Jump to content

This is TruthLoveEnergy: A Michael Teachings Collaborative Community - We are a collaborative community of studying, sharing, and archiving of The Michael Teachings as channeled through Troy Tolley since 1988.   BASIC INTRODUCTION

 

There are many SERVICES available - Order an Essence & Personality Profile, join a private Personal Open Floor chat with Michael, find out your 9 Pillars, discuss Past Lives, ask about relationships, and schedule time to discuss anything and everything with Michael through Troy.    SCHEDULE A SESSION

Do You Need SUPPORT? - Community Support and Official Support are available for members! Support Tickets receive responses as fast as we can, so please be patient. We are a very small team! Community Support is dependent upon member responses.   SUPPORT TICKETS COMMUNITY SUPPORT

Check out our ever-evolving LIBRARY? - Explore our archiving of decades worth of material channeled through Troy from Michael. This Library is a collaborative effort and shows the power of community.  STUDY LIBRARY

Learn More About Your HOST & CHANNELING - Learn more about Troy through his blog and feel free to ask him about anything related to his work as a channel! You will receive a response ASAP.   30 THINGS ABOUT TROY ASK THE CHANNEL TROY PLAYS GAMES

Probabilities of War with Iran (as of 1/7/20)


DianeHB
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • TLE12

From a private session on 1/7/2020: 

 

DianeHB: Hello Michael. What is our probabilities of war with Iran after the recent assassination of Iran's General Soleimani? Can you also comment on how this fits into our overall trajectory for 2020?

 

MEntity: At this point, probabilities for war are high at 78%. As for how this fits into an overall trajectory for 2020, it is increasing the probability for Manifestation of the Infinite Soul. These are comments based on the moment, but probabilities are in high fluctuation through February, so these can change dramatically in that time. We see more stable trajectories set after February.

 

😭

Edited by DianeHB
  • LIKE/LOVE 11
  • SAD 19
  • ANGRY 3
  • WHAT/WOW! 5
  • THANK YOU! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depressing. But I thank you for asking about this. I wonder if part of the constant background joy I've felt since the new year began has something to do with the higher probability of MIS.

This is such a classic Wag the Dog scenario from DT, but I don't think that line of thinking helps those died in the bombings...

I can't wait for the era of "strength = the ability to hurt others (to get your way)" to be over!

 

  • LIKE/LOVE 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Donald Trump has done to Iran and Iraq in the last few days has just made him permanently disgusting to me. Considering we were having a 45% chance of IS before, and now it's bumping up just because he is a fucking narcissistic asshole pisses me off.

I truly have no interest in an IS any longer. I did before, but those versions of me dissipated in the November 2018 Divergence. I have avoided Self Destruction every time so far, and reached out to others I felt needed help, and I'd like to think that counts for something in terms of aligning us on the more positive trajectory.

 

I hope we can get Trump out of office and reject these bullshit authoritarian tactics trying to create a fascist one world order.

Edited by KurtisM
  • LIKE/LOVE 18
  • THANK YOU! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm apparently doing a long-term study in the IS, so of course I would have a personal interest in encountering a manifestation again, but given the option, I'd rather the world not need one.

  • LIKE/LOVE 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank-you for asking DianeHB.  It explains the constant nausea I've experienced since this all started. 


This isn't all Trump himself, existing in a vacuum though, I think. IE:  Netanyahu seems be be using it to his own benefit (as a literal get out of jail free card).  Some kind of power vacuum is going to come out of this, akin to the fall of Rome, I think.  It's just a question of who / what fills it, and how / why.

I read an astute headline this morning: "Trump's Iran Clusterfuckery Just Handed the Middle East to China"
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-iran-clusterfuckery-just-handed-the-middle-east-to-china 

Edited by WolfAmethyst
  • LIKE/LOVE 7
  • SAD 2
  • ANGRY 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probabilities are so precarious unless it hits the point it becomes a sequence which leads to a vector. I always take their probabilities with a grain of salt since something can derail those at any given moment, and it seems we get reminded of that time and time again.

Edited by NickG
  • LIKE/LOVE 20
  • THANK YOU! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • TeamTLE

I asked this at a 10 Questions session with Michael/Troy on April 12, 2017. Interesting that Iran was not mentioned. 

 

Maureen:  What are the probabilities that the world is headed towards WWIII with the Trump Administration in power? What countries would likely be involved? If so, is there a probability that we are on course for nuclear weapons to be used?

