Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'causal entity'.
[Duplication of private session Michael on Seth posted by Janet in 2016] Janet: For about the last 9 months I have been drawn to the Seth material and have been studying it rather extensively. When I first was introduced to Seth (early 90s I think), I found the material hard to accept -- what I was able to understand. Now much of it makes sense to me, perhaps because I read it with a Michael teachings slant and have much more experience with some of the concepts. Can you comment on the extent and duration and perhaps the timing of my current Seth studies? It's as though I have begun to recognize Seth as one of my teachers. I would also be interested in your comments on the frequent ‘coincidence’ of reading sections of Seth materials that have content that connects with current conversation topics on TLE. The number of these occurrences has been amusing. Finally, who or what is Seth in Michael terms? I just read an early transcript where he refers to himself as ‘an energy personality essence’, which is the first time I remember the word ‘essence’ in these materials. Seth frequently uses the word ‘entity’ in a way that I think corresponds to ‘essence’ in Michael terminology, although this is not always the case. For me it is validation of both teachings when they overlap. Yet, Seth's materials have a different focus. How do you view the overlap and distinctions between the two teachings? MEntity: First, a teacher is often introduced before the teaching can be heard. This is a kind of seeding process that, if goes smoothly, will eventually unfold a structure that can be returned to and built upon. Many of our students are students of Seth. One usually comes before the other, and eventually find common ground, even if the terminology is different. Seth and we, both, emphasize the process of choice as a primary source of the creation of one's reality. We decided to focus on this from the point of Personality as a way to access and Manifest Essence, whereas Seth decided to focus on this from how this works from the deepest core of Essence and up, through Personality. Seth is a Scholar/Sage/Artisan Causal Entity who shares our Cadre 11 in our Energy Ring and is Entity 7. We think one of the few ways to validate a teaching beyond the levels of Personal Truth is through the overlapping and consistency that may be a part of a teaching even as they come from different sources and in different ways. Janet: Do others channel Seth now? If this is a causal entity I would think this is possible. MEntity: No. There are no valid channels of Seth at this time. The Warrior with whom Seth works will return to continue their work, but all claims to be channeling Seth are false, or misunderstood relationships with facets of that channel's Personality or Essence. Because their material is quite "dense" and focused, the Agreements remain with the Warrior. This Warrior is helping "Seth" to prepare for their Transcendental life. Janet: Do you collaborate with Seth at all? MEntity: Our Cadre cross-references our experiences and material, but our teachings remain quite distinct and unique among the entities, even as we are of the same Cadre. This is part of every Entity's evolution through the Causal Plane: to clarify and formulate that distinction as a teaching and teacher.
ASK Michael Live Chat February 1, 2015 Channel: Troy Tolley JeanAU: Hi Michael fragments of your Entity perform the same work, that is channeling? Are you involved in other activities, if so would you mind telling us what they are. Also do you feel any individuality. MEntity: Hello, Jean. All of our fragments are involved in channeling, but in different tiers that help us to accomplish this. In addition to those various tiers, we are also involved in any number of activities and explorations. "Life" as a Causal Entity is as diverse as life as a Physical fragment. In terms of our work through channeling, we have the first tier that works on holding our grounding or Anchoring. These are the fragments who hold our place in time and space relative to our students. Then we have a tier that works on our Cording, or the links that branch out from our fragments to other fragments. These are sustained with students and channels. Then we have a tier that manages our Agreements. Then we have a Tier that handles all Akashic Record research. Then we have our tier that does the work of Communication. Then we have our tier where we sustain our own ideals and vision and aim for evolution, or our Application tier. Then we have our Learning Tier, where we study with our own teachers. All of these Tiers: GROUNDING, CORDING, AGREEMENTS, AKASHIC, COMMUNICATION, APPLICATION, LEARNING, contribute to the dynamic that you experience as "channeling." This is also the case for us in our incarnations as Transcendental Soul. Fragments from among our entity rotate through these tiers. As for other activities, we have everything that would be familiar to you as "travel," "vacations," study, dreaming, bonding, arts, etc. No sense of individuality is ever lost, it is only enhanced to a degree very difficult to comprehend while Physical. It is as difficult to comprehend as it is to comprehend that "you" are a conglomeration of cohesive cells and atoms and microbes that contribute to all of who "YOU" are. We are, at once, completely whole as an Entity, but acutely aware of ourselves as parts within parts. No lifetime or Personality is lost. It is embraced and integrated. Never lost. JeanAU: That mAKES ME