posted on Jan, 20 2004 @ 01:00 AM
This is a channeled conversation with 6th density STO unified thought form. This may help you at least partially. I'd not discount this just because
it is channeled, that'd be a mistake.
To give you a little background, as I have said before, up to a certain moment in time I do not ever remember seeing or experiencing an "alien"
being or an "abduction" that could be clearly stated to be such - whether it was assumed to be physical or imagined. I HAVE made disconcerting
discoveries about my state when awakening, or have dreamlike memories of very strange things which then corresponded to some sort of physical or
material anomaly that I would immediately "sweep under the rug." But, in the following case, I DID wake up in the night to very strange activity
which I have described more fully elsewhere on the site. Here, I want to focus on the LESSON of that experience applied in GLOBAL terms. So, let's
look at it again, edited and arranged for this particular purpose:
Q: (L) The first thing on my mind is an experience I had several nights ago. It seemed as though there was some sort of interaction between myself and
something "other." Could you tell me what this experience was?
A: Was eclipsing of the realities.
Q: (L) What is an eclipsing of the realities?
A: It is when energy centers conflict.
Q: (L) What energy centers are conflicting?
A: Thought energy centers.
Q: (L) Whose thoughts?
A: Thoughts are the basis of all creation. After all, without thought nothing would exist. Now would it?
Q: (L) True.
A: Therefore, energy centers conflicting involve thought patterns. You could refer to it as an intersecting of thought pattern energies. ...
Q: (L) I also seemed to be aware of several dark, spider-like figures lined up by the side of the bed, was this an accurate impression.
A: Those could be described as specific thought center projections.
Q: (L) I seemed to be fighting and resisting this activity.
A: That was your choice. ...
Q: (L) At what level of density do these thought centers have their primary focus?
A: Thought centers do not have primary focus in any level of density. This is precisely the point. You are not completely familiar with the reality of
what thoughts are. We have spoken to you on many levels and have detailed many areas involving density level, but thoughts are quite a different thing
because they pass through all density levels at once. Now, let us ask you this. Do you not now see how that would be possible?
Q: (L) Yes. But what I am trying to do is identify these conflicting thought centers. If two thought centers, or more, conflict, then my idea would be
that they are in opposition.
A: Correct. ...
Q: (L) Okay, in the experience I felt a paralysis of my body, what caused this paralysis.
A: Yes. Separation of awareness. Which is defined as any point along the pathway where one's awareness becomes so totally focused on one thought
sector that all other levels of awareness are temporarily receded, thereby making it impossible to become aware of one's physical reality along with
one's mental reality. This gives the impression of what is referred to as paralysis. Do you understand?
Q: (L) Yes. And what stimulates this total focus of awareness?
A: An event which sidetracks, temporarily, the mental processes.
Q: (L) And what event can sidetrack the mental processes to this extent?
A: Any number.
Q: (L) In this particular case, what was it?
A: It was an eclipsing of energies caused by conflicting thought centers. Whenever two opposing units of reality intersect, this causes what can be
referred to as friction, which, for an immeasurable amount of what you would refer to as time, which is, of course, nonexistent, creates a
nonexistence, or a stopping of the movements of all functions. This is what we would know as conflict. In between, or through any intersecting,
opposite entities, we always find zero time, zero movement, zero transference, zero exchange. Now think about this. Think about this carefully.
Q: (L) Does this mean that I was, essentially, in a condition of nonexistence?
A: Well, nonexistence is not really the proper term, but non-fluid existence would be more to the point. Do you understand?
Q: (L) Yes. Frozen, as it were?
A: Frozen, as it were.
Q: (L) Was there any benefit to me from this experience?
A: All experiences have potential for benefit.
Q: (L) Was there any detriment from this experience?
A: All experiences have potential for detriment. Now, do you see the parallels? We are talking about any opposing forces in nature, when they come
together, the result can go all the way to the extreme of one side or all the way to the extreme of the other. Or, it can remain perfectly,
symmetrically in balance in the middle, or partially in balance on one side or another. Therefore all potentials are realized at intersecting points
in reality. ...
Q: (L) Was one of these conflicting thought centers or energies some part of me?
Q: (L) And was it eclipsed by interacting with a thought center energy that was part of or all of something or someone else?
A: Or, was what happened a conflicting of one energy thought center that was a part of your thought process and another energy thought center that was
another part of your thought process? We will ask you that question and allow you to contemplate.
Q: (L) Does it ever happen that individuals who perceive or think they perceive themselves to have experienced an "abduction," to actually be
interacting with some part of themselves?
A: That would be a very good possibility. Now, before you ask another question, stop and contemplate for a moment: what possibilities does this open
up? Is there any limit? And if there is, what is that? Is it not an area worth exploring? For example - just one example for you to digest - what if
the abduction scenario could take place where your soul projection, in what you perceive as the future, can come back and abduct your soul projection
in what you perceive as the present?
Q: (L) Oh, dear! Does this happen?
A: This is a question for you to ask yourself and contemplate.
Q: (L) Why would I do that to myself? (J) To gain knowledge of the future.
A: Are there not a great many possible answers?
Q: (L) Well, this seemed to be a very frightening and negative experience. If that is the case: a) maybe that is just my perception, or b) then, in
the future I am not a very nice person! (J) Or maybe the future isn't very pleasant. And the knowledge that you gained of it is unpleasant.
A: Or is it one possible future, but not all possible futures? And is the pathway of free will not connected to all of this?
Q: (L) God! I hope so.
A: Now do you see the benefit in slowing down and not having prejudices when asking questions of great import? You see when you speed too quickly in
the process of learning and gathering knowledge, it is like skipping down the road without pausing to reflect on the ground beneath you. One misses
the gold coins and the gemstones contained within the cracks in the road. ...
Q: (L) Okay, when this experience occurred, am I to assume that some part of myself, a future self perhaps, of course they are all simultaneous but
just for the sake of reference, came back and interacted with my present self for some purpose of exchange?
A: Well this is a question best left for your own exploration as you will gain more knowledge by contemplating it by yourself rather than seeking the
answers here. But a suggestion is to be made that you do that as you will gain much, very much knowledge by contemplating these very questions on your
own and networking with others as you do so. Be not frustrated for the answers to be gained through your own contemplation will be truly illuminating
to you and the experience to follow will be worth a thousand lifetimes of pleasure and joy.
[Edited on 20-1-2004 by lilblam]