Keys Writings 2014, Part 17

This entry is part 21 of 33 in the series 2014

2014

Aug 16, 2014

Glory to God

Greg:

As a former Mormon, I share the story in Moses 4:1 where God talks about Satan (I think we could place the title of beast in place of the name of Satan)

with the beast (Satan) saying “Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.” What the beast yearns for is glory. There is great power yielded unto him when we fail to give glory unto him whom glory should be given.

Good point Greg. The Beast seeks glory where glory is not deserved and does everything possible to direct glory away from the greatest source there is which is God which is within us.

Aug 16, 2014

Auras of the Stars

We were talking the other day about original writings not found anywhere else and it was pointed out that we have quite a few of them available on the Keys. Even though just about every subject you can think of can be found on Google we have still managed to present new ones here as well as give new perspectives on old ones.

Today I thought I would write about a subject I haven’t seen even mentioned anywhere else and this surprises even me for I am amazed this knowledge didn’t come to me sooner, let alone others.

As most of you know I have taught a number of classes on how to see etheric body, as well as the human aura and the outer film that encompasses each individual.

I had a strong interest for a couple years in developing this extra vision in my younger days. Back in the Seventies I practiced regularly and got pretty good at seeing that which is normally invisible. Then when I discovered that I could intuitively pick up what I needed with a lot less effort I switched my attention to a different level.

Because I no longer practice regularly my auric vision is not as potent as it used to be, but it is still available when I concentrate. However, my sensitivity seems to come in waves. Sometimes I can see a lot clearer than other times.

Well, the other night I seemed to be in the middle of a sensitive cycle and took a walk outside about 2 AM when the stars were out. I like looking up at the heavens for it fills me with wonder at the majesty of creation and the glory of God.

As I was looking up at the stars I focused for a moment on one of average brightness and contemplated it as the center of a whole solar system like ours, probably teaming with life of some kind.

Then suddenly, I thought I saw something. I blinked my eyes and looked again. Then an amazing thought entered my head which was this: “It is common knowledge that humans have beautiful auras, but stars are living things also. If we have auras then shouldn’t they have them as well?”

Then I thought to myself how much sense that made as it also fit in with the Law of Correspondences. Why hadn’t I thought of this before? Well, I thought of it at this time so I decided to go with it and focused again on that little point of light to discover whether I could see it’s aura, of which I seemed to catch a quick glimpse.

As I focused with concentrated effort it’s beautiful aura flashed into view and what amazed me was how large it was. The human astral aura stretches out about as far as you can stretch your arm, but this star’s aura reached outward billions of times its own diameter. It reached out so far that its aura interplayed with the auras of other stars.

DK says that when he looks at he night sky it is full of light to him because he sees what most people do not. I always thought he was talking about invisible etheric planets, but maybe not. Now I know that the heavens are full of light and the little dots we call stars and just a very small portion of what they represent. If we could see it all we would see the heavens full of the life force of the stars and galaxies all interplaying with each other in the dance and music of the heavens. I had heard teachings that the various heavenly bodies had relationships but know I knew of the reality and that the apparent trillions of miles of empty space between stars is not empty after all but filled with beautiful light and life.

I’m not an artist so I can’t draw what I saw so I thought I would find the closest thing observed by the Hubble Telescope to give you a rough idea.

The closest thing to what I saw was not a picture of a star but of a galaxy composed of billions of stars. To get an idea visualize the point at the center of the picture below as a single star and the rest as the aura and you’ll get the general idea of how a typical star would look if you could see its aura.

LINK

In fact, if any members of the group are sensitive they might try to see what I did. Go outside at night and pick out a star and look at it for a few moments, looking slightly away from it from time to time. If you see anything unusual post it here.

I also looked at the moon, but since it is a dying body its aura was not that strong, though it still has a weak one. We are too close to the sun to see it’s aura but I have looked straight at the sun from time to time and have seen a moving changing symbol in it that is very difficult to see correctly because of its movement. It is a little like a Star of David changing into different geometric forms.

