Sharing In The Field

In today's world of so many voices, and so many of them seeming to claim they are pronouncing on the factuality of various specific things - I personally lean towards resisting publicly explaining some things too categorically... 

Wikipedia is one of the worst examples of a meta-compendium: it gives explanations of things, often quite correctly, but then it follows a stylistic convention of insisting that there are or can be opposing views. Well there cannot, in the case of some matters.

The pics you have seen widely in the
media are all lies.
Front-line Russian combat soldiers
wear either all black with pull-down 
balaclavas, or, pure white and also
white with blue/gray.
There are zero front-line combatants in 
green or khaki. So what have you been
watching?

I don't really want to get into it but there is one strand of thinking that is very prevalent today, which has no conception or conscious acceptance of the fact of differentiation. 

Differentiation is an idea that is real. The human mind understands what differentiation is, and it does so because the sensory equipment that it has discriminates between various signals and orders those signals into semiotics in the brain. That is a functional existential reality of what the human brain does. So one cannot then assert 'all is one' when the brain does not itself recognize such a thing in practice. 

We live, in practice.

We do not live 'in theory' or in hypothetical realities.

And so I wish to alert the thinkers out there to the common misconception that since one particular person in the past might have observed something and then wrote about it or spoken about it, it doesn't necessarily imply that person suddenly radically disavowed all the previous frameworks - used in practice - of reality.

A good example of that is David R. Hawkins and his view that there is a field or fields, out of which phenomena emerge. He is not saying that the human senses are not real.

He did say that we had lived in a paradigm that concentrated only on 'cause and effect.'

And that is completely true.

Like this.
And also, they move very characteristically,
either they are completely still like statues,
and then move suddenly but in every case
there is one person facing to the 'outside' 
of the front-moving line of direction.
 

And yet he is still also correct in pointing to the phenomenon of fields rather than simple 'cause-and-effect' frameworks of experienced reality.

Absolutely our senses are elements of and participants in 'cause-and-effect' realities.

But underlying all of them are fields - frequencies, waves, repetitions, patterns aka fields.

We can differentiate between the various boundary condition states that we associate with our senses giving signals to the brain processing, and then some effects in our body consciousness caused literally directly from those signals. That is Muller's Law in operation. It is a well-known fact of psychiatry or at least neural psychology in the clinical arena.

Soon, there will be another one of these texts posted up on various platforms, and when you read it, things will creep up on you along the way in reading it and at some point it will be simply staggering what you will have learned in there and that is of a 'practical-application' nature. They will be like a platoon of idea Spetsnaz moving through your consciousness.

 

And you will be able to apply certain things and they will result in various effects.

But then you will also be saddened, maybe even filled with a low-level kind of grief because you will see one of the outstanding problems with human beings and especially with modern human society, and how widespread it is.

You see - and this is the object of this particular post here - people present a false extension, a projection outside of their true inner selves, and then they pretend they are going to share (recall the Vesica Piscis!) part of themselves with you...

Of course people 'idealize' the past
and make make it then some static
thing. ...Like a statue.

They do that really intending to gain something from you that they want.

They are not sharing anything of themselves at all. It's deceit. Maybe sometimes by accident they do, but only by accident and it is a tiny little bit.

But then a consequence of this kind of behavior is that their actual sentience itself merges with their own false projections and they literally lose themselves - who they really were, or once were - to a false and terminal, an ephemeral, image reality.

This is a very clear-cut and certain kind of death.

You see major celebrities do it all the time, especially at the ends of their careers, where they give interviews discussing what 'the truth was' of their experience/s with various movies or with boyfriends/husbands and producers. Well the person doing the talking is not the person who did the original performance. It is the celebrity identity, merged with the celebrity image projection.

Jesus Christ explicitly quotes a Platonic idea in The Lord's Prayer but I am not going to go into what He said and the mysterious aspect about it that is unstated in any of the texts all that openly - although it is there.

These are real ideas
tied together: they are blatantly
forceful.

The reason I'm not going to say what it is, is that Wikipedia and others, misrepresent about one of these massively important ideas of the ancient Greek philosophers - and they do this kind of thing often too - however let me just say that it is to do with reality. 

And if you remember what was just now said here at the start, people in the world today are not accepting that there are boundary state conditions that apply in reality.

A real idea is not an alone thing, it is not a simple thing, it is not a unitary thing - because all real ideas are tied together by the fact of their reality. A real idea is extremely complex! Wikipedia says 'collected together,' but that is a weak and deceptive way of saying what happens: they are not collected but come together by force and by attraction and are tied utterly.

They exist in a supreme field. 

Well -, the Supreme Field.

When you stop presenting a false projection, a mere image and constructed version of 'yourself,' two things will happen: firstly you will be resented by some, and secondly you will move into the self-attracting Universal Supreme Field.

When you read the new upcoming text, you will see in there what you can do with the real self.

And how powerful that it is.

It is powerful and it is not ephemeral. And you are not then either, ephemeral; not an ephemeral being.

 

 

The True Reverse Of Crush Depth

Enough of 'the news.'

It only takes you to bad places.

'Extremes' along a linear paradigm are not the true picture about reality.

Reality as human beings are told about, is a linearity of things, where at one extreme is some crushing pressure going inwards into itself until 'nothing;' and then in the other direction things expand in number and sizes and distances apart until again the effective virtual 'nothing' because you can't measure anything.

Looks good. What is it?