 

MEntity:  The probabilities for a World War are quite low at the moment and remain fairly low for the next 5 years, but the probabilities for a large-scale war between countries that have managed to avoid this are quite high at around 78%.

 

MEntity:  The highest probabilities of War on the soil of the country include The United States, North and South Korea, and Russia.

 

MEntity:  The probability of use of nuclear warfare are around 50%.

 

Maureen:  Which country would "invade" the United States?

 

MEntity:  Russia.

 

Maureen:  Oh!!!

 

Maureen:  What are the probabilities that Russia would "invade" the United States?

 

MEntity:  We wish to clarify here that "War" does not necessarily mean the familiar warfare, but a disruption of systems that bring about collapse.

 

Maureen:  I see.

 

MEntity:  Those probabilities stand at 65% over the next 5 years at this point.

 

Maureen:  Would the financial systems be affected?

 

MEntity:  Of course.

 

MEntity:  The primary targets appear to be power grids.

 

MEntity:  Keep mind that these are not predictions. They are probabilities, and while they are high or low, they are never 100% until after fulfillment.

 

Maureen:  Thank you.

 

  • LIKE/LOVE 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NickG said:

Probabilities are so precarious unless it’s hits the point it becomes a sequence which leads to a vector. I always take their probabilities with a grain of salt since something can derail those at any given moment, and it seems we get reminded of that time and time again.


Agreed.  Not to advocate any form harm or violence, but a certain relative (who I've suspected  was President Teddy Roosevelt in another life) regularly wonders aloud why someone entrusted with Fuckface's security hasn't deliberately failed to do their job.

  • LIKE/LOVE 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when I was in school a teacher said that a third world war would be the end of the world due to nuclear weaponry.

 

I remember hearing that .. amazingly though .. I was quiet because I thought, "Then there's never a third world war. No one would be crazy to bait an entire planet."

 

So I grew up and found that yes .. there are crazy people at this point ..

  • LIKE/LOVE 8
  • SAD 3
  • LOL 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@NickG I agree with you.

Michael's percentages are just mathematical statistics. But the real power is not in the numbers, it's in our actions and choices. We create the tipping points and turning points.

I do expect there to be a lot of wild cards this year though that could divert several momentum. Simply because this is a Sage-Spiritualist year and everyone has their own beliefs and truths to try and give form to.

  • LIKE/LOVE 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, shoot. I'm inclined to take those odds, though, because I remember how high the probability was for Hillary winning the 2016 election. And if war does indeed break out, that will be very unfortunate, but one silver lining might be the possible revival of a strong Anti-War movement, like what the United States experienced during the War in Vietnam. I know there was a draft back then, and there probably won't be a draft now, but resistance to the current presidential administration has already been palpable for quite some time, and adding Anti-War to the mix will only add strength to the resistance movement. If a new Anti-War movement breaks out, ideally it will place the blame where it is due, and it will not repeat the mistakes of the previous Anti-War movement, which demonized and blamed the veterans who were lied to and used.

  • LIKE/LOVE 20
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For any Americans on this board, if you're worried and wondering what to do, call your Senators and Congressmen. Nancy Pelosi is already trying to pass a bill that will restore Congress' right to stop a President from going to war without Congressional approval. It will most likely pass the House, but if we put enough pressure on certain Senators, it might possibly pass the Senate as well.

  • LIKE/LOVE 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

3 hours ago, Connor said:

Well, shoot. I'm inclined to take those odds, though, because I remember how high the probability was for Hillary winning the 2016 election. And if war does indeed break out, that will be very unfortunate, but one silver lining might be the possible revival of a strong Anti-War movement, like what the United States experienced during the War in Vietnam. I know there was a draft back then, and there probably won't be a draft now, but resistance to the current presidential administration has already been palpable for quite some time, and adding Anti-War to the mix will only add strength to the resistance movement. If a new Anti-War movement breaks out, ideally it will place the blame where it is due, and it will not repeat the mistakes of the previous Anti-War movement, which demonized and blamed the veterans who were lied to and used.

 

I agree that it's not their fault and they shouldn't be blamed or demonized.  I do, however, think that "support our troops" is a cultural norm that needs to die.  Soldiers are not, by and large, evil people, and through a combination of propoganda and perverse financial incentives, most have been essentially tricked into their service.  But they aren't heroes by virtue of their service either.  They're generally well-meaning people who have unwittingly contributed to a harmful force in the world.  That calls for support in the sense of compassion, but not admiration as is demanded in modern American culture.