***

I came across an interesting statement by DK where he gives some light on the stars and the sharing of their auras. He talks about:

“the method of understanding the song of life. As the “stars sing together,” as the “chant of the Gods” peals forth in the great choir of the Heavens, it produces a corresponding colour symphony.” TCF Pg 1256

Aug 17, 2014

Analysis

Well, I’ve just endured another round of conflict over at Allan’s forum. I must like punishment to have participated again, but it started off innocently enough. One of the members claimed to have remembered a past life where Stephen was a notorious Inquisitor who put the righteous to death and was attempting to make up for it in this life.

I thought that was a pretty outrageous accusation. I was planning on staying away from the forum but decided I should defend Stephen. I decided to defend him as kindly as possible and use Allan’s teachings in doing so. Here is what I wrote to Stephen on Allan’s forum:

“It would seem to me from Allan’s teachings that it would have been impossible for you to have reincarnated from one of these bad guys. Allan says that such people do not reincarnate. The only ones that do are those who have merged with the soul, like James, the brother of Jesus. Therefore, if you go by Allan’s writings, you should have no concern about being one of those undesirables in the past.”

That sounds logical doesn’t it? If Stephen is a unique entity projected by his soul and is here as the first time as Stephen (according to Allan) then he should have no worries about paying off debts from a past life that did not even exist. I figured this should be accepted as I was cooperating with Allan’s views in my conclusion.

If I thought this would just be accepted, and the group would sing Kumbaya, then I was mistaken for they saw this answer as highly offensive. First I was asked to prove where Allan taught such a thing. This perplexed me because he taught this often.

Here was my answer:

Here is a quote that made me think that Allan’s teachings would convey the idea that a killer from a past life would not reincarnate as Stephen:

Contrary to Eastern dogma and the New Age concept of reincarnation, the soul or soul-self does not enter into this world — but rather, what enters into the body-vessel at conception is an embryonic image of the higher soul-self — i.e., “…But when you see your images which came into being before you, and which neither die nor become manifest, how much you will have to bear!” And these images which failed to become manifest do not reincarnate — neither do they go to Glory as the Christians believe — but rather, as images that failed to attain the next level of birth, they remain within the Matrix of the Soul.

LINK

It sure sounds to me that a murderer and literalist from the past would qualify as a failed image “which failed to become manifest do not reincarnate.” Therefore, the image which is now Stephen could not have been the same as a failed image that did not reincarnate.

And yes, I understand Allan’s teachings about the Higher Self putting out many “embryonic images of the higher soul-self.” But if one of the bad guy images does not reincarnate then Stephen could not be that bad guy image reincarnated, even if the two have the same Higher Self. It would certainly appear that from what Allan says that Stephen would bear no karma from a failed image of the past that was not him.

Next Allan accused me of finding fault with the teachings of the higher reality of the soul and it went down hill from there. I tried to be as pleasant and courteous as possible for the next couple days where I spent most of my free time answering questions, handling accusations and straightening out wrong interpretations of my words and beliefs.

They were really upset last time that I posted some of their dialog here so in the interests of peace I will not do it this time. Suffice it to say that as the dialog continued their outrage at me just continued to grow. Finally, we reached a point where the dialog, questions, accusations etc were repeating, often more than once.

I came to the conclusion that I was wasting my time as they did not want to resolve or understand anything I was saying, but just wanted to catch me saying any small detail that could definitely be proved wrong. I know, many of you could have told me I was wasting my time, but I felt it was the right thing to do to defend Stephen from such an outrageous public statement and got sucked back in from there.

This time I have decided to not respond there no matter how much they misrepresent me or someone else, unless I am totally moved on by my soul.

Now that I have had a few days to relax from their negativity I have been reflecting on this whole affair and the root cause.

What do the other guys think?

They think I am mean and just bent on attacking Allan. But if you read our dialog you’ll see that I have not initiated any attacks. Most of what they consider an attack is merely me answering their questions or responding to their attacks or misrepresentations toward me.

On reflection I have come up with an interesting insight as to why Allan and his group are so highly offended at me, and some of you.