But 'as human beings are told about it' becomes a political story in which if you are Giordano Bruno then you will be horribly killed, or if you are some FBI director then you will illegally listen in to people to check that they are not being informed by 'Giordano Bruno' - and track them down and more or less kill them if they have been listening to unacceptable ideas.

I have recently been hearing some lectures from pretty academically well-credentialed persons, on the subject of what they all refer to as the 'Platonic Theory of Forms.'

These ideas were not ever presented as 'theories' even though they are framed inside of staged discussions as if there were two or more people in a particular situation talking to each other and discussing complex subjects. Despite even that it is possible to say they are spoken of inside the dialogues as 'theories' in fact taken from the perspective of a reader outside (EG you) of the dialogues they can clearly not be theories at all but are in fact being presented as statements, as assertions without any substantive supporting lines of logic and evidence from humans' observed and experienced reality.

It's very important to notice this.

Plato is of all people the example par excellence of someone who insists on logic and supporting factual evidence for a conclusion.

So what is he doing here?

He is revealing something. Something he doesn't want to be killed for having revealed.

But what?

Today, if you look at any - and I do mean virtually any at all - academic or published commentary about the Forms of Plato, you will be taken always to a literal interpretation of the word, or in fact the phrase (as it is used in the original texts) - 'the Good.'

'Okay children, come inside now.'
'Aw mom, we're having fun.'

Now something that eludes a lot of people is that metaphors are significations of real things. They are not the things themselves, but they are supposed to be like them and to give insights into them - the real things being talked about.

Metaphors are not, 'not real things;' they are totally real because they stand for actually real things. Unless it is a false metaphor or one about a genuinely non-existent thing.

One person I was listening to repeated the common thing they all say, which is that the Platonic Forms exist outside of Matter and physical objects and have an influence over them.

Well this is in no way correct about what Plato writes. He does not say they have an influence over Matter and material objects - he says that all Matter complies with them always and everywhere.

Thus, for example, there is no place in the Universe in which you can see a naturally 'existing' (made by nature) perfect actual triangle with straight line sides and actually perfect straight lines and connecting perfectly to enable there to be three inner angles all complying to the major theorem. ...And yet, there is no place and no types of Matter (even flowing water) which must not strictly comply with these rules if the necessary formation is forced onto the Matter.

In other words, the nature of Matter itself does not abridge the power of intangible primary mathematical and geometrical forms (ideas). And it does not ever abridge it.

The same lecturer that I was listening to managed to say that from the intermediary philosophical position between Cratylus and Heraclitus (1: everything always changes/2: nothing ever actually changes), Plato created his synthesis of the theory (his, 'theory' of Forms).

Plato goes to some lengths to restate what is also the assertion present in the Bible (he is not related to the writing of the Bible of course, but people in different places were having similar thoughts at roughly the same sorts of times, vis-a-vis say, the Old Testament), namely that something is necessarily un-created, and outside of Creation (simply meaning 'material Nature'), but this highly-credentialed lecturer apparently never got to those many passages everywhere in the texts. Plato did not create the Theory of Forms, he observed it in reality. He noticed there was such a thing as the 'un-created conceptual which yet exerted actual force over the real material.' I will explain properly in a moment, because people like Dawkins childishly focus narrowly and exclusively on the notion that it is possible to draw common patterns from existential material reality; it is, but that's not what we're talking about here. 

But now I am going to reveal here to you the critically useful importance of what was being said and how it was being said.

At the top of his 'Forms' Plato placed 'the Good.'

Plato was using a metaphor when he said 'the Good.'

And he doesn't quite define its meaning fully either. He does say in several places that 'necessarily the Good must also be the Beautiful...' But he doesn't really explain that either. 

However now I am going to give an insight into something about this whole picture - in a way that you can make actual functional, material use of it:

If you at least take on their face value, the words this lecturer I was listening to, said - 'The Forms exert an influence over Matter...' ...then you can appreciate a basic concept like that vibrations effect changes on material states. We use ideas in formed states to describe complex but repeating patterns - colors, musical notes, that kind of thing.

The stumbling block that all standard thinkers fall at, who have approached Plato when it comes to the Forms is this - he says, and correctly, that the Forms cannot be seen with normal human eyes, and yet they are far more real (he doesn't explain) than what people do see in the material context.

And so people are left with a vague thought (only) like this one for example, 'invisible' sounds and vibrations cause effects on visible objects. So at least, 'the Platonic Forms' are invisible but can exert influence over solid objects. (We love solidity).

So fine, it's simplistic but one thing about it works in the minds of humans: 'unseen' is there for sure, for real; we know - in the head, in the mind - that the musical note scale is a template of frequencies, and so we know for certain that a completely 'non-materially existing and invisible core thing' (the musical note scale) can exist outside of all material things... ...And yet exert some effects on real objects when employed by intelligent beings.

The complex elements
in Plato's Theory of Forms...
Right? Right Bill, am I right here?
Parker & Co bespoke and MTM, dude.
Our place. Remember when we
set off the fire alarms?
LOL
(That really happened).

Plato is going so far up in the stratosphere, and even beyond there with this though - he's just not making it explicitly obvious what he's really saying.

But I will here and now.

He says 'the Good' and 'the Beautiful' but I say ('and,' not 'but...' lol) sentience ascribes meaning to a range of things, and this meaning can be small or it can be very great.

