The Snowflake Principle

7/27/99

The Snowflake Principle

A reader wanted clarification on this statement I made:

“ The mental person must step down to the feeling world to reach agreement with the emotional person.”

The first possible miscommunication is that this “stepping down” idea may be interpreted to mean that the thinking male must step down a notch to be on the same level as the emotional female and such idea is not the case nor was it intended to be conveyed.

Females have minds and men have emotions and when I refer to the mental person I am referring to mental people of both sexes. Those who are mentally polarized are liberally found among both the sexes.

But wait, you say. Are not men left-brained logical thinkers and females right-brained emotional feelers?

Not so fast. The man may be very left brained, be tuned in to factual sequential brain activity, but be very much centered on the emotional level for decision making and have very little mind development.

Brain activity is not thinking. True thinking from the plane of the mind is only done by about ten per cent of the people and even most of those are only in kindergarten in dealing with this principle.

Before I proceed I want to make one thing very clear. I do not want to add any fire to the battle of the sexes. I think it is silly that such a battle should even be considered, especially from the view that there is reincarnation and that we each spend about half of our time in each sex. If, I being a male, were to consider myself superior, then I would experience disappointment when I incarnate into a female body and visa versa. Such is not the case. Male and female are equal in importance, but different and together these two energies create the entire universe we live in.

That said let me state an important principle. “Where two things exist in the world of dualities these two items will not be exactly alike in every way. If they have intelligence the intelligence of one will be above the other. If they have vibration, the vibration of one of them will be above the other, if they have mass the weight of one will be heavier than the other and if they have shape the width of one will be greater than the other.” In common vernacular this could be called the “no two snowflakes are alike” principle, or the Snowflake Principle for short.

Now let us apply this principle to the three worlds where form building takes place, the physical, emotional (or astral) and the mind (or mental).

Are these there worlds on the same vibration?

I think we will have to admit that they are not. For instance, almost everyone realizes that the unseen worlds are on a “higher” level or vibration than the physical.

Does this make these higher worlds “better?” Not necessarily. Because we are in the physical then it is “best” that we are here, even though it is a lower world. We would miss much learning if we just bypassed this experience.

Are the Masters “better” than us? They do not look at it that way. They merely see themselves as having progressed down a path a little farther than we have and have gathered angles of vision that are not yet available to us.

The next world higher than the physical is the emotional or astral. This world is based largely upon illusionary principles, but nevertheless is a higher vibration than physical.

Higher in vibration than the astral is the plane of the mind which is created from true principles and the higher mind sees through illusion.

It may be surprising to learn that those who have risen above the astral focus, and are centered in the love-wisdom pedals of the heart, dwell on the plane of the mind and not the emotional polarization. The mental plane must be entered to some degree to play the harmonics of the love-wisdom duality.

Most men and women in today’s world are centered on the emotional level and when the disciple does enter into the plane of the mind in his focus he (or she) will definitely have to lower vibration when in confrontations with emotionally polarized people.

The Master Djwhal Khul, in speaking through Alice A. Bailey, writes in his forward of raising “the aspiration and the will-to-serve from the plane of the emotions to that of the mind (the plane whereon the Masters can be found)…”

Many channeled entities are found on the emotional plane, but the Masters are found on the plane of the mind for this place is the doorway to the invisible worlds of the Spirit.

Thus I stand by my teaching that one who dwells on the plane of the mind will have to step down to the emotional plane to deal with those encountered there.

In addition there are entities even above the Masters who dwell in higher planes of feeling that must step down their vibration even in dealing with what we may call a Master of Wisdom.

Hope this helps.

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Older Archives (Like this One) in the Process of Updating

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

 

Keys Writings, Part 7

This entry is part 9 of 34 in the series 2011C

Welcome
Aug 23, 2011

Let me welcome Lori as a new poster. She is not new to the teachings though for she is Duke’s (socioheresy) wife and I have met her several times. They are both very nice people.

Kris points out that that the posts here seem to lean to the right and wants to know if there is room for a liberal.