The core reason goes back to my original post that caught their attention. They interpreted it as an attack on Allan, some even saying I called him a liar.

But was it an attack on Allan?

No.

It was the beginning of a discussion as to the validity of one of his teachings.

So here’s what happened. Allan and his group saw a discussion of one of his teachings as a personal attack on him.

I think Keys members can readily see that this would not occur with the Keys group. Outsiders can discuss what they think of any of my teachings and none of us will take any offense. If someone doesn’t think the Molecular Relationship is a correct idea, none of us will see this as an attack on me.

On the other hand, most offense Allan and his group have had toward us isn’t because we attack anyone personally, but merely because we disagree on teachings.

I maintain that if Allan’s group would have merely allowed us to discuss and analyze Allan’s teachings without taking offense then this great rift would not have occurred for we do not take offense if anyone analyses any teaching here, neither are we offended if someone does not believe what I teach.

Question:

Why are Allan’s group offended when Allan’s teachings are analyzed or disagreed with? Why do we have no problem with such things?

What is the core difference between the two groups?

Below is the original post that was considered highly offensive. Notice the only objective was to discuss the teaching, not attack a person.

The Original Post

One of his (Allan’s) core teachings is that the scriptures are not literally true but written as allegories with hidden symbolic messages that will be understood by the enlightened.

This is not a new teaching as many people think the Bible is not history but stories of fiction designed to present teachings of some kind. Some see the scriptures as presenting simple things while others see deep hidden meanings.

If the scriptures are truly fiction this means that whoever wrote them created a lie for, unlike Jesus presenting parables, and me The Immortal series, they have been presented as true history and in most cases the writers would have known that the narrative wasn’t true.

Questions:

(1) Does this make sense to you?

(2) Would a truly enlightened teacher use such deception?

(3) Are there hidden meanings in the scriptures?

(4) Do you know of any useful knowledge anyone has derived from fiction presented as historical fact?

***

IamAHebrew writes:

Shalom JJ, I wrote that post and then deleted it, but apparently, the delete button doesn’t truly delete. I have a lot of respect for Allan and how he has dealt with me over the years,

Sorry, I didn’t realize you had deleted the post. It showed up in my email but not on the forum and I thought Yahoo was playing tricks on us again.

I am amazed that Allan’s forum talks about you like you were a big problem. You seem very respectful.

***

lwk

Don’t know about others, but it seems to me that the built in editor in Yahoo Groups used to create replies is not working very well. What you get after you post can be significantly different after you post it?

The only way I seem to be able to get my posts to look the way I want is to format them first in Microsoft Word and cut and paste. The problem seemed to start when you wondered why I didn’t use paragraphs – which i did and Yahoo took them out. Hopefully, they’ll fix this problem. I’m glad I’m not the only one having it.

***

A Big Clue

Allan writes on his forum:

So, when JJ asks the question: “Would a truly enlightened teacher use such deception?” He is posing this question from the perception of liner-bound blindness. Which means that his true problem with me, is that I reject the burka he is trying to impose upon me. Moreover, I am very much the voice of his higher soul-self attempting to open his mind to the reality portrayed above in the Gospel of Thomas.

Question:

What does this t

ell you about the difference between Allan and I as teachers?

(Oh, I forgot; he thinks it requires a big ego to refer to oneself as a teacher. He likes to just call himself “the prophet” instead.)

Aug 18, 2014

Voice of the Higher Self

One2 quoting Allan

“Moreover, I am very much the voice of his higher soul-self attempting to open his mind to the reality portrayed above in the Gospel of Thomas.”

Is he serious?

If he is the voice of your higher soul self, then that makes you his lower shadow self puppet?

That explains everything now.

It is not The Prophet…….It is the Puppet Master at work!

I’m surprised we didn’t receive more comment on this. It is one of the clearest statements I have seen of one individual attempting to shift the attention of another from his own inner God or Higher Self to an outside source.

Yeah, I think I prefer to listen to my own Higher Self rather than someone else’s version. And this is also the way I teach. I never tell the group that they must believe me or follow me because my God Within is right or I am in contact with the true source and they obviously are not or they would agree with me.