People have got a hold of the concept that musical notes can move taut strings in wave motions (this is straight Pythagoras here). But what moves you to ascribe meaning...? It's your 'psychology,' right? LOL

The next-to-useless commentators say 'exerts an influence;' me and Plato say it absolutely dominates all Matter everywhere.

You know the orchestra makes strings and pipes vibrate, and that they get sounds thereby.

Tchaikovsky knows how to compose those sets of vibrations whereby they will cause a reaction inside your brain and mind because you are ascribing meaning to those sets of notes and vibratory layers.

Now, if these things are true and correct, then why do you believe that the Good and the Beautiful cannot or will not make you rich and powerful? Because if you possess meaning, and the ascribing of particular meaning is common to all sentient beings, then all other sentient beings are looking to you once you are in that meaningful condition.

Is there some intangible music you are not listening to? Is there some formulation of variations of vibration, of unseen invisible frequencies that hold meaning, the very essence of meaning to all sentience?

Does meaning come from one thing only or from many things? Is it simple or is it complex?

The true description of reality contains the fact that it is a relationship of things and most complex.

The higher up the strata of Platonic Forms, the closer you get to what he is prepared to call 'Absolute Divinity.' And we must be able to see meaning in what it is that is really there at that spot.

Now...

That 'thing' is not a thing at all, and it cannot be a 'thing,' but the object of all meaningfulness and which is necessarily also always in relationship because otherwise there can be no other relative 'thing' to which meaning is an intelligible fact, 'object' in the epistemological sense. 'Material object reality' that we see with our human eyes is only a subset of the Forms! It is in fact inside the Forms themselves, albeit it may indeed be part of them for real.

So in terms of full and correct understanding, we are going up the Forms, from functional object-affected Forms - like the musical scale/vibrations/photons/wavelengths/etc - to sentience-meaningful things. 

Sentience is you - you search for meaning - meaning is in the Ultimate Object of Meaning; but that also exerts the most power of all of the Forms.

Did you get that?

And the key fact for you is 'exerts the most power.'

So what are you waiting for? I'll tell you what - you are really not sure what motivates the object of your concept of meaning...

The reverse of an extreme condition is not another extreme condition - it is the center or median position, the moderate one, the one that lacks extremity.

How You Will Benefit Soon

Even 'Blind Freddie' (with all due respect to blind people), can see right now, that there are continuous and fairly consistent stories being seeded in the wider press and general media, about some kind of 'ET Alien' coming event, or the likelihood that there might or even will be, a formal government position statement to the effect that at least some compartmentalized small but high level clandestine groups have firm evidence and therefore knowledge of, the presence here of actual off-world beings.

To a very large extent the current general media narrative seems to be along the lines of an actual 'invasion risk,' absurd though this sounds and is.

But I have told everyone who reads here - over several years now - that this was absolutely certainly going to happen and that it would be a fraud perpetrated on the public at large for nefarious reasons. I suppose counter-intel people would also challenge me with the position that if the reason was to avert the disaster or perceived disaster of being over-powered in key ways by foreign, if only mundane, decidedly Earthly, governments - then it could not and should not be a-judged as 'nefarious.' 

Don't like the car - like the pic 
composition.

That is what they would say but even that is not the complete truth of it.

Superficially there is and always has been even since the time of the Roswell incident/s, one strand of genuine intended goal, which is to do with countering competitive foreign military technology advances.

So we don't need to undermine that side of things nor deny that it is a reasonable one to have as an objective for this level of mass deception and propaganda.

By you having stayed the course here and read along, especially the off-site 'stories' and so on, you will have been absorbing a different line of information inclusive of data having been introduced not in a heavy-handed kind of way. And so you will readily be able to quickly contrast what the public propaganda narrative position is, with what you already possess in terms of facts and reasoning and perspectives about this subject.

And at that key point, you will suddenly see something or somethings, that others will simply not have the tools and the background information to introduce into their thinking, into their judgments - certainly other people will not be able to turn so rapidly on the spot towards other orientations about meaning and objective and intention.

When you match up a particular 'shocking' event then, with what you already know is a key preparatory factor that you also know happened well beforehand and was not 'out of this world' - whilst others are completely unaware of it - you will have the advantage.

In chaos there is opportunity but mainly for those who are not themselves internally chaotic, or troubled by shadows or by unseen monsters.

You remember this, Bill?

In the coming few days, maybe not much longer than that, you will be able to read something that sets certain things down that no one will or can see anywhere else. These are secret matters and they are matters of the highest confidentiality but they will not be presented as that.They will be presented in a very benign way that no one can object to.

But you will know, as soon as you read them (these specific matters/specific facts), that they are key and they are clandestine, and that governments at minimum have been involved covertly certainly at least in the knowledge of them, although maybe not having perpetrated anything themselves. So yes some of it is a technology matter and don't bother to guess about it right now - you never will (be able to).

By benefiting I directly mean financially. You will easily be able to put two and two together and observe the necessary consequences.

As for actual ET Aliens well they will not be a part of the scam that is about to be perpetrated on the masses, on the public at large.

I cannot say that what is about to go down will not have the hallmarks of ET Aliens, as much as governments do know about those; because they will necessarily mimic what actual ET technology is like - but only mimic it and if you are a reasonably decent logical thinker the contradictions of logic involved will be obvious.

My suggestion is that one really obvious way to enable a financial advantage, is simply to refrain, to restrain yourself from going down the seemingly obvious reactive path that the government's narrative is bidding you to go.

You don't need to go hide anywhere, or to run for cover or to 'fight' or prepare to fight against ET's and an ET 'invasion.'