My answer is, yes, of course. In my first couple years of teaching on the Keys I pretty much stuck to metaphysics and members did not know what my political views were. I would guess at that time that the majority of the members were liberal. Eventually we did discuss politics and it turned out the majority posting anything political seemed to have more conservative views. At present we have a mixture of many political views here, but the most popular is probably libertarian.

When discussing pure metaphysical truth it doesn’t matter much what your political views are. People from all belief systems are looking for higher truth and answers to their many questions, There are not many places where the right and left can merge in a group and calmly talk politics together without insulting each other. We try and do that here.

The strongest arguments in political discussions though have come between me and several here that are not liberal by any means, but in many ways close to my libertarian thinking.

If a liberal here sees an error in thinking or disagrees with something said he or she is surely free to speak up. All we ask is that members stay on the plane of the mind as much as possible.

To insure that things stay fairly civil we do have moderation here. When a person joins he is automatically placed on moderation until we see he is a responsible poster. Then if a member gets out of control or quits and rejoins, he may be placed on moderation again.

You should have been here in the last days of the unmoderated group. The conflict really got to a point of tension and we had to make a change and overall moderation has helped, for the main thing it does is keep the troublemakers away. When they realize they can’t insult people they move on.

Anyway, I hope you feel welcome here.

Dream Book
Aug 23, 2011

I don’t think I ever told the group why I chose red as the dominate color for my books. I first started playing with writing around the age of 16 and I gave a couple things to a good friend to read. Then one day he comes to my place all excited and told me he had a dream about me that seemed very real and significant. He said that in the dream I had written a book that became a blockbuster seller and everyone was talking about it.

I asked him if he saw the title or what it was about.

He said he couldn’t recall the title but did remember it had a bright red cover.

I don’t know if there is anything to his dream but have used the idea of a red cover and plan to keep red prominent in future books.

Re: Book Cover2
Aug 24, 2011

Not only do most of the Keys members like your cover, but so does my wife so that just about seals it up.

JJ

Re: Book Cover2
Aug 24, 2011

Steve writes: Concerning your friend’s dream about a red book of yours becoming a bestseller, perhaps The Immortal is the one but has yet to make its mark. You can’t get much ‘redder’ than that.

Maybe the foundations are still being laid behind the scenes (spiritually speaking). There is something very special about that book.

JJ Yes, I still think that The Immortal could become a best seller if it got the right publicity. That could still be the book in my friend’s dream.

Molecular Art
Aug 24, 2011

Good to hear from you again Viggi.

This must be the artwork you created:

http://www.synthesisnet.com/Art/Triads.jpg

I had forgotten that it was you that designed it.

Mental Plane
Aug 25, 2011

Speaking of Ann Coulter and the mental plane – here is a great example of her intelligent writing on Darwinism. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45747

While checking out this subject I discovered the best article yet on intelligent design. It is lengthy but worth the time to read it. http://spectator.org/archives/2005/08/05/the-little-engine-that-couldun/

It starts out stating:

“IMAGINE A NANOTECHNOLOGY MACHINE far beyond the state of the art: a microminiaturized rotary motor and propeller system that drives a tiny vessel through liquid. The engine and drive mechanism are composed of 40 parts, including a rotor, stator, driveshaft, bushings, universal joint, and flexible propeller. The engine is powered by a flow of ions, can rotate at up to 100,000 rpm (ten times faster than a NASCAR racing engine), and can reverse direction in a quarter of a rotation. The system comes with an automatic feedback control mechanism. The engine itself is about 1/100,000th of an inch wide — far smaller than can be seen by the human eye.

“Most of us would be pleasantly surprised to learn that some genius had designed such an engineering triumph. What might come as a greater surprise is that there is a dominant faction in the scientific community that is prepared to defend, at all costs, the assertion that this marvelous device could not possibly have been designed, must have been produced blindly by unintelligent material forces, and only gives the appearance — we said appearance! — of being designed.”