Instead, I give out the teachings and those who are ready can verify them for themselves without my help.

***

Allan:

In JJ’s own words (see below): I maintain that if Allan’s group would have merely allowed us to discuss and analyze Allan’s teachings without taking offense then this great rift would not have occurred for we do not take offense if anyone analyses any teaching here, neither are we offended if someone does not believe what I teach. Well, here it is — i.e., an analysis of the differences between the original suppressed teachings of Jesus as set forth in the Gospel of Thomas and explained, explored and proven in what I write, in relation to the teachings of JJ…

Completely untrue Allan. You have not analyzed my view of reincarnation nor any other concept I teach. Just declaring what I teach to be wrong and what you teach as right is not an analysis. It is a declaration of your own belief.

If you want to analyze something I teach bring up some actual words I have written and then analyze. Putting words in my mouth is not analysis.

And things are not black and white. Discovering light in the written word does not involve a choice between writings you designate and everything else. There is truth to be found in many different writings and if one achieves soul contact he can have the power to recognize truth when he sees it.

By the way, I am already in touch with my Higher Self and live a consecrated life so it looks like the problem you see for me is solved.

Aug 18, 2014

The Beast 106.1

Assignment:

Contemplate what the wording of the most powerful political thoughtform would be and submit it to the group.

I though Dan gave a pretty accurate one. He said:

“Man is a selfish, greedy, willful warmonger that requires a strong central authority to constantly crack the whip or all would be laid to waste.”

Perhaps we could reduce it even more by saying this:

“Man is irresponsible and must be controlled for his own good.”

There are lots of other thoughtforms out there besides those of religion and politics, as One2 pointed out. There are thoughtforms governing every department of life and are so pervasive as to make any dictatorship look weak by comparison.

Let us examine one at a time. Several powerful thoughtforms govern health care. One2 guessed their thoughtform was “must have injections or medicines etc.”

That is one of the results of the core thoughtform, but not the thoughtform itself. If you were to encapsulate a wording that would describe the directions people follow as if their doctors are outer gods – what would it be?

And how about people who reject all modern medicine. Are they governed by a thoughtform? If so what is it?

***

Robert says he is reminded of the scripture: “Am I now your enemy because I have told you the Truth?”

Well, then according to your thinking, since I do not see you as an enemy then you must not have told me the truth.

***

Robert takes a stab at the on topic questions. We would encourage any of Allan’s group here to participate on topic rather than switching to explaining their method of salvation. We have heard this many times and get the idea behind it.

The Question:

Why are Allan’s group offended when Allan’s teachings are analyzed or disagreed with?

Robert:

Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is amazing that you say this when it is extremely obvious that your group was highly offended. I’m sure I could come up with a lot of quotes where your group certainly sounded offended. Here is an exact quote from Allan right after I made the post:

“Before I even made my first post across the forum, I was attacked by JJ”

It is obvious that Allan thinks that a logical discussion of a doctrine that he believes in is the same as a personal attack on him. This belief is pure illusion.

Robert:

Allan truthfully answers every question asked of him…

Wow. Where have you been? While I have answered hundreds of questions from your group he has rarely answered any. Here are several he has not answered:

(1) What do you believe to be the true story of the death and resurrection of Jesus?

(2) Give me the tenth word of the original Gospel of Matthew which you claim you wrote and remember.

(3) Give us examples of truth hidden in allegory in the New Testament, not counting the parables.

(4) What are the details of your technique which takes people into past lives and contacts the Higher Self?

(5) Allan says Jesus helped him write the original gospel. Did this happen before there was even a crucifixion or resurrection? In what time frame did this happen?

(6) Did the writers of the New Testament scripture intentionally write in people, events and history into them that did not occur as events in this physical reality?

Remember we are not talking about allegorical truth here so answer this. Would such writings be fiction or non fiction, historically true or not true?

(7) Is the intentional presentation of information you know to be not true, as if it were true, a lie or not?

(8) What did Jesus look like?

These are just a few. How you can say that Allan answers questions is strange indeed.