If 'someone' is able to know well beforehand, each and every step the government is making, and tells you, then they are not being aggressive against you at all, they are helping you.

Circumstantial evidence.
...Which the government does not 
possess.
Remember that; always remember that.

What you are about to read via here in the coming days, is head-spinning to say the least, but only if you had your head screwed on right to begin with - because it sure might seem to come across as benign. It will not seem to dumb people, any kind of 'Earth-shattering' news or information.

Once though, you worked out how stunningly 'prescient' it is, you will be left with the thought that maybe this information was coming from sources not anywhere near anyone on this planet, that's for sure.

...If you understand what I am getting at.

I was told some of you (five of you) may have just received a 'visit' already, or you are about to. But what I said right from the start was that it will take you some good long while to process what happened (to you).

This is just the beginning.

Be very patient. Already you are seeing the moves by government and government media arms, to take this narrative about ET's into absolute cloud cuckoo land. Why are they doing that?

I will answer that question via the reading material coming soon and you will be very alarmed.

Even so, once you see it, you must at that point become aware that yes, something is definitely going on now. Meaning something that will form up as 'change' and through that change will come opportunity; major opportunity - but only for you while others will be drowned in the misdirection and the tide of people going 'the wrong way' as the result of that misdirection.

I already showed you an Alien. Some of you have met one or more of them through here.

I doubt that too many people will catch the symbolism in here - even you Mel Gibson - did you get it? Don't believe it? LOL It is what is it, sonny. Who's 'gone?'

 

Why Ideas For You First

The reality - the absolute certain and existential practical reality - is that the depth of a person's intellectual grasp of things exceeds anything their senses alone can deliver to the sentient being, to the consciousness. (That's a complex statement, and requires to be thought about).

And that is why you will always be initially quite frustrated with coming into real and actual contact with any truly advanced species or being. They won't let you near them at first. Because you will seek the comfort of the senses relaying to your personality, something about the 'truth' of whatever it is that you have come into contact with.

This only seems like
science and technology,
but it is not.
This is imagination manifested
as a hard material reality.

But then if that were allowed to happen - on the part of advanced intelligent beings - your human senses would seek to dominate the 'discussion' by placing what are fundamentally mechanistic pieces of a complex process, at the head of something that is in fact essentially well beyond matter and space and even time: it is dynamics and living, uncertain interplay, involving human will, and moral perceptions and decisions.

This is where Descartes went right off the rails and all of modern 'science' went with him - and let's be honest and face the fact that in any case, that was all a political fight between the religious clerics who demanded a monopoly on books and scholastic learning, and the Enlightenment Movement in Europe at the time.

The claim that Descartes and since him, all of his followers (which includes all of modern academia at large) was that ever since the proposition that it was both possible and necessary to 'objectively' discover things and experiment and test those putative discoveries - God was no longer the guarantor of truth...

Well, He never was; not at least, in the affairs of men (IE Mankind).

Right from the very start of Genesis, the whole entire proposition there is that Man has involved himself in a catastrophic form of uncertainty made all the worse by his 'living' nature: namely, Man makes moral decisions based on his will and his intentions to move some objective factors and but definitely the minds and hearts of other people.

The guarantor of Truth as far as Man goes - is Man and his will to perceive moral issues in whichever ways he decides based on a combination of hard material facts, insofar as he possesses them at the given moment/s, plus his own desires and ambitions and goals projected from his actions.

Having intelligence has not ensured that Man has realized that clearly he does not always and everywhere possess all facts, yet nevertheless he has made it - when it comes to 'science' - that he should act on his own will rather than consider (as ancient peoples once had), to consort with oracles and so on because of the logically correct hypothesis that 'if Divinity' then Divinity has the best and most complete (indeed total) knowledge.

This is somebody's
actual work space...
I'm not telling you to whom
it belongs.
Most of you will be able to search
it an find out anyway.

It is one thing to decide a particular oracle is no good; not reliable - and another to hypothesize that there is no such thing as 'total knowledge' and no such non-human possessor of any such thing. I mean, you can hypothesize it of course - but then, you would have to give good and sound, factual reasons why it is not so (that there is a perfect possessor of complete knowledge).

But logically, and very early on in human civilization, the Sanskrit shastras and people like Homer, already proposed non-Earthly, vastly superior intelligent beings with greater technology than humans - and this already philosophically sets asides the argument that humans can have no basis to think there can be better knowledge held anywhere other than in the human sphere. 

Homer's 'scientifically unlikely' explanation for what happened to Odysseus at the end of his long journey, alters how one will perceive the moral questions that Odysseus and the unworthy men of Ithaca saw concerning the decisions about who was to take over Ithaca and all of the possessions of King Odysseus (and who was to commandeer his wife!). The unworthy men presumed Odysseus would never return - Odysseus believed that he certainly would one day.

And then he did, through the aid of what was essentially a space ship. Piloted by non-human grey-skinned and super-intelligent people.

Firstly the proposition of Descartes is wrong because it is built on an entirely false premise - that 'truth' is centered on objective material things (which he then proposes to call 'facts') - whereas human truth is the result, and always is, of dynamic decisions by unpredictable human will; because humans are alive, and life, the proceeding of it, is not set in stone at all.

Human truth is a psychological phenomenon, involving some aspects of lifeless material objects and how they existentially behave in reality.

'Science' is therefore stilted and a false representation of human existence and of reality itself.