Then I had to laugh at the author’s description of non believers stereotype of believers in intelligent design:

“Among certain sectors of the media, for example, it’s an article of faith that those who believe in God, or advocate principles supporting that belief, are just a mob of Bible-thumping, knuckle-dragging, Scripture-spouting, hellfire and brimstone-preaching, rightwing, gun-toting, bigoted, homophobic, moralistic, paternalistic, polyester-wearing, mascara-smeared, false-eyelashed, SUV-driving, Wal-Mart shopping, big hair, big gut, fat butt, holy-rolling, snake-handling, Limbaugh-listening, Bambi-shooting, trailer-park-dwelling, uneducated, ignorant, backwater, hayseed, hick, inbred, pinhead rubes — mostly from the South, or places no better than the South — who voted for Bush.”

That sentence is a masterpiece in description.

Re: Sharón prophecies from 26 June 2011
Aug 25, 2011

Ruth writes: JJ I have not read anywhere in your teachings about this point about Judas that Sharón mentioned:

“Northern India will produce proof that Judas Iscariot did not betray Jesus but a guy with a similar name… Authorities attempted to change the story by rewriting that one of Jesus’ own disciples betrayed him in an attempt to discredit Christ. The new books will expose their illusion.”

Any clarification on that?

Judas was like the one chosen to betray Jesus, from my understanding.

JJ Variations on the idea that the disciple Judas did not betray Christ has been around since the days of early Christianity.

I believe the betrayal as portrayed in the gospels is fairly accurate. This is also supported in the Gospel of the Nazirenes, believed to be the earliest gospel, and the Aquarian Gospel.

I am not infallible so there is nothing wrong with members having another opinion.

Re: Mental Plane
Aug 25, 2011

JJ posted: Among certain sectors of the media, for example, it’s an article of faith that those who believe in God, or advocate principles supporting that belief, are just a mob of Bible-thumping, knuckle-dragging, Scripture-spouting, hellfire and brimstone-preaching, rightwing, gun-toting, bigoted, homophobic, moralistic, paternalistic, polyester-wearing, mascara-smeared, false-eyelashed, SUV-driving, Wal-Mart shopping, big hair, big gut, fat butt, holy-rolling, snake-handling, Limbaugh-listening, Bambi-shooting, trailer-park-dwelling, uneducated, ignorant, backwater, hayseed, hick, inbred, pinhead rubes — mostly from the South, or places no better than the South — who voted for Bush.”

That sentence is a masterpiece in description.

Judy: I just do not agree with that sentence and do not find it to be truthful although colourful. I do not associate Republicans with the image she depicted.

JJ But you are not the media. From my listening to the mainstream media this is te way many think of conservatives, especially the Tea Party.

The Majority Speaks
Aug 26, 2011

Larry Woods passed through Boise a couple weeks ago and he, Lorraine and I had breakfast together. He was excited about starting a chapter of The Majority Speaks in his area and he asked me what project we should pick to push. He was thinking of something like, “No taxes on the internet.”

We didn’t have much time and I wasn’t able to give him a complete answer so I thought I would add a few details here.

The first problem Larry or others have to deal with is that I have not yet started the central organization here in Boise. I plan on doing this after the book is published and not before. I’ll have a lot more clout with influencing people when I can present myself as the author of a unique political book.

When I begin the organization the first goal will not be to implement one of the 95 points, but to gather and organize groups in order to garner sufficient power to create change. If we only have a handful of members and attempt to change national policy and attitudes then we are doomed to failure.

The first step is to gather enough laborers so we have a chance to become a center of influence.

Now, if Larry or someone else wants to get started early I would suggest that he seek to gather people around him that are interested in some of the 95 theses or points I made as well as participating in a more direct democracy. He could organize this like a study class and invite in guest political speakers. There are many in the political arena who like to speak and many looking for interesting speakers.

Larry reminded me of my teaching that we need to concentrate on one thing at a time rather than scattering our energies and wanted me to name one of the 95 points in which to begin.

I don’t plan on pushing any one of the 95 points at the beginning (except to group members) but will concentrate on teaching the groups the basic idea that people can create change and have a strong influence on how our politicians vote.