Robert:

and has done an amazing job making the incomprehensible comprehensible in this age.

I’d say it is more like making the comprehensible incomprehensible as he keeps telling us that the true reality cannot be put in words and the words he does use takes us in circles.

Second Question

Why do we have no problem with such things?

Robert:

Really??? What I pasted in and highlighted above surely suggests otherwise!

Nothing you highlighted shows anything like that. For instance, my problem with the accusation of Stephen being a murderer in a past life had nothing to do with teachings of past lives or karma, which I have no problem discussing, but with picking on a specific individual and making an accusation with no proof.

You cannot find one teaching that I give that would offend me if your group discussed. On the other hand, Allan and the group were highly offended that we discussed the idea of presenting false history as true for the sake of revealing truth.

Question Three

What is the core difference between the two groups?

Robert:

Allan is a Shepherd who guides seekers to find the True Prophet within as Yeshua commanded us to do. This forum is led by a teacher who asks questions and expects his students to repeat his words back to him. Then either a “Good Student” or “Well Done” compliment can be issued or the student can be further instructed to see things the teachers way.

Allan is a shepherd all right, but one who claims we should follow him, not because his teachings ring true, but because he was the brother of Jesus in a past life and he has merged with his Higher Self, and thus any disagreement with him has to be wrong. His actual words confirm this, “Moreover, I (Allan) am very much the voice of his (JJs) higher soul-self .” This attitude leads followers away from the true teacher within.

And, as usual, you do your best to mischaracterize me. When I ask questions members often give good answers that are different than I had thought of, which contribute to the understanding of the whole. At the conclusion I give my view which members can take or leave. Generally members like this process better than me just posting teachings because they get to participate – yet you find fault with such a beneficial process.

Aug 19, 2014

The Beast and Healthcare

The Question:

If you were to encapsulate a wording that would describe the directions people follow as if their doctors are outer gods – what would it be?

Olivia was the only one who took a stab at the actual question. She said, “blind adherence to a belief.” Now this idea runs through the general tactic of the Beast in using all governing thoughtforms, but is not a thoughtform itself. Remember that a thoughtform used by the Beast is a computer program that enters the mind like a virus and takes over to the extent that the victim thinks it is he who is doing the thinking when it is the program.

The key is that the thoughtform must be accepted into the brain to have an effect. Remember we are told that all but a few accepted and worshipped the Beast.

But who is there among us who would accept the idea of being a blind follower?

None. No matter how blind the follower he doesn’t think he is following blindly, but always believes he is using his own mind.

So what is the thoughtform then that people willingly accept for their healthcare?

It is basically this old aphorism:

“The doctor knows best.”

I’d guess that well over 80% of the population are governed by this thoughtform which is widely used by the Beast.

Does this mean that the few who are not governed by this will reject all the advice of their doctor?

No. If you are thinking in this direction then you are lacking in understanding of how to escape the mark of the Beast.

He who does not have the mark and listens to the Inner Voice above the outer ones will take into consideration the advice of doctors and other educated authorities, but at the same time they are hearing advice they are running it by he Inner Spirit and coming to their own conclusion. That conclusion may be to accept the doctor’s advice, or it may be to reject it. He who does not have the mark will not automatically accept the advice of a doctor, a priest, a politician or whatever.

He who does have the mark will follow doctors orders if he has accepted the basic thoughtform.

It is interesting that many who are into alternative medicine and think they are independent of “doctor knows best” still are governed by the “doctor knows best” thoughtform when the chips are down. When many who think they are free from such a thoughtform are told by medical authorities that their life is in danger and they must follow orders exactly or they will die then what do most of them do? They drop all alternative ideas and follow orders just as they are told.

The sad thing is the doctors are often wrong and their advice sometimes leads to a painful drugged up last days. Those who escape the mark will often find a life changing alternative, but they have to do a little thinking on their own accompanied by research.

The Second Question

And how about people who reject all modern medicine? Are they governed by a thoughtform? If so what is it?

