Monday, February 4, 2019
3:45 a.m. All right, questions. Hanns Oskar Porr asks (on Jan. 30) about people who are murdered.
[So here is a question to TGU/Rita, which I think would help a lot of people in a similar situation, that is, the kin and friends of people who were murdered: does somebody who is murdered choose to be murdered? Is it part of any greater plan ( call it a life-plan, probabilities, test, an exit strategy, etc.)? And here is the important one: if it is a choice, is it always a choice or are there also freak accidents?]
Their choice? Part of a greater plan? Freak accident sometimes? I, looking at something he quoted in his email, am inclined to think the quotation contains the answer:
[“A change of angle of viewing will show entirely different relationships that are no less and no more true. in other words, there is no one way of seeing things; there is only every way, and this of course no one in 3D can ever stretch to encompass.”]
But – is that right? Would you comment, please, to a sincere question?
The quotation is apt in a way that is beyond what you were thinking. It is more profoundly true. not only does a different viewpoint reveal a different aspect of a given situation – it alters what is possible, what is true.
That is a truism, I think.
Only from a certain point of view! From another, it may appear to be fantasy, or debatable, or disinformation.
So I guess you’re going to go into it a bit more.
When you see life as fluid rather than static – as a dream rather than a collection of objects to be moved around – the ground-rules seem to change, but in fact they don’t only seem to; they do change. What you believe is directly connected to what is true (and possible) for you. You know this from experience, many of you, but not all who have experienced it realize what they have experienced.
Your beliefs bound your experiences; your experiences expand or limit your beliefs. As usual, a reciprocating process. Someone who will not be convinced is impregnable in his unbelief, and thus from one viewpoint, he is firmly rooted in fact, and from another viewpoint he is trapped in his own limiting beliefs. This is not an either/or – it is a both/and, as well as a neither/nor.
Choose your beliefs, change your life.
Yes, except that stating it that way implies a firm platform from which to choose. Your life is not as simple as a 3D mind making its decisions rationally and fairly.
Unless that is our ideal, I suppose.
Not exactly one’s ideal; more like, one’s firm idea of how things are. You understand, there isn’t really any point in thinking one or another person can set out the rules of life as they are. The best you can do is to set out the rules of life as they are for you. Again, looking at life more as a dream than as a staged event will bring you closer intuitively to the reality. Only – some will be unable to adopt that view!
I see it. So your definitive answer to Mr. Porr’s question is, “The rules of life depend upon how you see them, so there isn’t any way to answer this question, except arbitrarily.”
That isn’t wholly representative of our answer. But perhaps it is best to pause there and wait for reaction. On to your second question.
All right. Alex Bee, citing the case of Canadian investigator Joe Fischer, asks if Fischer killed himself or was murdered by malevolent beings. More specifically, he asks how to protect against malevolent beings.
[1. Why Joe Fischer, author of The Siren Call of Hungry Ghosts died? Was it suicide or murder by malevolent beings, who for example possessed his body and threw it from the cliff?
[2. How to protect against contact with malevolent non-corporeal beings when using for example Gateway exercises. Is the Robert Monroe’s affirmation enough (this part, that I deeply desire help of beings which are on the same or higher level of wisdom, development)? Just saying it, thinking it, or thinking it in non-verbal-communication enough?]
The two questioners are linked in more than the accident of chronology, you see. They illumine each other. Let us think for a moment about luck, and divine protection, and evil or malicious spirits, and intent.
Oh, I see that clearly enough. Again, what we believe is what is true for us.
With an implied caveat, always, that no one in 3D knows fully who or what he is, and so never fully knows his own mainsprings.
Well, spell it out for us a little?
If you believe you need a ritual of protection, you will. If you don’t, you won’t. However this is not as simple as deciding to decide. Again, what you are in various aspects of the community that is you will determine your range of choice. You may consciously think “I am not afraid” and unconsciously cower. Or vice versa, for that matter. But – subject to that very important reservation – it is true that life will serve up what you expect.
Surely “what you expect” isn’t right.
Well, it is, provided you remember that people do their expecting at various levels, not all known to one another.
I have never felt a need to ask for protection, but perhaps that is foolhardiness. So far, so good, anyway.
But in your external life you do the same, and again, so far so good.
Although I do hesitate to make recommendations to others, for fear I may be wrong, or may be pushing my luck, only to discover one day that it runs out.
But regardless, this is your experience, your (inner and outer) world in conformity to your expectations.
So I suppose the answer is, if you think you need protection, act as if you do, otherwise not.
Let’s say who and what you are determines the need or non-need for protection, because malevolent forces do exist, in a way, and don’t, in a way. That is, what is within your limits seems real to you, and other things do not, can not. But again, don’t confuse deciding that you believe something with actually believing.
So in practical terms?
It’s always the same prescription: Get into close touch with all levels of yourself. Stay in touch. Reconcile to the degree possible, while remembering that you while you are in the body have the opportunity and responsibility to choose. That’s what you are doing here, choosing.
Or at least, that is my/our take on things.
Yes, very good. Everyone lives in a different subset of the world tailored for them, of necessity. That is the opportunity; that is the predicament.
Thanks. Any more on this?
This should do for the moment.
Okay. Till next time.