As the group grows we will use our influence to encourage members to create activists groups centered around the 95 points. Ideally a group created around this idea would pick only one of the points so their energy can be concentrated. I see the main purpose of the initiating group would be to promote direct democracy and encourage the adaptation of the 95 points.

If this project becomes successful it is bound to draw attention to my other writings. This is likely to lead to some controversy, which may turn out to be a good thing.

Re: The Majority Speaks
Aug 26, 2011

I haven’t changed my mind on the one thing at a time approach but to influence an issue takes a lot of money and manpower. Since we will not have that on start-up the one thing we will be teaching group members is about their own power and motivating them to use it. Group members may go several different directions with their own “one thing” which we will support if it makes sense.

Once we have the manpower to influence legislation then we’ll examine the field to see what the next best one thing will be – probably implementing Molecular Politics.

JJ

Re: The Majority Speaks
Aug 26, 2011

Blayne: Sorry I couldn’t help but chuckle at the irony of a central organization promoting direct democracy 😉

JJ I don’t see the irony. There are central organizations in any endeavor. Not much can happen without them.

Blayne It sort of speaks to where we are as a people. I see the free market as the ultimate direct democracy

JJ I am a big promoter of the free market but don’t see it as having much to do with democracy, but a result of democracy. The free market does not elect a President or Congress, but a democracy can.

Blayne: if you will but the majority of people still need some central authority and refuse to claim their full rights to individual self determination and self government as long as they are harming no one.

JJ It sounds like you want to throw out the Constitution and have no president or Congress, or even state legislators. Perhaps you could clarify as I have a hard time thinking you believe this.

Even in an entirely free market you have strong central authorities created. If you start a business and hire twelve people you are then their central authority and have life and death power over their jobs, which can put the fear of God in them.

Blayne One of the main problems is the majority of people accept the idea the government or central authority has a right to intervene in almost every aspect of the individuals or groups lives. I doubt direct democracy will cure this wrong belief.

JJ It wouldn’t cure the problem, but the majority believe the government is too intrusive and that is a starting point.

Re: The Majority Speaks
Aug 26, 2011

The issues I see us dealing with are those that naturally evolve which is normally one main issue at a time. The last main issue was raising the debt ceiling. The one before that was the Health Care Bill. As these issues come to the forefront we can take majority opinion beliefs that make sense and offer solutions.

To take an issue and force it on the public consciousness as happened with the Health Care bill would cost billions of dollars. By taking something already in the public’s concern we save a giant costly step.

When the organization becomes large and powerful it can then introduce ideas for change that are not already in the front pages.

One thing that is coming before the public more is the changing of the Constitution by either adding amendments or a Constitutional Convention. We’ll have to watch this and see where it goes. JJ

Re: The Majority Speaks
Aug 27, 2011

Blayne The free market is the purist form of democracy WITH NO CENTRAL AUTHORITY! Just people voting with their feet or wallets deciding market trends demand etc. period.

JJ I’ve never heard the free market where people vote with their feet called a democracy before. Everyone I have ever seen write about it just calls it a free market or capitalism for there are no ballots and you elect no people to represent you. It appears you have an unusual personal definition of democracy.

The terms, democracy, republic, monarchy etc usually have to do with government rather than business.

Quoting JJ I don’t see the irony. There are central organizations in any endeavor. Not much can happen without them.

Blayne Really? Seriously? Read my explanation to Dan above…

JJ I still don’t get it.

Blayne Wow… So you don’t see people VOTING with their feet and wallets in a free market as having anything to do with democracy?

JJ People are voting with their feet in China as far as business goes but they do not have a democracy or close to it. Business is business and politics is politics – two different animals.

Blayne: The free market does not need to elect a congress it allows people to decide for themselves.

JJ No one said they needed to elect a Congress.

Quoting JJ Even in an entirely free market you have strong central authorities created. If you start a business and hire twelve people you are then their central authority and have life and death power over their jobs, which can put the fear of God in them.

Blayne You certainly have a strange view of a free market. There are no central authorities in an entirely free market.

JJ So are you saying that your version of the free market will have no bosses or owners who are the central authorities in their business??? It sounds like you think a free market will not create any business larger than one person.