FEEL BETTER JeanAU: I believe we were sloth-like in the beginning on Sirius - over millions of years can you give us an idea of how we looked at various stages? MEntity: The species that was "sloth-like" started as large, lumbering, vegetarian, quadrupedal about the size of what you know as Elephants. These evolved into smaller and smaller versions rather rapidly over time, relatively speaking, and because of fruitarian/vegetarian diet, and the change in plant life over time, the species evolved into greater and greater use of the forelegs into forearms, moving from lumbering and into climbing. By the time of our transfer, we were still not entirely bipedal, and quite like Chimpanzees might be seen today, so our splicing with primates was the easiest. Because of the splicing from one species to another, the evolution of Human will always have a "missing link." Maureen: (Question via Rolf) What happens when someone releases a part, or parts, of their body post mortem for reuse? There are reports that organ recipients take over personality traits of the donor. If one is aware that the physical body is the manifestation of spiritual energy it would seem natural that something like an “energetic signature” would persist like a "psychic fingerprint". Maureen: What does this mean for the donor after death and what does this mean for the recipient? MEntity: We have always told you that the Personality is genetic. It is not merely "energetic." It is in the cells of the body. It is a series of switches, so to speak, that are on or off in combinations that are the base Personality. In addition to this, we have always said that the body is a local storehouse for memories, wounding, healing, etc. This is because memory is not local to the brain, though the brain manages it. In addition to this, there is imprinting, which is also not merely "energetic," but a kind of behavior modification that reaches into cellular levels. So an organ that remains alive and moved to a new body will retain whatever memories, programming, and imprinting. This retention is easily overridden, but can take as long as 7 years. Depending on the recipient, whatever has come along with the organ can be integrated, overridden, or ignored. However one would prefer to describe this phenomenon, it is very similar to how a Walk-in process is fulfilled. Except, in reverse. Rather than an Essence walking into a body, a body is walking into an Essence. So to speak. This is a topic that can be explored in a multitude of directions. Do you have further questions for now? Maureen: No, that was perfect Michael. JanaK: Hello Michael, could you please comment on validity/feasibility of pranic nutrition as described and allegedly practised by Henri Monfort, Prahlad Jani, (pratially?) Jasmuheen, and many others? I keep hearing about it and though I know it defies all we have been told about nutrition, the people I hear about it from don't give me impression of lying JanaK: Prahlad Jani was also medically observed in a hospital and confirmed not to eat of even drink for I don't know how long. I know Troy thinks it's bullcrap :) Can you see if these claims are valid and how is it possible if they are? Are they lying? MEntity: Troy's lack of "belief" is well-founded, from what we can see. We know of no humans living without food who can live longer than the usual time frame for the body that lives with no food. No credible proof of this has been offered within the very simple range that would be necessary to exemplify this. Humans do not photosynthesize for their primary nutritional purposes, and no Physical body simply lives off of "spirit energy." It is true that there is a life force that animates the body and is the difference between "living and dead," but that force is not unidirectional. It is part of a circuit. And while there is nourishment from spirit, and light is vital to Humans, neither of these can keep a body alive. Of course these fragments are lying. Either to themselves, to others, or both. In the observations that we know of, foods are still being eaten, however small in quantity. It is true that one can live off of very small quantities of food and extend the life beyond a breaking point if there were no food, but that quality of life force would diminish greatly, and require tremendous relinquishing of participation in life. Bodies are affected by beliefs, this is true, but the will to live does not trump the nature of Physical reality. If that were the case, the delusional man who truly believes he can fly would not crash, or the sheer number of individuals consciously or subconsciously terrified of crashing during a flight would bring down that aircraft. We know that many things are possible, and that the universe is never conclusive, however static its momentum, but if there are Humans who are living with no food and sustaining a healthy and active life by choice to feast only on light and breath, we know of no one. In most cases where this belief is upheld, there is delusion, escapism, and extreme variations on Arrogance at work. JanaK: Interesting, as the people claiming it seem quite humble MEntity: The greatest of arrogance is wrapped in self-deprecation. If you feel you resonate to the claims, it is because there is truth to the possibility, as there are many organisms who can live in such a way. They are not Human, however. If one were to begin training the body to live on minimal food, it would still not be because he were living on light or breath. He would merely be living on minimal food. brian: Hi Michael. I