Edited by Sam K
  • LIKE/LOVE 11
  • THANK YOU! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • TLE12

Thank you for asking about this. I am immensely disgusted by the latest actions of fuckface against Iran. There are many other environmental related issues to contend with like the devastating fires in Australia, Amazon fires from last year, rising temperatures and ice melting around Greenland and Antarctica, significant amount of plastics in our oceans and the effects on marine life, extinction of many species, and on and on. The focus should be on healing our planet so we have a planet to live on moving forward rather than starting yet another war. There are more older souls across the planet now than before. Michael mentioned in the January report that Self-Destruction has "anchored primarily in the Baby and Young Soul populations." I would like to think there is still the possibility of sufficient resistance against a global war as our species moves to a Mature Soul Age. The probabilities could still change like NickG mentioned.

  • LIKE/LOVE 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, @DianeHB for this channeling. The "invasion" of the US by Russia may be the negative result of the pentagon configuration of which Trump, Putin, Bannon, and Don Jr are a part. https://our.truthloveenergy.com/blogs/entry/3391-michael-on-2020/?tab=comments#comment-20315 

 

Trump is the eccentric, unstable aspect of this configuration. It's pretty clear he's trying to work for the power position (Putin), but he's so narcissistic and moronic, his actions are scattershot. The "Russian invasion" probably has nothing to do with violent war on US soil at this point, but an increasingly pro-Putin (Russian) agenda blindly followed by Trump because he's so unconscious he feels compelled. Putin is nowhere near as dumb as Trump, so here we are. Putin has an agenda, which may be to put Russia back on the map as a superpower with a repeat of the Pan-Slavic, antisemitic world of pre-WWI, Czarist Russia. From what I've read, Russia is poorer than is claimed, and the sanctions hit them hard. Putin is in a long line of Russian strongmen. This is my US perspective. Michael students from countries closer to Russia may have a clearer point of view.

 

@Connor  Sadly, the vilification of the Vietnam war vets is a myth. It's bullshit promulgated by right-wing war hawks even at the time and it continues to this day. So what we get now is this smarmy "Thank you for your service." There is no reliable data that the vets were spat upon or treated with contempt by anti-war folks. The Vietnam vets were ignored, isolated with the horrors they experienced, but few anti-war activists ever held held the soldiers responsible for that war.

  • LIKE/LOVE 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for asking about this, @DianeHB. I came looking to see if Michael had said anything about this yet, and I wasn't disappointed. Still, 78% is a darn high probability, and I hope we can find some way to avoid all-out war.

Also, it annoys me that even the anchors on the more liberal media are rarely coming out and calling this what it was: a murder, an assassination. Everytime someone uses a less exact word makes me angrier.

Rachel Maddow: Why did the President do this? We don't know."

Yes, we do. He's been claiming for years that he could commit murder and get away with it. This was his attempt to prove it. If he had attempted it on Fifth Avenue in New York, at least we probably wouldn't be looking at a looming war.

Rachel Maddow: "Why did he choose to do it now? We don't know."

Yes, we do. He's been impeached. He's striking out to cause chaos to take attention away from the impeachment and the nearly-certain trial in the Senate. Maybe he even thinks he cannot be removed from office during a war.

No. This merely illustrates the need to get him out of office NOW, before he can make anything worse.

  • LIKE/LOVE 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Connie Stansell-Foy said:

Thank you for asking about this, @DianeHB. I came looking to see if Michael had said anything about this yet, and I wasn't disappointed. Still, 78% is a darn high probability, and I hope we can find some way to avoid all-out war.

Also, it annoys me that even the anchors on the more liberal media are rarely coming out and calling this what it was: a murder, an assassination. Everytime someone uses a less exact word makes me angrier.

 

This assassination puts corporate news media that play at being "left-leaning" in an awkward position.  Such entities typically profit greatly from war, but have to maintain their progressive veneer. 

 

Thus, they'll speak of how dreadful and senseless a "mistake" this was, but they won't call it a murder because Suleimani was a Very Bad Man who needed to be stopped, but this was just such a reckless, foolish action to undertake, but we can't just let them retaliate like that, and how awful it is that Trump's made it so we have to go to war with them, but we'd better come out on top now because otherwise China and Russia will gain an advantage on us, but oh it's just so terrible.