As long as you allow the freedom for people to own their business and hire people you will have central authorities created. The central authority is called the “boss” or maybe just “the owner,” or “president.”

I am really curious about clarification here as I cannot imagine the existence of any substantial business without a central authority whether in or out of a free society.

The Majority Speaks
Aug 27, 2011

The problem that the debate has evolved into (as it often does) is that we have veered away from the original argument and Blayne and Larry are arguing against something I never said – something with which I agree.

Yes a free market where people vote with their feet loosely uses the democratic principle. That is not part of any argument. On this we agree.

However in order to communicate it is good to use words as they are currently defined and rarely would anyone call Walmart a democracy. They call it a business. Yes, people do make it successful by voting with their feet.

Here are three popular definitions of the word Democracy and a business doesn’t fit any of them:

▸ noun: the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives ▸ noun: a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them ▸ noun: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group

That said let us get back to the real disagreement rather than arguing that with which we agree.

The problem started with Blayne quoting me as follows:

“The first problem Larry or others have to deal with is that I have not yet started the central organization here in Boise… I see the main purpose of the initiating group would be to promote direct democracy…”

It appeared to me that Blayne thought that any central organization or central authority was completely unnecessary for he responded:

“I see the free market as the ultimate direct democracy if you will but the majority of people still need some central authority and refuse to claim their full rights to individual self determination and self government as long as they are harming no one. Many people see this as chaos however it really does not preclude group work it just makes it all voluntary instead of coerced and forced by government or central authority.”

JJ This sounded like you disagreed with my plan to create a central authority in the planned political organization and I responded as follows:

“Even in an entirely free market you have strong central authorities created. If you start a business and hire twelve people you are then their central authority and have life and death power over their jobs, which can put the fear of God in them.”

Then in your responses following you seemed to disagree with this, bringing in the idea of businesses voting with their feet which had nothing to do with the disagreement.

So, here seems to be the point of disagreement.

I believe that it is unavoidable to have a central authority in almost any successful enterprise.

If you have a successful business with 30 employees that is participating in the free market then that business will have an owner/president that will be a central authority. If you have a crew of twelve then a manager will be a central authority to the twelve.

If you have a Masonic lodge, a church, a charity or anything organized you will have some presiding central authority giving it structure and purpose. It is as DK says – “All is hierarchy.”

You seem to disagree with me on this and think that if we just have a free-for-all then churches will not need pastors, business will not need managers or owners, lodges will not need presidents but everything will just move ahead with no organization necessary or central authorities at all.

I think the Second Key of Judgment is the key to understanding here. Strong central government governmental authority that strictly governs lives and does now allow any freedom to make decisions on levels below it are indeed terrible and tyrannical. This is one extreme. But the other extreme is also destructive where no central authority would exist in the various organizations.

Central authorities in organizations that people are free to reject by leaving or voting the guy out are essential and no civilization in the history of earth has been without them.

I am amazed that my stand on this obvious point has caused such disagreement.

Re: The Majority Speaks
Aug 27, 2011
I made a typo or two that needed correction. Disregard my previous post and read this.

The problem that the debate has evolved into (as it often does) is that we have veered away from the original argument and Blayne and Larry are arguing against something I never said – something with which I agree.

Yes a free market where people vote with their feet loosely uses the democratic principle. That is not part of any argument. On this we agree.

However in order to communicate it is good to use words as they are currently defined and rarely would anyone call Walmart a democracy. They call it a business. Yes, people do make it successful by voting with their feet.

Here are three popular definitions of the word Democracy and a business doesn’t fit any of them:

▸ noun: the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives ▸ noun: a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them ▸ noun: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group

That said let us get back to the real disagreement rather than arguing that with which we agree.

The problem started with Blayne quoting me as follows:

“The first problem Larry or others have to deal with is that I have not yet started the central organization here in Boise… I see the main purpose of the initiating group would be to promote direct democracy…”

It appeared to me that Blayne thought that any central organization or central authority was completely unnecessary for he responded:

“I see the free market as the ultimate direct democracy if you will but the majority of people still need some central authority and refuse to claim their full rights to individual self determination and self government as long as they are harming no one. Many people see this as chaos however it really does not preclude group work it just makes it all voluntary instead of coerced and forced by government or central authority.”

