As I’ve discussed numerous times, and in fact the title of this blog, I’m on a neverending question for Validating Michael. I allow my Attitude of Idealist slide to Skeptic whenever I’m reading and thinking about Michael. It takes a lot to “prove” that something intangible can still have substance. And, I’ve had to come to terms with the fact that validating Michael, their existence, and their information will come from rather small incidents of synchronicity, rather than huge globally rending ones.
As I’ve let this blog slide due to a combination of different other interests and a dormant period of simply observing, it’s time to post something new about a moment of validation.
Back in January, 2008, I received the following about my daughter, SCB:
The Four Pillars or Truths:
LIFE TASK/True Work: “to redefine concepts of security”
TRUE REST: observing fractured light; star gazing; sky watching; falling asleep in arm chair
TRUE PLAY: dream exploration; word games; races/racing
TRUE STUDY: dreams; astronomy/astrology; candle-making; calendars
BODY TYPE: Venusian/Lunar/Solar
Due to unforeseen circumstances, this was long ago forgotten by both SCB and myself. We weren’t even sure whether or not the 4 Pillars had ever been channeled. In fact, Michael remembered giving them, even if we didn’t:
[MEntity] The Life Tasks for these fragments have already been given; correct?
[GeraldineB] I don’t have them and neither does she
[GeraldineB] I’ve not requested full profiles and the previous “basic” didn’t include them
[MEntity] We will deliver those, then.
[MEntity] For the fragment known as SCB, we would describe the
Life Task something like “to transform her ideals about security and trust.” This would be a part of her True Work.
True Rest would include suggestions such as watching the effects of prisms, observing the night sky, observing the sky, in general, and falling asleep in a favorite spot that is not the bed;
True Play would include dream interpretation, word puzzles, and some sense of competition, or competitive challenges;
True Study would include, again, dreams, actual astronomy, but also astrology, craft-making as a hobby, and the methods of various civilizations for measuring time.
[MEntity] Body Types here would be Venusian (44%), Mercurial (35%), and Saturnian (11%) for SCB
This is actually a huge point of validation from several aspects. One, it validates the ongoing relationship that Michael develops with their students. Two, with consistent channeling information does stand the “test of time.” And, three, the information is “spot on.”
And, while it can be difficult to validate any particular channel, I would say that whomever Troy IS channeling, it has been consistent over time.
I’ve discussed validation from multiple perspectives, but today, I hit on one I’d not contemplated previously. I was doing my usual quick response to a discussion thread and Essence stepped in and nudged my intuitive self. I’d been discussing the various permutations of why “truth” isn’t the end-all and be-all of truth most of the time. There are very few universal truths that truly span the universe. And, most that are part of our human experience are incomplete. There is always “more” to know that completes a better representation of a truth. I wrote: “We don’t validate only to figure out the “truth” of a statement, but to understand the bigger picture that underlies it. It’s a type of meditation to understand more. Validation can be very Zen-like.”
While validation includes “proofs,” or facts to verify, it also includes resonance from within, an inner knowing that’s based on other things one knows. But, the longer one focuses on a particular statement, the more one realizes that it doesn’t stand alone. There is more that either supports or negates it. One may not know what this missing information might be, but this is why one then expands on wanting to know more. Major discoveries have been made by an unending quest to know more.
An example might be when Michael gave me my four “Trues,” way back in 2007 during my very first session:
LIFE TASK/True Work: “to draw soft conclusions”
TRUE REST: true stillness and silence; listening to intricate sounds; witnessing/expressing compassion
TRUE STUDY: human behavior; personality patterns; cooking/recipes; definitions
TRUE PLAY: flaunting flaws; flirting; getting loud; letting loose; contradiction
I’ve been working to validate these ever since. On the surface, many were easily validatable. Life Task took a whole lot more. True Rest has an odd juxtaposition between non-interaction and interaction. True Study seemed incomplete, and eventually I was able to add to it. True Play is quite “Sagey,” but is it play?