There are a handful of people who do not trust doctors and will automatically reject all or portions of their advice. This category does not reject doctors because they are free from thoughtforms, but because they are governed by a different one than the masses. Several thoughtforms govern this group. Here are two possibilities:

(1) I trust God rather than doctors.

This guy doesn’t go by the inner voice but what some religious authority has told him God thinks about doctors.

(2) All orthodox medicine is corrupt.

This governs the guy who has read a lot of alternative material that speaks negatively of doctors and orthodox medicine and instead of using judgment he takes in the black and white thoughtform that calls for automatic rejection.

It is a key factor in understanding the workings of the Beast to realize that controlling thoughtforms leave no room for individual judgment but are black and white in their execution.

Another key in understanding the Beast is that this powerful authority is more concerned in control and obedience than what it is you are obeying. If a subject can be tricked into accepting one of his thoughtforms then he can easily be tricked into another one. Bait and switch are key words here.

Now let us switch to science. Name a couple thoughtforms that govern them. Remember there are a number of subjects where scientists can buy into thoughtforms such as global warming, evolution, God etc.

***

ImAHebrew says:

So this Beast, this sinful or carnal man that dwells within each and every sinner, overcomes the sinner and the sinner is enslaved by the Beast:

2Pet 2:19 promising them freedom while they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by what a man is overcome, by this he is enslaved.

So I would suggest that the most powerful thoughtform known to man IS the lusts and desires of their sinful flesh, known as the Beast. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

Well, ImAHebrew, we are in harmony as far as the big picture is concerned.

The Greek from which the word “sin” was translated in the New Testament comes from HAMARTIA which is derived from HAMARTANO which means “to miss the mark.” In other words, when the Greeks 2000 years ago shot at a target with an arrow and missed they “sinned” (HAMARTANO) or missed the target. Thayer’s Greek Lexicon tells us that the Greeks also used it to mean “an error in understanding.”

People largely miss the mark because they listen to outer authorities above the voice of God which speaks within. This misplaced attention is indeed the cause of most of the error or sins of mankind.

However, the lusts and sins of the flesh is not a thoughtform. It is kind of like gravity, which is a force and not a thoughtform, but the pull of the material side is definitely behind the creation of many thoughtforms that deceive mankind.

Science and Thoughtforms

The Assignment:

In considering the thoughtforms that create misplaced authority in a system the key is to examine how people react to that system. Then one must ask this, “What is running through their heads that they should react the way they do, as if they are reading the same script?

There are two basic thoughtforms governing science. The first affects the vast majority of those who are not governed by religion and the second governs many of the believers.

The first thoughtform is this: “You can’t argue with science.”

This thoughtform affects both those who have studied science and those who have not. There are many out there who have little understanding of science, but when they hear that science supports a thing they figure the argument has been settled. To them the authority of science is the closest thing we can get to the voice of God. Just like the believer wouldn’t think of a rejecting God, even so, will the low educated science believer not question science.

If he hears a report that science says the global warming issue is settled, that it is happening now he will believe and not question. If you show him that the earth is cooler now than in 1998 his eyes will just glaze over. If he says anything it will be accusing you of denying the science which he supports.

On the other hand, many scientists and those with a knowledge of science are captivated by this same thoughtform. Those who are trapped by it will also see science as the highest source of knowledge but will respond differently than those with little learning. If you point out that global warming seems to have been on a pause since 1998 they will give a complicated answer that will seem reasonable to them, but not to the logical thinker. For instance, many say that the earth has indeed warmed but the warming has been trapped deep under the oceans.

So, even though one may be learned in science he can still get trapped in a thoughtform that takes him away from real science and truth. He doesn’t want to challenge the thoughtform that governs his group.

Then in different divisions of science there are supportive thoughtforms, such as:

Global warming: “All scientists agree.”

Evolution: “Evolution has been proven.” While it is true that it has been solidly proven that evolution has happened this does not mean that all theories about how it happened are true.

God: There is no one wording but the general idea in the thoughtform runs something like this, “The belief in a sky god watching my every move is just plain silly.”

There are several thoughtforms governing those who reject science, but a common one is, “Science is godless; therefore, I choose God.”