JJ This sounded like you disagreed with my plan to create a central authority in the planned political organization and I responded as follows:

“Even in an entirely free market you have strong central authorities created. If you start a business and hire twelve people you are then their central authority and have life and death power over their jobs, which can put the fear of God in them.”

Then in your responses following you seemed to disagree with this, bringing in the idea of businesses voting with their feet which had nothing to do with the disagreement.

So, here seems to be the point of disagreement.

I believe that it is unavoidable to not have a central authority in almost any successful enterprise.

If you have a successful business with 30 employees that is participating in the free market then that business will have an owner/president that will be a central authority. If you have a crew of twelve then a manager will be a central authority to the twelve.

If you have a Masonic lodge, a church, a charity or anything organized you will have some presiding central authority giving it structure and purpose. It is as DK says – “All is hierarchy.”

You seem to disagree with me on this and think that if we just have a free-for-all then churches will not need pastors, business will not need managers or owners, lodges will not need presidents but everything will just move ahead with no organization necessary or central authorities at all.

I think the Second Key of Judgment is the key to understanding here. Strong central government governmental authority that strictly governs lives from which there is no escape and does now allow any freedom to make decisions on levels below it are indeed terrible and tyrannical. This is one extreme. But the other extreme is also destructive where no central authority would exist in the various organizations and you have a free-for-all instead.

Central authorities in organizations that people are free to reject by leaving that organization or voting the guy out are essential and no civilization in the history of earth has been without them.

I am amazed that my stand on this obvious point has caused such disagreement.

Re: The Majority Speaks
Aug 27, 2011

Wow, Blayne, you have my head spinning. At first I thought you disagreed with me that a central authority was necessary for groups and organizations – now I am not sure so I do not know where to approach or clarify.

If you can point to any disagreement so I can understand then I will seek to clarify my position. If we agree then we can move on.

There is one specific thing you said to which I take issue. You say: “The definition of central authority is the anti-thesis to direct democracy.”

Now in a democracy as defined by the dictionary (not speaking of a loosely used principle) a leader is elected and then that leader becomes a central authority to the group. I see no irony here.

Even in a business where people vote with their feet a central authority exists within that business. This is something that just always happens so I do not see the irony if you’re thinking irony-odd. If you’re thinking irony because two opposites are involved in creation then I can see your point, but then a marriage would also be ironic.

Re: The Majority Speaks
Aug 27, 2011

I don’t personally see the irony between democracy of any kind and central authority that develops in organizations that spring up in a free society because it makes sense to me but I see where you are coming from.

The irony thing alone would not have been enough to make me respond to your post. The reason I responded is because you said, “The definition of central authority is the anti-thesis to direct democracy.

My point was no matter whether you have a direct democracy, a representative democracy or any other type of government you will have various central authorities spring up. They will be created in business, groups, clubs churches – anything with an organization.

Even in the direct democracy I advocate there will be various central authorities spring up – “ironically” as you say, even in the group promoting such an endeavor. A Senator or Representative, even though he shares the vote, will be somewhat of a central authority as the manager to his co-legislators. He decides how to handle the committees he is in, what legislation he wants to introduce, what materials and information to make available and doesn’t have to take counsel as to how to do his job in mixing with the senate – except when it comes to voting on essential issues. He’s the central figure co-legislators look to for assistance and direction and has powers given to him by his office that voters do not have.

Blayne: Their (businesses) central authority is limited to their business and has nothing to do with the democracy of the free market.

JJ But these central authorities in business will spring from a free market and be stronger than in a dictatorship. In a dictatorship the power of the business owner is diminished or even shared by the state. In a free market the business has one strong central authority – the owner/president etc.

I don’t see how we can possibly disagree on something so basic. I think when I say “central, authority” you must visualize an omnipotent Big Brother controlling all things in the country and that was far from my mind.