My Life Task didn’t become resonant until I had a couple of Michael Workshops that dealt with various Personality traits, and included a Self Karma of “To always be right.” Suddenly, I understood my Life Task through a prism of self-knowledge that went back to early childhood. Part of “always being right,” is adhering to a very narrow focus of what the “truth” is. One immediately loses a sense of rightness once a truth expands into a broader spectrum of information. That’s where “drawing soft conclusions” begins.
I could probably write an entire essay on discoveries I’ve made about my Life Task, but most of them are probably only applicable to me and my experiences. Everyone has a Life Task that they planned to work on and it will always be more than it seems.
True Rest has become more relevant as I’ve gone full circle in musical tastes and am back in “classical” music, as well as some Indian sitar music. I’ve also developed a taste for “Renaissance” music, particularly the chansons of one of my prior selves, Janequin Clement. He was one of two French composers who influenced music from England to Italy. They were the first to compose “popular” music that wasn’t religiously based and also invented the “round” style of singing.
Also, I find lute music to be very restful. As for the compassion aspect, I’m still not sure how that plays out as being restful; but, maybe it simply soothes the spirit and allows me to be more accepting. It needs more validation on a deeper level.
Based on both my penchant for the type of questions that I ask Michael, and my ongoing Project, I would definitely have to add “History” to True Study.
True Play only works when it includes laughter. . . .lots of laughter.
These are simply examples of statements that were made about me that were only partially true on the surface. It’s required time and intuitive monitoring to reveal secondary and tertiary traits that apply. My Life Task is what allowed me to let go of a lot of my “baggage” and finish processing my 5th Internal Monad.
I’ve been going through some cogitating on “what” are the Michael Teachings as defined by a usable term — are they spiritual? are they metaphysical? are they “new age”? are they “secular humanist”? and so on. In the process, I’ve read deeper into the concepts of Pantheism and into Apophatic Theology (negative theology). The definitions from Wikipedia articles are below:
Pantheism is the belief that the universe (or nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity, or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God. Pantheists thus do not believe in a distinct personal or anthropomorphic god. Some Eastern religions are considered to be pantheistically inclined.
Apophatic theology (from Ancient Greek: ἀπόφασις, from ἀπόφημι – apophēmi, “to deny”)—also known as negative theology, via negativa or via negationis (Latin for “negative way” or “by way of denial”)—is a theology that attempts to describe God, the Divine Good, by negation, to speak only in terms of what may not be said about the perfect goodness that is God. It stands in contrast with cataphatic theology.
In negative theology, it is accepted that experience of the Divine is ineffable, an experience of the holy that can only be recognized or remembered abstractly. That is, human beings cannot describe in words the essence of the perfect good that is unique to the individual, nor can they define the Divine, in its immense complexity, related to the entire field of reality. As a result, all descriptions if attempted will be ultimately false and conceptualization should be avoided. In effect, divine experience eludes definition by definition:
Neither existence nor nonexistence as we understand it in the physical realm, applies to God; i.e., the Divine is abstract to the individual, beyond existing or not existing, and beyond conceptualization regarding the whole (one cannot say that God exists in the usual sense of the term; nor can we say that God is nonexistent).
God is divinely simple (one should not claim that God is one, or three, or any type of being.)
God is not ignorant (one should not say that God is wise since that word arrogantly implies we know what “wisdom” means on a divine scale, whereas we only know what wisdom is believed to mean in a confined cultural context).
Likewise, God is not evil (to say that God can be described by the word ‘good’ limits God to what good behavior means to human beings individually and en masse).
God is not a creation (but beyond that we cannot define how God exists or operates in relation to the whole of humanity).
God is not conceptually defined in terms of space and location.
God is not conceptually confined to assumptions based on time.
The other terms that need to be defined are “immanent” vs “transcendent” — immanent means that the divine permeates everything, it is within all. Our use of the word Tao or the phrase “All That Is” is immanent. There is no personal or anthropomorphic “god” outside of everything. God is not transcendent.
In a sense, Apophatic or negative theology is both a polar opposite of Pantheism or a different way of looking at it. When one attempts to define the divine by all of the things that God is not, vs all of the things that God is, there is a point where “All That Is” meets up with “All That Is Not.”