was wondering if you could comment on how the three types of centering affects relationships and how exchanges are processed and interpreted (or misinterpreted) ? MEntity: As with all Overleaves, it is more about the Poles than about the actual Overleaves, in terms of how these work together or work against each other. A Moving-Centered individual partnered with an Intellectual can work very well together from their Positive Poles, while two Emotionally-Centered individuals in the Negative Poles might destroy their relationship. In terms of Centering, this is even more flexible in that when one is in the Positive Poles, there is far more flexibility, as well, so that one is not habitual in Centering. Centering is not static. It can move through all Centers. One can move through all Centers. If you have two Sentimental Emotional fragments together who cannot let go of the past, then each will simply drag their "baggage" around with them and into the relationship, for example, and often presume the other person must do the work of either trumping their own baggage, or the work of relieving them of that baggage. Or two "Reasonable" Intellectuals who constantly justify their behaviors and/or choices without reaching any Insight about the choices and behaviors of the other. That being said, when there are two fragments in a relationship coming from two different Centers, the third Center would tend to be the common ground for help in either bringing resolution, excitement, breaks from patterns and habits, etc. So if an Emotional and Intellectual are in a relationship, some of their greatest common ground might come from the Moving. What that means is different for different fragments. For some, it might mean something as simple as DOING things together. Not just thinking and feeling. Many Intellectual/Emotional pairs can fall into ruts, routine, or second-guessing if there is no action to explore. For others it might mean creating something tangible together as representation of the relationship. So you would want to look to Productivity, or finding a new solution, direction, pattern, anything that might bring a different result. We cannot delineate all combinations here today, but we think this is a start. Bobby: Regarding the last paragraph in January's Energy Report "What Dreams May Come" would you provide some additional detail as far as what you had in mind on that last sentence: Tracking your dreams over January and through March may provide you with some bizarrely wonderful entertainment, at worst, and profound symbolic and prophetic patterns at best MEntity: We were being fairly literal here. The dreams might be entertaining, which is likely the case if you find waking state references that were from your day, or they may be prophetic in that they describe one of three scenarios: highly probable, highly improbable, or test probabilities. Some of which may come true. Does this address your question? Bobby: Um, ok, I was just testing the waters there MEntity: We understand. We were simplistically rather literal in that instance. DavidB: I noticed that Entity 1/2 has by far the most fragments planning to attend the first TLE gathering in September and that Entity 1/7 has the second largest group of fragments planning to attend. I've also noticed that some in 1/7 (perhaps more than usual?) seem to have their ETs in 1/2 and vice versa (including myself). I remember it being said that most fragments in Entity 7 of one Cadre usually have Essence Twins in the Entity 7s of other Cadres. Is there a unique tie between 1/2 and 1/7 to account for these apparent phenomena, or am I seeing something that isn't there? MEntity: A bout half of Entity 7 is paired with other Entity 7s, particularly of the next Cadre. This leaves about 600 paired across its own Cadre. Entity 2 is not more unique in its twinning with Entity 7, but it happens that 2 and 7 have tended to have a push/pull, love/hate, go/stay type of dynamic between the members when incarnated. Entity 7 is quite keen on completing external monads with as many members as possible from other entities, and entity 2, having been quite an eager and outgoing bunch, tend to be available quite often. In that sense, there is a kind of unique "Heart Linking" in high numbers between fragments of those two entities. Kurt: Hi Michael, Attitudes appear in social situations, so I was wondering if you could talk about how Spiritualists appear/act in socializing. MEntity: In the positive pole, Spiritualists will tend to be listeners and hear you out, no matter what you are saying. They will tend to be open-minded, and give you the space to share your truth, without feeling compelled to agree with it or challenge it. They do not feel you are asking of them to believe anything, and they do tend to trust that you would do the same for them. In the negative pole, Spiritualists may tend to use you as a launching pad for sharing anything that might add an "oohh or an aahhh" to the exchange. The sharing is far more conclusive and sometimes even competitive in terms of challenging beliefs. In other words, they can tend to stretch the truth just to hear you react in awe, or to drown out your own beliefs if they are not interesting to them. In social situations, look for the Spiritualist to be the most indecisive, or the most decisive if in the negative pole. In the positive pole, they would help make the decision, but will not impose one. There are more symptoms of the Spiritualist in social scenarios, but this is a bit of an idea. We will conclude here for today.