  • LIKE/LOVE 6
  • LOL 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Philos = the doctrine that certainty in knowledge is impossible.

Probability = the principle that in matters concerning which there is more than one probable opinion, it is lawful to follow any one of them. The quality or state of being probable but not proved.

  • LIKE/LOVE 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • TeamTLE

I'm strangely calm about the whole situation with Iran. I'm dreaming like crazy and perhaps I'm getting messages that I don't remember. Somehow I feel there's another shoe about to drop. 

 

The whole thing is about control of the oil and preservation of wealth and power, and that's the only real reason we have troops in the Middle East, regardless of the story they try to spin about fighting ISIS. 

 

The possibility of this war may be just what is needed to wake Americans who have thus far been oblivious to the threats to their Republic. 

  • LIKE/LOVE 9
  • THANK YOU! 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone notice that some of his wording seemed somewhat garbled this morning?  Mental degradation?  I was listening to Morning Joe today and was still awake when they interviewed Elizabeth Warren....I am beginning to once again support her nomination.....We need someone with strong ideas and plans who also has the "youth" to implement those plans and lead this country towards a more collaborative, resource based future that centers on helping the planet and those who need financial, emotional, help - not corporations, that's for sure....

 

 

  • LIKE/LOVE 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, AnnH said:

 

@Connor  Sadly, the vilification of the Vietnam war vets is a myth. It's bullshit promulgated by right-wing war hawks even at the time and it continues to this day. So what we get now is this smarmy "Thank you for your service." There is no reliable data that the vets were spat upon or treated with contempt by anti-war folks. The Vietnam vets were ignored, isolated with the horrors they experienced, but few anti-war activists ever held held the soldiers responsible for that war.

Well, I stand corrected, thanks for clearing that up. I'd known about the term 'baby-killer' rising to prominence after the My Lai Massacre, and I knew the vast majority of the Anti-War Movement wasn't focused on attacking veterans, and I guess I just assumed the rest. I hadn't known how much of it was fabrication. I guess it's the fact that the vets were, as you said, ignored and isolated which makes me feel as if there was a missed opportunity. Many Vietnam vets did end up joining the Anti-War movement. If the veterans had been treated better and taken care of, maybe many more would have found the courage to join, too, because the activists and the soldiers were on the same side, even if not all of them realized that at the time or behaved accordingly.

So, I agree with @Sam K, the veterans should not be worshiped. I never thank veterans for their service. Each person who volunteers to go to war, knowing they will be asked to kill other people, should bear responsibility for that choice. But it is also true that no one who signs up for a war really knows what they are getting into, and by the time the mistake is realized, it is too late, and all one can do is try and survive until the tour of duty is complete. The United States does have a fetish for glorifying veterans, and we absolutely need to stop doing that, but we should also be sure to try and include veterans as much as possible in the Anti-War effort, if such a thing ever comes to pass, and not abandon them to depression, PTSD, and vices.

  • LIKE/LOVE 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • TeamTLE
2 hours ago, Connor said:

Each person who volunteers to go to war, knowing they will be asked to kill other people, should bear responsibility for that choice.

While I agree with this, I don't think that everyone that signs up for military service does so because they are volunteering to go to war. Some do it because they know that someone has to defend our country. And some do it because they literally have no other choice to support themselves or their families. And I imagine there are other reasons besides wanting to go to war. I grant you, on other other end of the spectrum there are some nut jobs that absolutely want to go to war and kill as many people as they can, but I don't think this is the majority of those in military service. 

 

The bottom line is that all of the people in the military are humans with families and not just cannon fodder. So, regardless of their reasons for enlisting, they don't deserve to be put in harm's way to support the whims of a belligerent narcissist. And that's ESPECIALLY true when the one with the whims developed magical bone spurs to get out of service himself. 

  • LIKE/LOVE 8
  • THANK YOU! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • TeamTLE

@Connor,  @AnnH, and others, as we are speaking about war and the Vietnam War specifically I remembered Seth had a few things to say about it. Here is Seth on The War in Vietnam, Korea, WWII, and Hate and Love. There may be more from Seth on this (which I will post) but this is probably enough for today.  🙂 

 

 

From The Nature of Personal Reality:

SESSION 673, JUNE 27,1973, 9:38 P.M. WEDNESDAY:


Now: Dictation. (Slowly, to begin: ) Left alone, hate does not last.