This fellow automatically rejects anything from science that contradicts his religion or what he thinks the scriptures say.

Both sides are in error because of their acceptance of thoughtforms. While it is true that science has proven many things, there are also many other avenues that are not proven. Many science supporters, and even scientists, often do not differentiate between the proven and the unproven when talking under the influence of their thoughtform. The trick they often use is to give an undisputed fact and follow it by something that has not been proven. By lumping them together they give the impression that neither can be challenged.

Those who have escaped the mark of the Beast will neither automatically reject science or accept all they tell us is true. They will look into the facts and come up with their own conclusions.

The next area to look at is the media. In this, let us include TV, Newspapers, magazines, Hollywood and the internet. What are some thoughtforms governing those who deliver news and influence us?

Aug 20, 2014

Illusions in Hollywood

Keith writes:

The most powerful overarching thoughtform of the beast is ‘FEAR’. All of our most awful mistakes in past lives occur because ‘FEAR’ leads us to believe (erroneously) that we have no choice, but to comply with the beast’s demands.

Great observation Keith. You have touched on the key principle behind all thoughtforms used by the Beast in all departments of life. You are getting a little ahead of the program here. We’ll get back to this when we do a general wrap up.

The Question:

The next area to look at is the media. In this, let us include TV, Newspapers, magazines, Hollywood and the internet. What are some thoughtforms governing those who deliver news and influence us?

Good comments on this.

I was contemplating the principle that would pin down the actual governing thoughtforms and this came to me:

“Find the illusion and you will find the thoughtform.”

That turned on a light in my head. As are all truths it is very simple, but enlightening.

The illusion in medicine is that doctors and authorities there always know what is best better than you do.

The illusion in science is that the scientists can gather scientific facts and always come to a more accurate conclusion than you can, even if you access the same facts.

The illusion in religion is that a minister, prophet or preacher is closer to God than you are or can be.

So, what is the illusion of the media? There are a number of them. Susan pointed out a big one which is basically self importance – they feel their words should carry more weight than the rest of us, just because of who they are.

This illusion particularly applies to Hollywood and is fed by many sources. There are the fans who worship them, business who pays for their endorsements and politicians who want to rub shoulders with them and get their advice. On top of this, they create all kinds of award ceremonies where they have lots of opportunity to pat themselves on the back.

The key to seeing their main governing thoughtform is realizing that the self-importance of the individuals involved is only half the equation. The other half is the weight that they give the opinion of their peers. Therefore, in all their work, most involved in Hollywood seek not only to magnify their own glory through their work, but to get approval from their coworkers. Since it is usually assumed their coworkers are from the Left they will generally do what is necessary to appeal that that thinking process.

So what would the thoughtform be then if we keep this in mind?

“I will do what is necessary to generate praise from others in the business and for this will receive maximum glory with the people that matter.”

Question:

Now, how about those who deliver us the news? What is their illusion and the main governing thoughtform?

***

The Question:

How about those who deliver us the news? What is their illusion and the main governing thoughtform?

Let us analyze the answers so far for illusions to see the progress made.

They want to outdo the competition… Not quite. That is the truth of what they are trying to do. No illusion there.

They want to be the first… No illusion there. That is what we all know they want.

They would think that they are greatly needed in society to keep us all well informed… It is true and not illusion that we do need newspeople to keep us informed. If we did not need the m they would have no power.

It would also be something along the lines of “I can “feed” you information” No illusion there. They can feed us information.

The Illusion is that reporters are better informed than everyone else so they know better about politics than everyone else. The reporters are better informed than average but their job is not to preach politics, but to report the news so this wouldn’t be a core illusion.

Finally Larry says: “But there is another strong thoughtform that works on TV reporters in particular. They must maintain the appearance of unaffected and non-participatory.”

Here Larry is approaching one of the two major illusions in the news media. Let me reword this illusion as follows: They are under the illusion that they report without bias and are unaffected and non participatory.

The thoughtform would be “You are a sincere unbiased reporter just trying to get the important facts to the people.”

Question: What is the second illusion with the accompanying thoughtform?