Reality is part of a vast dynamic structure involving living creatures that change, and have reactions.

Cartesian 'science' would be true if there were no living intelligent things at all who had effects on the material world.

But it is of course not true (for the significant reasons shown) - and that is the main problem of the human race and of its world today.

And that is the abundantly clear-cut reason why you will first be 'entertained' through lots and lots of complex intellectual things, well before you will ever be allowed to actually meet formally with physical material beings of far greater knowledge and possessing very superior technology.

The entire point of all religions, including Satanism, turns on the matter of who you will, not serve, but give your own personal will over to. The real Biblical meaning of 'to worship' is to give your will over to (someone/something).

'Bow down before me, and all these kingdoms shall I give thee.' 

Well that's nice but it intrinsically means that you lose your personal will and give that to someone else. Now unless you have a reason to believe or to know, that that other person is wholly Good and benevolent and beneficial to you in the ultimate -, then it makes no logical sense to give your will over to that other person.

I have said that you - you reading here - will engage with these creatures called Seraphim. And that their personal title (which is used also as a kind of a name too) is 'Uriel' or Auriel, or Oriel but is accurately rendered 'Ir-u-El.' And that is because they are the ones with the deepest intellectual apprehension of the Mind of God.

Hollywood knows these things before you do. That is why the film theme song to the movie 'City of Angels' was 'Iris:' about a Watcher Angel.

*

Meanwhile, leaving all of this vaguely occult stuff to one side, the School Board finally held its recently postponed meeting (a lot of illness, some kind of super-flu post-Covid), at which the Principal showed a photograph of the schoolkids taken by a drone flown by the Autistic kids that all of you have been sponsoring via here.

There is a lot going on, on this front, and we are starting to have the support of some powerful and rich city councils, including some that are in these 'bush-fire risk' areas.

So. More on that as things continue to develop.

MERRIWA Primary School, including
the Ed Support Campus.
Pic taken from drone.

The Autistic field is not at all being represented accurately in the media, and especially with all of these YouTube videos around from people claiming that they are Autistic, and seeking to talk about what it means to be Autistic. Strangely, given that so many people want to claim to say that they are 'scientific' suddenly somehow, Autism is now being presented as if it were a psychological thing - whereas here is one place where essentially one must start from the inanimate, bio-neurological factors. 

Interest-groups spin these things the way they do for political, financial, and ideological reasons, and masquerade what they are doing as being 'science' or scientific, and then they dominate the discussions, and manipulate funding in society. They could care less about the genuinely Autistic.

Here is another example of how humans use their own will, to dynamically try and gain benefits for themselves in highly immoral ways. Just why do human beings chose to be immoral?

Because these people, these humans, have aligned their wills with the position that there is 'no ideal Goodness.'

In order to physically meet a super-advanced species, you must align your personal will however, with the proposition that there is absolutely and without question, such a thing as 'the ideal Good/ideal Goodness.'

You gotta get to around halfway in this to 'get it:'

 

 

Your Relationship With Watchers

Leaving aside the slanders of foolish people who fail to understand the actual and true nature of human beings -, one must at minimum realize that there is no point either in ancient history or now and nor shall there ever be such a moment, when there are no 'Watchers' at the Throne of God.

'Watchers' are not merely watchers of or over, men - but they in essence are facing the Divinity itself who is seated on a 'throne;' which simply means the place of Ultimate Universal and Cosmological Power to which everything else must comply to its directives. 

This is of course in any event, a highly controversial philosophical, scientific, as well as metaphysical concept, since no one really can explain exactly where such a thing is physically located or whether such a thing necessarily exists. Why should there be indeed, some intelligent being or force which directs everything in the Cosmos? And where exactly is some 'location' that is quite literally outside of space and time?

Sometimes, the artist sees,
what the ordinary person cannot.

But for you in fact, surprisingly, things are much easier.

This is about relationship.

You can hardly even find real relationship here on Earth between other supposed members of the human race... What we have is transactional interplay: this person wants something, and so they engage superficially, with their material senses, with another individual - in order to get whatever it is they want or wanted from that other person.

This is not a relationship in the way we want to say such a thing is properly defined on the human sentient level.

We are talking about the transmission of authentic and honest thoughts and feelings from another person, to us, and the transmission of authentic and honest thoughts from ourselves back to that person. aka - true communication.

For you however, since you are already versed in some higher and more complex concepts, you can accept a proposition that if, there are other dimensions which are completely invisible from the senses of our temporary bodies which deal strictly with matter only, and that these intelligible dimensions and links span vast physical distances - then these can once again, be proposed to function right across and through huge populations, across huge spatial measurements (as the Hebrews say 'parsecs'), and over time in such a way that time itself is no barrier to function.

There are Watchers.

These all come under a generic title or nomenclature, that common people say is 'Uriel.'

And this is not exactly correct. The right way to say this name is 'Iru-El..' Watcher of God.

Or 'Beholder.' The same root is used both in the ancient Greek and the Hebrew for the Dawn, because this is when the sun is Beheld first, in the morning.

Fire, because, well -,
fire, you see!

You cannot see the face of a Watcher. These beings have hoods covering a fire which is the substance of God itself. In other words, their faces have turned into the fire of God. This is what Moses apprehended in 'the burning bush.'

But, the Watchers both see your face and all other faces of good people everywhere. 

They can somewhat 'stand down' from their normal roles and duties, and adopt a human physique and have their own natural human-esque faces. And they don't stay there for any great length but return pretty quickly to where they usually reside. And they can come back over and over too.