Oddly enough, most major religions have a strain of apophatic tradition, most especially Buddhism, Greek Philosophies, Taoism, Hinduism, Shia Islam, and early Christianity. So, it’s not entirely foreign to any of our thinking. The biggest conflict occurs when an attempt to anthropomorphize “God” into a personal deity occurs. At that time God becomes limited by the imagination of the followers.
Why have I bothered diddling around in obscure philosophies? I’m tired to trying to explain what the Michael Teachings are to others. If I have a term to “hang my hat on” such as Pantheism, it’s up to them to look it up further. I can also explain that it means that god is within and without everything . . . that it’s the entire universe. It’s then up to me to decide whether or not to expand on concepts of non-duality, good vs evil, etc. Also, it keeps me away from having to use the atheist word as that is currently loaded with so much judgmentalness. I don’t really want to debate whether or not god exists, but I’m willing to let others think that I’m not “godless,” even though I am. 
Also, Michael really does stand uniquely outside of many of the New Age catechisms. Although, as Michael said recently, the difference between those who subscribe to rituals and pagan types of beliefs come out of the Western or Atlantean philosophies; whereas the more intellectualized version of belief more in the Lao-Tzu traditions come from the Eastern or Lemurian philosophies. The direction each of us leans is in large part due to past lives and our instinctive center memories. One attracts us more because we resonate with it more.
Due to an appropriate request by VIP in comments, I’m going to add information on Transcendence from Wikipedia. I hesitate on how much of Wikipedia to quote in any given article in large part because I do provide the link. But, I understand that some will want more in order to “go less.”
In religion, transcendence refers to the aspect of God’s nature and power which is wholly independent of the material universe, beyond all physical laws. This is contrasted with immanence, where God is fully present in the physical world and thus accessible to creatures in various ways. In religious experience transcendence is a state of being that has overcome the limitations of physical existence and by some definitions has also become independent of it. This is typically manifested in prayer, séance, meditation, psychedelics and paranormal “visions”.
It is affirmed in the concept of the divine in the major religious traditions, and contrasts with the notion of God, or the Absolute, existing exclusively in the physical order (immanentism), or indistinguishable from it (pantheism). Transcendence can be attributed to the divine not only in its being, but also in its knowledge. Thus, God transcends the universe, but also transcends knowledge (is beyond the grasp of the human mind).
Although transcendence is defined as the opposite of immanence, the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Some theologians and metaphysicians of the great religious traditions affirm that God, or Brahman, is both within and beyond the universe (panentheism); in it, but not of it; simultaneously pervading it and surpassing it.
Today, a poem written by a very old and infirm man, which was discovered after his death in the hospital, is once again circulating online. It gives great food for thought, not only about his particular circumstances, but of the circumstances of each of us.
Cranky Old Man…..
What do you see nurses? . . .. . .What do you see?
What are you thinking .. . when you’re looking at me?
A cranky old man, . . . . . .not very wise,
Uncertain of habit .. . . . . . . .. with faraway eyes?
Who dribbles his food .. . … . . and makes no reply.
When you say in a loud voice . .’I do wish you’d try!’
Who seems not to notice . . .the things that you do.
And forever is losing . . . . . .. . . A sock or shoe?
Who, resisting or not . . . … lets you do as you will,
With bathing and feeding . . . .The long day to fill?
Is that what you’re thinking?. .Is that what you see?
Then open your eyes, nurse .you’re not looking at me.
I’ll tell you who I am . . . . .. As I sit here so still,
As I do at your bidding, .. . . . as I eat at your will.
I’m a small child of Ten . .with a father and mother,
Brothers and sisters .. . . .. . who love one another
A young boy of Sixteen . . . .. with wings on his feet
Dreaming that soon now . . .. . . a lover he’ll meet.
A groom soon at Twenty . . . ..my heart gives a leap.
Remembering, the vows .. .. .that I promised to keep.
At Twenty-Five, now . . . . .I have young of my own.
Who need me to guide . . . And a secure happy home.
A man of Thirty . .. . . . . My young now grown fast,
Bound to each other . . .. With ties that should last.
At Forty, my young sons .. .have grown and are gone,
But my woman is beside me . . to see I don’t mourn.