Often it is akin to love, for the hater is attracted to the object of his hatred by deep bonds. It can also be a method of communication, but it is never a steady constant state, and will automatically change if not tampered with.


If you believe that hate is wrong and evil, and then find yourself hating someone, you may try to inhibit the emotion or turn it against yourself — raging against yourself rather than another. On the other hand you may try to pretend the feeling out of existence, in which case you dam up that massive energy and cannot use it for other purposes.


In its natural state, hatred has a powerful rousing characteristic that initiates change and action. Regardless of what you have been told, hatred does not initiate strong violence. As covered earlier in this book, the outbreak of violence is often the result of a built-in sense of powerlessness. Period. (See sessions 662-63 in Chapter Seventeen.)

Many who unexpectedly commit great crimes, sudden murders, even bringing about mass death, have a history of docility and conventional attitudes, and were considered models, in fact, of deportment. All natural aggressive elements were denied in their natures, and any evidence of momentary hatred was considered evil and wrong. As a result such individuals find it difficult, finally, to express the most normal denial, or to go against their given code of conventionality and respect. They cannot communicate as, say, even animals can, with their fellow men as far as the expression of a disagreement is concerned.

(9:50.) Psychologically, only a massive explosion can free them. They feel so powerless that this adds to their difficulties — so they try to liberate themselves by showing great power in terms of violence. Some such individuals, model sons, for example, who seldom even spoke back to their parents, were suddenly sent to war and given carte blanche to release all such feelings in combat; and I am referring particularly to the last two wars (the war in Korea, 1950-53, and the war in Vietnam, 1964-73), not the Second World War.


In these wars aggressions could be released and codes still followed. The individuals were faced, however, with the horror of their violently released, pent-up hatreds and aggressions. Seeing these bloody results, they became even more frightened, more awed by what they thought of as this terrible energy that sometimes seemed to drive them to kill.

On their return home the code of behavior changed back to one suited to civilian life, and they clamped down upon themselves again as hard as they could. Many would appear as super-conventional. The "luxury" of expressing emotion even in exaggerated form was suddenly denied them, and the sense of powerlessness grew by contrast.

(Pause at 9:59.) Give us a moment... This is not to be a chapter devoted to war. However, there are a few points that I do want to make. It is a sense of powerlessness that also causes nations to initiate wars. This has little to do with their "actual" world situation or with the power that others might assign to them, but to an overall sense of powerlessness — even, sometimes, regardless of world dominance.

In a way I am sorry that this is not the place to discuss the Second World War (1939-45), for it was also the result of a sense of powerlessness which then erupted into a mass blood bath on a grand scale. The same course was followed privately in the cases of such individuals as just mentioned.

Give us a moment. . . Without going into any detail, I simply want to point out that in the United States strong national efforts were made after World War II to divert the servicemen's energies into other areas on their return home. Many who entered that war feeling powerless were given advantages after it was over — incentives, education, benefits they did not have before it. They were given the means to power in their own eyes. They were also accepted home as heroes, and while many certainly were disillusioned, in the whole framework of the country's mood the veterans were welcomed.

(Pause at 10:11.) I am speaking generally now about the war under discussion, for there were certainly exceptions, yet most of the men involved in it learned something from their experiences. They turned against the idea of violence, and each in his own way recognized the personal psychological ambiguities of their feelings during combat.


They were told by politicians that it was to be the last war, and the irony is that most of those in uniform believed it. (I, Robert Butts, was one of the believers.) The lie did not become truth but it became more nearly so, for despite their failures the ex-servicemen managed to bring up children who would not go to war willingly, who would question its premise.

In an odd way this made it even more difficult for those who did go into the next two, less extensive wars, for the country was not behind either one. Any sense of powerlessness on the part of individual fighting men was given expression as before, this time in a more local blood bath, but the code itself had become shaky. This release was not as accepted as it had been before, even within the ranks. By the last war (in Vietnam), the country was as much against it as for it, and the men's feelings of powerlessness were reinforced after it was over. This is the reason for the incidents of violence on the part of returning servicemen.*

Footnote: *According to Seth, then, feelings of powerlessness would have much to do with the especially high rate of violence — even to the death — among American servicemen who had once been prisoners of war. A government study of those who had been held captive in the Far East during World War II and the Korean War, for instance, shows that 40% of all the deaths that took place in the group between 1945 and 1954 resulted from murder, suicide or accident.