The only, and I do mean the absolutely only, way, that you can or ever will have a proper relationship with any other human being, is if and when a Watcher directs them into your path.

Watchers know where everyone is.

Watchers know what everyone is.

But then...

...You are yourself also a Watcher.

You must turn your mind, direct your inward attention, to this propositional 'Throne of the Divinity,' and at that place you will encounter the Seraphim - and, if you are accepted, they will disclose themselves to you, not as 'Uriel' or 'Auriel' as some occultists have it, but Iruel. Which is in fact, actually 'Ir-u-El.'

And it is from thence, that you will next encounter some real physical person, with whom you can have an actual relationship.

And there is no other way.

The Seraphim have authority like no other beings have; they are the agents of the True Divine Intelligence.

Old, wise...

Whenever you turn your mind to the Ultimate Divinity - you are watching it, apprehending it, seeing it: you become a Watcher yourself. Because, if you really do see it, then you absorb into your inner vision, energy and power and a substance that is entirely real. In fact it is reality itself where no other thing is actually real but only a temporary movement of composed parts.

Another way to 'see' this Ultimate Reality, or a substantial and important part of it, is to try and see a plate (tablet, if you will) filled with letters written in gold. Just face your mind's eye to this idea, to this concept, and let the letters form there. 

This tablet may have a large amount of letters, but they will only have those ones that pertain to you - to your existence, and which are contained in your own personality. This tablet is you. While Throne Watchers are themselves perfect, and a completed work, you are a living and a new work.

And that is why you live here at all.

I definitely recommend the popular entertainment film 'The Devil Rides Out' as a source of factual information far in excess of what the common viewer thinks is contained in there.

Look. Get some strong alcohol. Get drunk. Do whatever you need to shift your perceptions away from the commonplace, and the usual, and the 'normal' natural daily world - and enter into the music of this next piece below. 

People are already in a trance state when JES introduces this piece in the middle of the set. These are not because such things are mundane. They are very far from anything mundane.

'Auriel Auriel Eo Potesta' - is what is said in the Wheatley film starring Christopher Lee (The Devil Rides Out). This means 'Uriel Uriel, you who have power and authority.' It is presented as a 'summoning' ritual incantation, although one does not 'summon' the Watchers.

Nevertheless, when you have a return communication, then you must know, using the logic of your alert and waking brain, that you are in relationship with something, But then, when you do it, you yourself will know this is not a 'something,' but a some person. And you will get a response. And it will be stunning. ...Takes a while to accept in your head. Takes a while to get used to. ...That you are a having a real relationship. But after which, all others from the basic members of this planet will look perfectly silly. Anyone you get involved with on this kind of level from this planet will utterly not be ordinary, nor even necessarily all that human either.

 

When All The Fairy Tales Come True

Look, fairy tales would not have the power that they do unless they were indeed, actually true! 

They are of course true but since we live in a world of other people and not just ourselves alone, the psychic impediments of the others impact on their own participation in the jointly-generated power and the two-way reality of the fairy tale of life.

To expand a little on what was being said before about the Hollywood actress Jane Fonda, the thing to bear in mind with any of these personalities - is the hidden hand, the invisible voice in the whole mix:

The Producer.

Producers, of which Roger Vadim was essentially the first big one who had Fonda in his films, all chose her in many successive movies to play the role of an innocent moral idealist because she is naiive! Because she is an ingenue in real life. She never 'acted;' she was playing roles with scripted words - but those roles were fundamentally herself. And there is no point asking her what she thinks about that statement because she has not enough insight into it all, even after decades and decades. And again, this is not to demean or invalidate Jane Fonda the person or the very hard-working actress, but simply to make an important point about all human psychology generally.

Look if it were not so we would not be able to observe virtually the whole entire human race wandering around staring at themselves on their tiny little iPhone screens.

All standard human beings are naiive.

As our associate here 'Bill Smith' just now reminded me, the word metamorphose comes from the linking of the Greek god Morpheus with the Greek word for 'beyond' or 'change.'

I am mentioning these things here to explain something regarding the reported experiences of so many 'close encounter' subjects: many or even all of them say that at some point they were transfixed, were unable to move.

Well this is not because ET Aliens want to control a person or disable them temporarily - it is due to the reality that were you actually to have a full encounter with the people of the higher, more advanced civilizations, you just simply would be overcome like being pushed under by a huge tidal wave; and that is particularly, one of the emotions being overwhelmed to begin with.

Some people, many people in fact, get emotionally affected by certain kinds of music, and this is exactly the same thing - only much much more so.

You will be days, weeks, maybe months and years getting over the actual full experience.

'Adam and Eve' (all of them, across all the cultures) are examples of the fundamentally morally naiive. 

But the story is just repeating over and over.

Humans have progressed morally and intellectually not one single inch since that 'time;' whenever it...

This is fairy tale fantasy Paris, 
not real Paris.

...was and I am suggesting it is 'now.' It is an existential on-going 'now' basis of humanity.

Once a person goes beyond that primary, primal, naivety they are no longer human.

The physical material 'human being' - the body, the organism - is a Gauss curve thing; it must grow, it must die. And so if you are holding out for an intervention by physically-obvious, and temporal present beings - then watch out, because they do that, and usually when someone (important) dies or someone (important) is being born. 

They do not need to be involved here in the Gauss curve existence because they are already permanent beings! They do not aspire to be here or to live here.