I agree with what you said about business being little dictatorships and pointed that out in my treatise on the Molecular Business, which seeks to incorporate more democratic principles into business giving the employees more participation and to diminish the dictatorial powers of the bosses.

 

Copyright 2011 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Log on to Freeread Here

Boise Gathering 2008, Part 13

This entry is part 13 of 15 in the series Boise Gathering 2008

Astral Details
JJ: From the bottom of the astral world to the top is a tremendous difference. At the top it is very close to the mental world. But the astral world, since half of you are Mormons is the really the terrestrial kingdom. The telestial kingdom is what?

It is this earth right here and as a matter of fact when you go the Mormon temple they say right in it that, brothers and sisters this is a lonely world the telestial kingdom the world in which we now reside. So this world and all the stars up there are all a part of the telestial kingdom. The telestial kingdom is what ministered to by the Holy Spirit, and that is how the spirit ministers us to in this world. If we are true seeker then we will feel an inward spirit come to us and that is how we are ministered to in this telestial world.

The next step up is terrestrial world and that is the astral world and most of us go there after we die. The upper parts of the astral world would be the terrestrial world and the lower parts would be what the Bible calls the spirits in prison for want of a better word. But the upper parts of the astral world are what are called heaven. The upper parts of the astral world in esoteric writings are called the Devachan. They teach that the Devachan is like a dream. In other words, everybody is having their own dreams and they are pleasant dreams and it seems real but it is a little bit like a dream world in the fact that everything is governed by the power of feeling and thought.

When you are there it seems just as real as anything. The lower part will be filled with Mormons, Methodists and so on and they will all have their individual groups and they will maintain their teaching and most of them will not believe in reincarnation. It is interesting when they did a survey among people with near death experience that about sixty percent were told there was reincarnation and about forty percent were told there was not reincarnation and that is because they went to different places. Where the regular religious people go they will be preaching the standard gospel waiting for Jesus to show up. As a matter of fact sometimes when a person dies he is really into religious teachings and there is really no place for him in the astral world then they will arrange a greeting group for them and they will also arrange kind of a play situation where he will come and meet Jesus and they will have an environment like he is expecting to have after he dies until he kind of gets used to it and then they will start explaining to him that is really not real and they will say okay we are now going to take you to the real astral world.

There are different grades of etheric matter where other different life forms live like on some planets like Venus. There are actually beings that live on Venus in higher etheric matter, not on the astral world but on higher etheric matter. But on the actual lower physical that we are in there is no life on the surface at least but there might be something in the interior.

What is different about the mental world is when you want something you create it with your mind and when you want something in the astral world you create it with your feelings. Like lets say you want an apple you feel a desire for an apple and an apple will materialize but when you are in the mental world if you want an apple then you just think an apple and an apple will materialize. They say that you do not have to eat in the spirit world but you can eat for your own enjoyment because we are so used to eating here that you can eat there also. Now another question that the book that Larry mentioned did not answer is, do they have sex there and the answer is that they do have sex but it is different than it is here and what happens is they create like a charge of energy and exchange the energy so it is not like having actual physical sex with a physical body but there is an intense feeling of sharing.

Audience: And which one is that the mental world?

That is in the astral worlds – in the higher worlds they share a consistent feeling of union without the need of sex – though a correspondence to it can be had if desired.

Audience: Yes they did this in the movie Cocoon.

JJ: Another question that many people have is what happens when a person commits suicide or gets blown up instantly or the body does catastrophically.

If a person commits suicide the general teaching is that they will sleep until they would have normally died. For instance if a person commits suicide when they are 20 and they would have normally died when they were 50, they would normally sleep in the spirit world for up to thirty years. Now I do not believe that this is a hard and fast rule but I feel that there is truth behind and they will sleep for a period of time and they will eventually be given another chance but suicide always creates karma because the person was in a terrible situation in his life or at least he thought he was and he decided to escape it. There was a lesson to learn there by facing it and he will eventually have to come back and face it again until he is finally willing to work through it rather than taking his life.

Audience: Why would they sleep during this time between taking their own life and dying a normal death?