As for the war in Vietnam: over 500 American military prisoners were released by North Vietnam following the January, 1973, cease-fire. Officials now fear that a good number of these men will come to believe that their suffering was futile because of the war's unpopularity in the United States. There have been suicides among them (as of July), and many have undergone at least temporary stress reactions since their release from prison.


Hate, left alone then, does not erupt into violence. Hatred brings a sense of power and initiates communication and action. In your terms it is the build up of natural anger; in animals, say, it would lead to a face-to-face encounter, of battle stances in which each creature's body language, motion, and ritual would serve to communicate a dangerous position. One animal or the other would simply back down. Growling or roaring might be involved.

(10:25.) Power would be effectively shown, but symbolically. This type of animal encounter occurs infrequently, for the animals involved would have had to ignore or short-circuit many lesser preliminary anger or initiation encounters, each meant to make positions clear and to ward off violence.

Another small point here: Christ's dictum to turn the other cheek (Matthew 5:39, for instance) was a psychologically crafty method of warding off violence — not of accepting it. Symbolically it represented an animal showing its belly to an adversary. (Jane, as Seth, patted her midriff.) The remark was meant symbolically. On certain levels, it was the gesture of defeat that brought triumph and survival. It was not meant to be the cringing act of a martyr who said, "Hit me again," but represented a biologically pertinent statement, a communication of body language. Give us a moment. . . (Softly: ) It would cleverly remind the attacker of the "old" communicative postures of the sane animals.

Now: Love is also a great inciter to action, and utilizes dynamos of energy.

You may take your break.

(10:35.) Jane's trance had been deep on a very humid night. She now told me that while delivering the World War II data for the book, she had been quite aware of another, unspoken, channel from Seth.

(That one had been concerned exclusively with the Second World War, Jane said with some surprise, and had contained amazingly complete information on the war's origins and the individual, racial, and reincarnational aspects of it as experienced by the peoples of various nations, whether or not said nations had been directly involved in it. The information had even considered the consequences flowing from the intensified use of technology by the societies of the world after the war. "All of that was coming from that way, "Jane pointed to her lower left. She spent perhaps ten minutes describing some of the categories inherent in the material, and repeatedly said that she wished we had a record of it. At the same time, although the data was available, we didn’t want to lay this book aside to get it.

(Her awareness of this "probable" channel reminded me that she'd experienced a similar phenomenon in the 666th session in Chapter Eighteen. But now, [as then] when I asked how she could perceive a subjective stream of information from Seth while giving book dictation for him, she couldn't really say. See the 616th session in Chapter Two for her first encounter with multiple channels.)

(Resume at 11:01.)


Now: Love and hate are both based upon self-identification in your experience. You do not bother to love or hate persons you cannot identify with at all. They leave you relatively untouched. They do not elicit deep emotion.

Hatred always involves a painful sense of separation from love, which may be idealized. A person you feel strongly against at any given time upsets you because he or she does not live up to your expectations. The higher your expectations the greater any divergence from them seems. If you hate a parent it is precisely because you expect such love. A person from whom you expect nothing will never earn your bitterness.

In a strange manner, then, hatred is a means of returning to love; and left alone and expressed it is meant to communicate a separation that exists in relation to what is expected.

Love, therefore, can contain hate very nicely. Hatred can contain love and be driven by it, particularly by an idealized love. (Pause.) You "hate" something that separates you from a loved object. It is precisely because the object is loved that it is so disliked if expectations are not met. You may love a parent, and if the parent does not seem to return the love and denies your expectations, then you may "hate" the same parent because of the love that leads you to expect more. The hatred is meant to get you your love back. It is supposed to lead to a communication from you, stating your feelings — clearing the air, so to speak, and bringing you closer to the love object. Hatred is not the denial of love, then, but an attempt to regain it, and a painful recognition of circumstances that separate you from it.


If you understood the nature of love you would be able to accept feelings of hatred. Affirmation can include the expression of such strong emotions. Give us a moment. . .


(Pause. I yawned, and Seth caught me at it.


(Amused: ) I thought it was more interesting than that.

 

 ("It is. Really.")


Dogmas or systems of thought that tell you to rise above your emotions can be misleading — even, in your terms, somewhat dangerous. Such theories are based upon the concept that there is something innately disruptive, base, or wrong in man's emotional nature, while the soul is always depicted as being calm, "perfect," passive and unfeeling. Only the most lofty, blissful awareness is allowed. Yet the soul is above all a fountain of energy, creativity, and action that shows its characteristics in life precisely through the ever-changing emotions.