They aspire for you to go with them! ...Not the other way around.

There are literally presently also two types of beings on the planet - one are the 'Manu' whilst the other, and the generally unseen, are the 'Danu.'

Danu live beneath the superficial world, rather than 'underground' as the standard fairy tales and myths go. The Danu are regularly involved with creative people and those people rarely speak about what is really going on with them because they'd all be taken away to the funny farm.

From our modern point-of-view we don't want to just die in order to live - we want a form of compromise on that metaphysical ancient teaching (and it is an intelligent compromise that we want) - which is namely that we would find most accommodating, some simple open contact with a genuinely advanced species not dissimilar physically to ourselves, and we would accept moving into their technology and their lifestyles and learning to grow into their moral understandings of things.

It's only simple...
But there is an ambassador 
between the Fay people
and Mankind.
Pouring a libation of milk to this 
individual, is an ancient ritual. 

One of the most mysterious and unexplained passages in the New Testament, in Revelations, is that one which talks about the two lamp-stands in the city that is spiritually Sodom and Egypt.

Well what is Sodom and why Sodom? Sodom is a commercial center of trade, filled with very well-off merchants and denizens, and they are interested in all kinds of sensual activities too, but they have no limits when it comes to caring about the other person. Well that describes today perfectly well and it describes all modern people, especially all forms of government and all bureaucrats who are the hands that exert the control. 

And why 'Egypt?' Because Egypt is where the light became darkness.

The historical truth about Egypt is so in darkness, that we know nothing about the place today, really - not about that time long before the Pharaohs.

Well I'll give you the key to unlocking the room in which the two lamp-stands are - and these keys will open to you, incredible power and wealth and all kinds of unimaginable new other things.

Be careful when you start to engage with the Danae or the Si because they fully possess those keys. 

If you feel yourself being overwhelmed by emotional forces, by deep feelings, then this is not a bad thing - indeed it is the first sign of becoming involved with the Danae. 

All red wine grapes are,
as you know, not red at all,
but blue.
These are not grapes of course.

It takes some doing but using your intelligence you can do it: you must and you can slowly move the field of what those feelings are to do with, until they attain a very special richness.

The money and material wealth of ordinary people can seem like it is great, but it is nothing when compared to what you can embody inside yourself from the Danae world.

Not only that but the Danae literally possess material wealth too - and they can and will impart it to their friends. And you must be a friend to them, or become a friend to them and to do that in the very first place you must become known to them.

So obviously, and it is fairly obvious if you just think about it a little, the intensity of your feelings do have measurable effects on your EMF halo - that is, the field around you.

There is an alphabet somewhere, not on this planet, but somewhere - that contains all of the human personality characteristics and capacities of individual people; and when composed into a syntactical line, they become a word and then a sentence. About four or five letter spaces along is a letter that describes the height of a person's emotional capability; and about another four or five letter spaces along is the one which describes the depth of someone's capacities.

The first of these letters is in the shape of a common, if elongated open-mouthed peaked triangle (or a pyramid without a base) and the second letter is in the shape of an inverted open-mouthed triangle, that is, a 'V.'

We do not have a pyramid-shaped letter in English but we do have a 'V'-shaped one.

Why we do not have the first type letter is a good question. The sound is 'd' (like the Greek 'Delta') plus 'n' or 'm.' D'ne. This is what the Navajo call themselves, btw.

Danae.

But we remain deficient until we possess these letters.

  

Naivety

I'm going with the standard on-line version of this word, and I also know that I am going to murder the English language somewhere in this because it involves so much 'neologism' stuff that is inherent in the early formulations of modern psychology.

In fact I'm going to default straightaway to the field of psychology, though without restricting it to the thinkers of only the last two hundred years -, when considering this idea of why people are bored or become bored in life.

So why do I raise 'naivety' with reference to human boredom?

Let me start with an example of what adult humans mostly all do - and this example is to do with a very well-known actress, namely Jane Fonda.

You cannot say that Fonda has not been around. She is not young, she's had a lot of life experience.

You would suppose, that maturity in humans is what happens when they have experienced a lot, and processed those experiences and had enough relationships and then derived some synthesis about their relationships and how those are dynamically reactive with their own inner selves.

You cannot say that Fonda is unintelligent; she's very intelligent.

So... The psychological standpoint is that humans are happiest when they are playing among themselves and achieving growing, positive interrelationships that are creative and dynamic, sometimes unpredictable, but necessarily alive.

The ancient psychology conception about why humans go off the rails as far as genuine maturity goes, says it (the problem) starts at their birth and early childhood - because although they are dependent on adults, they do not in the cell memory of their conscious brains actually select the two people who are their parents, and they have no say in how they are actually raised either.

Consequently, if the parents are psychologically flawed or under some kind of pressure, it becomes a given that the children are affected in some way or in many ways, often profoundly.

Jane Fonda, in many fairly recent interviews, casually mentioned that one reason she left Roger Vadim, was that he was gambling a lot and was using her money often, to do it.

'Her money.'

In the same breath, she says that much of Hollywood's producers had only one conception about the female roles in films - namely, they (the women characters) validated the male figure, and then took their clothes off, and that was it.

Vadim never did that with Jane Fonda. Oh absolutely he was called an 'exploitation film' producer, but that is not at all what he was. Fonda's roles always and forever were the same: that of the ingenue. She was an ingenue in Barbarella, the film that put her on the map world-around, and she was an ingenue in Klute (produced by Alan J. Pakula) and she was always and ever that.