At Fifty, once more, .. …Babies play ’round my knee,
Again, we know children . . . . My loved one and me.
Dark days are upon me . . . . My wife is now dead.
I look at the future … . . . . I shudder with dread.
For my young are all rearing .. . . young of their own.
And I think of the years . . . And the love that I’ve known.
I’m now an old man . . . . . . .. and nature is cruel.
It’s jest to make old age . . . . . . . look like a fool.
The body, it crumbles .. .. . grace and vigour, depart.
There is now a stone . . . where I once had a heart.
But inside this old carcass . A young man still dwells,
And now and again . . . . . my battered heart swells
I remember the joys . . . . .. . I remember the pain.
And I’m loving and living . . . . . . . life over again.
I think of the years, all too few . . .. gone too fast.
And accept the stark fact . . . that nothing can last.
So open your eyes, people .. . . . .. . . open and see.
Not a cranky old man .
Look closer . . . . see .. .. . .. …. . ME!!
How often do we fail to see another, whether it be a small child, a teen, a young adult, a middle-aged person, a handicapped person, someone from another culture or “race,” someone who trips one of our prejudices, an old person, or even ourselves in the mirror?
Perhaps, this is the ultimate truth of Essence’s long learning curve to KNOW what it means to be a species and to remember what it means to be part of the Tao. While incarnate, we start by seeing through our senses, long before we start seeing through our hearts. Or put another way, we see through our physical bodies, long before we grasp that we also have an intellectual, emotional, and spiritual body that in combination is the true ME. Once the ME can be seen, it becomes possible to see all of the others who have their own ME.
We are but the beginning phase of Spark’s return to the Tao — there are many more steps of understanding that we are all part of the One.
Thank you, Maureen.
I’ve been caught up in a bit of a downer mood — a sense of isolation or unwillingness to interact. Hardly anything as severe as once would have laid me low: depression. But, just a wait and see holding pattern. Try a few new things. So, downloaded a few new books, reading a “History of Islam,” and a new murder mystery author from Iceland in addition to all of my other ongoing interests. But, Maureen perceived that I was a little too isolated and sent me the following POF Transcript from back in 2010. Very applicable.
[Geraldine]: I would like to know how my karmic theme of Mindfuck shows up in “more insidious and personal” ways during this Old soul level?
[MEntity]: The most relevant references we might find within the current life would be those periods wherein the very value of your Being was put into question because of the chaotic and painful relationships that demanded attention, but with no truly satisfying resolution.
[MEntity]: This affected the current personality in two ways: in a way we might call “becoming calloused,” and in a way that might be called “sternly fragile.”
[MEntity]: In other words, it created a shell around a pool.
[MEntity]: Much like an egg.
[Geraldine]: Yeah, but I thought I was a hard-boiled egg.
[MEntity]: The insidious and personal part of this was in the near-condemnation of the self as having to simply resign to that state based on the reflections of the life at the time.
[MEntity]: What has come from this, however, was the nurturing of that state of “eggness,” so to speak, and from that a “new life” has emerged
[MEntity]: Rather than succumbing to the mindfuck of experiences this life may have had, you rose above those to a great extent by “getting real about what is real.”
[Geraldine]: One must survive in order to live long enough
[MEntity]: By that, we mean that you have moved into a state that allows room for the fact that what is real is never something that can be defined by one person.
[Geraldine]: yes, tis true
[MEntity]: Or one teaching. Or one teacher. Or one day. Or one year. Or one lifetime
I’m feeling my eggness. Singing, “I am the Egg-ness,” sung to the tune of “I am the walrus.”
I am the eggman, they are the eggmen
I am the walrus, goo goo goo joob
Heh. Another one of those intuitive leaps when memory doesn’t know, but “I” do.
Although, on Michael final statement, about one teacher, at this point in my life I consider Michael to be my only “teacher;” although, I consider fellow students to be teachers, too. At least on matters unseen. But, since I’m always validating whatever Michael says from other sources, usually unintended sources, I do recognize other teachers. I also recognize myself as teacher. There are unique insights that only I can make about resonances I feel. Accepting oneself as teacher is one of the last steps of letting go of mindfucks. I AM the Egg.
|
|