JJ: Because energy follows thought you see and he was trying to extinguish his life, not his eternal life but the life that he would have led on the earth. I do not believe this is a hard and fast exact rule but it is a general rule with exceptions. I think many wake up earlier than their original time of death.

Also if a person dies suddenly his actually spirit body or astral body will be in a state of shock and he is actually met there by the spirit doctors who assist him in recovery. It is impossible to destroy the astral or spirit body with an explosion or car crash or something like that but the sudden death is somewhat of a shock to the system that they need a bit of rest in the spirit world before they are able to function. Now some people wonder what would happen if you had a direct hit by an atomic bomb – would that hurt your astral body? I think it would be a shock to your system but I don’t think it would destroy your astral body or do any permanent damage to it. Some people theorize that it would but I haven’t seen a teaching on it by anyone I would trust one way or another but my gut feeling is that nothing we could do here could create any permanent harm to our astral body, unless we do it ourselves through our own negligence.

Audience: What about if a physic vampire wants to pull your energy from you?

JJ: Well that drains your physical and then you recover in the astral world and you would completely recover.

Audience: What if you astral project your energy in your physical body?

JJ: If you astral project to the lowest levels of the astral you might find little devils trying to zap you of all your energy but if you go to the mid astral you would not have to worry about such entities because they will have no such power to latch on to you. But if you go to the lowest realms of the astral world then these vampire types of very selfish people can make life a hell for you after death. But all of these are temporary residences – all except for the people that are dedicated to the path of darkness and these people don’t even go to the astral world, they go to what is written in esoteric writings as the eighth sphere. This is actually a lower vibration than the actual physical. The eighth sphere in Mormon language is where the sons of perdition will go to where their being, everything that composes them begins to break down and then they are recycled in the recycling pit of God so to speak. And their soul eventually puts out a new personality and tries again to create a successful creation from the monad of the person, so that is interesting.

Audience: What is an ashram and more specifically if the Masters are incarnated in bodies on the earth right now, they have ashrams or schools that are teaching right?

JJ: An ashram is just a gathering of students around a teacher. We could call this an ashram right here – I am the teacher and you are the ashram so to speak and that is all an ashram means in the east. Now it is a risk for a Master to incarnate because he loses his memory and has to start and re-do his initiations in miniature. Sometimes he will get caught and does not quite get up to the third initiation. He gets trapped and will have to incarnate a number of times to where he has to get back to where he was before. And this is one of the reasons that the Masters are hesitant to come and work with us because it is a little bit risky. Maybe is that is why The Christ has not taken a body for over 2000 years.

Audience: But you said that He has one.

JJ: Right He has one now but He has not taken a fresh incarnation to work among us. The physical body that He is with now is probably thousands of years old. He could leave that physical body at any time and be born as a child if He decided to. He could recreate that discarded physical body again if he decided to because He is in the middle of His seventh degree initiation.

Audience: Now is this Jesus or Christ?

JJ: The Christ, Jesus is a fifth degree initiate right now and Christ is half way through His seventh. The Tibetan says an interesting thing about this and I never really thought of it until I read DK who says, “What people really don’t think about is what is going through the mind of Christ as He is contemplating His second coming.” And when he said that I thought, put yourself in His situation, people are expecting me to come in a blaze of glory and wipe out all the wicked and bring peace on earth and goodwill to all men. Don’t people realize how difficult this would be!

Don’t they realize how difficult it is to move things around so there is peace on earth or how ridiculous it would be to just wipe out everybody just because I think they are wicked? How am I going to manifest on the world so I can convince a substantial number of people that I have something to offer this time. Remember He only had about 120 followers last time when He was crucified.

Audience: In the Aquarian Gospel it says that Jesus, before his actual Jerusalem ministry was mingling amongst other adepts and he was contemplating that very thing.

JJ: Yes that was the interesting part of it where they all had that conference and they all gave their advice to Jesus and they said well we think if you did this it would be good. That was very interesting and He is probably doing that right now, talking amongst the other Masters thinking how He is going to pull off his Second Coming.

 

Copyright 2011 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Log on to Freeread Here