(11:22.) Trusted, your feelings will lead you to psychological and spiritual states of mystic understanding, calm, and peacefulness. Followed, your emotions will lead you to deep understandings, but you cannot have a physical self without emotions any more than you can have a day without weather.


In personal contact, you can be quite aware of an enduring love for another person, and still recognize moments of hatred when separations of a kind exist that you resent because of the love you know involved.


(As I looked up, Seth said in anticipation of my question: ) You can add the word "is" to that sentence (before "involved") if you want to. But it is fine without it.


(Slowly: ) In the same way, it is possible to love your fellow human beings on a grand scale, while at times hating them precisely because they so often seem to fall short of that love. When you rage against humanity it is because you love it. To deny the existence of hate then is to deny love. It is not that those emotions are opposites. It is that they are different aspects, and experienced differently. To some extent you want to identify with those you feel deeply about. You do not love someone simply because you associate portions of yourself with another. You often do love another individual because such a person evokes within you are feeling on a conscious level. The emotions are there, but they are invisible to you because you are afraid to look. To that extent you are divorced from your own reality and disconnected from your own feelings of love. These denied emotional states may be projected outward upon others — an enemy in a war, a neighbor. Even if you find yourself hating the symbolic enemy, you will also be aware of a deep attraction.


A bond of hate will unite you, but the bond was originally based upon love. In this case however you aggravate and exaggerate all those differences from the ideal, and focus upon them predominantly. In any given case all of this is consciously available to you. It requires only an honest and determined attempt to become aware of your own feelings and beliefs. Even your hateful fantasies, left alone, will return you to a reconciliation and release love.


A fantasy of beating a parent or a child, even to death, will if followed through lead to tears of love and understanding.


Now: I will end our session. My fondest wishes to you both, and good evening.


("Thank you, Seth. Good night.")  12:17A.M.

 

A note added later: After comparing the information in this session with some of Seth's material of previous years, Jane wrote a statement for insertion here:


"In these passages on hate, and elsewhere in this book, Seth goes more deeply into the nature of our emotional life than he has before. His earlier comments on hate, for example, were made when he had to consider the level of understanding of those who were witnessing the session. One such instance is mentioned on page 248 of The Seth Material, when, in response to a declaration by a student in my ESP class, Seth took the conventional idea of hate for granted on the part of the student. Then he answered accordingly: 'There is no justification for hatred . . . When you curse another, you curse yourselves, and the curse returns to you.'" The answer must be considered in the light of the previous conversation, in which the student was trying to justify violence as a means of attaining peace. Seth's main concern was to refute that concept.


"In this book, Seth leads the reader beyond conventional ideas of good and evil to a new framework of understanding. But even at these deeper levels, hate is not justified, since an honest confrontation with it will lead the individual back to the love upon which it is really based.


"In using the word 'curse,' Seth is not referring to swearing, but to directing hatred against another. Until the individual comes to terms with himself and his emotions, the hatred will return, because it belongs to the one who hates and not to anyone else. The earlier instructions on handling emotions, in Chapter Eleven, provide a framework in which hate can be faced and understood. Also important in this context is Seth 's frequent reminder that the expression of normal aggression prevents the buildup of anger into hatred. "

 

  • LIKE/LOVE 9
  • THANK YOU! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2020 at 2:52 PM, Janet said:

While I agree with this, I don't think that everyone that signs up for military service does so because they are volunteering to go to war. Some do it because they know that someone has to defend our country. And some do it because they literally have no other choice to support themselves or their families. And I imagine there are other reasons besides wanting to go to war. I grant you, on other other end of the spectrum there are some nut jobs that absolutely want to go to war and kill as many people as they can, but I don't think this is the majority of those in military service. 

 

A lot of people who sign up for the military do it quite pragmatically - as a way to get out of their depressed small town or region, pay for college, and learn marketable skills. And the armed forces provide support and structure, and they DO pay people and provide housing, childcare, and health care - OMG SOSHULIZM, lol. And there are many who do feel a genuine sense of service and/or duty.

 

@Maureen, thank you for the Seth quote! I wonder if there ever was a follow up from Seth with all the WWII material. I have all the books, but it’s been a while since I’ve really dug into the Seth stuff - maybe it’s time to do that again.

Edited by Crystal
  • LIKE/LOVE 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...