'Ingenue' has the meaning of not only an innocent and naiive person, but one whose decisions are based on moral idealism not pragmatism or genuine life experience and maturity.

Only a naiive person would have ever said the words 'my money' when they had been produced and directed by Roger Vadim. Vadim was the highest grossing filmmaker by actual global sales of any director/producer at the time. The logical flaw in Jane Fonda's perceptions of it all, is that if she was only an ingenue then 'her' money was like an act of professional body-selling, but even so she was in competition with all the other 'validate the man/remove clothes' actresses in the movies. Fonda is not narcissistic and would not be so narcissistic as to admit she was so much better looking than all those others! ...That hence why she made her money. In other words...

No. It's not true as a fact, what she said; her reading of it all is false. It is not invalid on a certain level though because what Vadim must have been doing was also wrong. But her perceptions and reactions were immature and naiive. 'Moral idealism' here means 'childish fantasy' ideals, not Universal Truth ideals.

No doubt at all, his gambling ways were a great fault if they were (as they indeed must have been) coming into negative contact with the people he had in his personal relationships.

But the adult mature experienced way to have handled that was to explain to him - 'Roger,  your role is to make films that sell, and to put important stories down into film. And it is reckless and irresponsible of you to waste too much time gambling significant sums in gaming houses regardless of whether you feel that some lucky streak might give you a bargaining edge over the studio money, and if you are doing it because you need the psychological driver of the feeling of high risk to spark some creativity then well, fine but you still need to put out films and have those finance your losses - which they can easily do.'

The naiive thing to do is stew on the thought that he is using your money. And that is on account of the fact that it is actually not your independently-made money at all; it was made via Roger's creative and directing power.

If Roger Vadim had have produced me and my cat, we both would have been enormously rich and enormously famous. And neither I nor my cat are enormously globally famous!

Same goes for you - you would be rich and famous too.

Jane Fonda never at all made the leap across from ingenue to actually life-mature woman.

A lot of people would of course howl and say otherwise but she is not mature and not wise. She is instead, completely stuck inside a loop involving her own ego, her own pride, issues coming from the fact her wealthy independent mother committed suicide (or so the story goes) when Jane was only 12, and a troubled relationship with her hugely famous father Henry Fonda.

Vadim and Fonda played together as human beings, but neither one of them 'went half-way across the street' for the other one.

There is a difference between the trick of sex attraction and the power and the force of the attraction of a liberated soul - as Charles Bukowski called it 'a free soul.'

You will never ever be happy here on this planet, among other people, if you are a soul enslaved - as indeed most of them all are too. Some people reach resigned acceptance and imagine it is happiness.

Bukowski utterly nailed it, and all he's done is echo the psychologist whose name must not be named, and CG Jung too and Freud certainly, absolutely: 'The free soul is rare, but you know it when you see it - basically because you feel good, very good when you are near or with them.'

...I am about to pull out a huge teaching that will astonish some and send chills up the spine of others - and if you have your brain switched on it will surely give your flesh goosebumps:

The power that each of you has, is to turn on all of these huge stars, these super-famous, super talented, super-rich people and look upon them as the naiive immature children that they all are. And to love them of course, and necessarily - but as you would love a child. We own them -, if not their bodies, then absolutely their living souls. The Devil has possession of their bodies. And only those, may die. Here endeth the first lesson.

Must Address 'Boredom'

You will most certainly find, if you are in any way at all a thinker, especially a self-reflective one, that one major issue that becomes a very ugly one right throughout the normal human life - is that of becoming bored trying to chase other human beings down slippery slopes and rabbit holes.

Different if any of these were actually 'White Rabbit holes.'

The very mysterious art of
having coffee alone - 
in Rome (where I have not been).

If you talk with any practicing psychoanalyst who has some regular human analysis subjects (people who have agreed to subject themselves to scholarly if otherwise dubious templates about what a well-ordered human being should be) - then you will come away with one very obvious conclusion:

By far the most world-around issue with people is their own stubborn inability to see that they have placed 'what I want' ahead of the proposition that in a relationship 'what I want' always must exactly match with 'what they want.'

'So-and-so provides me with what I want.'

Well why?

And what happens as soon as they no longer do that or you can't get that out of them?

Why this situation is there at all is fundamentally because people do not trust other people on the whole.

So to get basic needs, they must exploit holes and gaps and vulnerabilities in the next person in order to meet a certain level of emotional and psychological return, but in the end, this leads the whole human race into a position of extreme pathology.

Not only that, it is a pathology that no leader is prepared to admit and then to act upon to resolve.

I know all of you - you are all too smart to accept anything less than the very very adequate. And by that I mean not in the way that it is just an objectification that meets low threshold criteria.

No you all want the optimum path.

That's Angelique Johnson
on the left: the most important
female stylist in the world today,
that you've never heard of.
She's been to Rome.
This pic is prolly in Florence 
though.
She lives in France now although
she was born in the USA.

You recognize the possibility of your own potential flaws in the eyes of others, but you are also well-enough aware of your positives.

I'm afraid what the optimum path looks like, is not going to sit well with the rest of human society - especially if they all see that you are different, with a different lifestyle, with a lot of different things going on in your life that they do not have but that they want.

This issue is so important that it necessarily must become a whole series here - which is as of right now completely unplanned; I have no idea what will unfold or how it will but that it will is a necessity.