"To love someone is to see them as they really are, beneath the surface, giving credit for their best intentions. It’s a mother’s-eye view."
Indeed it is. There is no depth, no height, no lift, no task too great for a mother when it comes to her child. It's a force that has surprised me many times.
Appreciate the shout-out and wishing you a wonderful Mother's day. I know your children are fortunate to call you mom. ❤️
At first I wrote "Without trying to change them." And then I thought, that's not like a mom at all. I burned through half my brain cells figuring out how to keep my kids from thwarting their own best interests.
In fact, if my daughter Cassandra is right, you can only change what you love. So love, in the sense of seeing someone's intentions, is the prerequisite for trying to change them.
My oldest daughter and I spend a lot of time talking about people behind their backs. We distinguish this from gossip because our overarching question is "Why? Why are they doing this thing that isn't making them or anyone else happy? What's our best strategy for getting them to change and think it was their own idea?"
I'm so happy to have your friendship, Kathleen. I hope your mother's day is warm and full of love from your lucky kids ;-)
This is such a beautiful one Tereza, I love the art and the memes too.
You wrote:
"Soul contracts aren’t about who you’ll marry, but about what dimensions come into being with someone else’s. A true friend is when you like the dimension of yourself that person reflects back to you." --- I think this ties in with the post I just sent on Energy Frequency and Vibration:
Though mostly scientific, there are elements to the Quantum study that reflects the Mystic view of Oneness. This is near the very bottom of the post:
Quantum Mechanics, Entanglement at a Cosmic Level, all of it points to the fact there is only One Thing. And that’s Consciousness, we are each a unique focal point within Infinite Awareness, temporarily experiencing this thing called Human.
What the science is pointing to; we create reality and the nature of the cosmos is based on oneness; even though it appears to have a duality from a human frame of reference. The physical universe is only possible because of the Primacy of Consciousness. We are Consciousness, Knowing is not because of Thought, it is because of Sight. Knowledge is a direct reflection of Being. True Intelligence is not the product of the mental process; it is a distillation originating from consciousness itself. The Observer.
Quantum entanglement implies that separateness of experience is not possible as a final fact. It is the One Self perception in the act of Observing Itself; Each focal point of Self Perception is actually experiencing its own world or Reality.
We are both the Observer and the Observed. We are both the Lover and the Loved.
There is not one World having 7.5 billion lives in it; there is one Consciousness experiencing 7.5 billion unique worlds. (perceptions of experience)
By the way, this had me really laughing; "Sign/If/I/Can't." ;-)
I was just thinking that, had I read your post prior, I would have distinguished between my physical friends and my quantum physical friends ;-) But as we were discussing, you have to call it quits sometime and stop reading to hit send. I've given up on ever doing a post that doesn't exceed the email limit, with so many smart and artsy quantum friends.
And yes! That was exactly the one that had me crying laughing. So hilarious!
Thanks for this insightful comment, to weave in a thread that fits perfectly and adds so much.
the soul contract elaboration caught my attention too. i became familiar with this from when i met a theta healer and psychic who was astounded at one of my 'soul contract' experiences in line with myss's idea of that concept. she said, paraphrased, 'omg! now i understand what a soul contract is.' until then i'd not heard of the concept and she hadn't, i guess, experienced it with the energy of it in my life at that time.
i love how the alchemist has expanded this way beyond that. very powerfully it aligns with my recent ideas around gautama's concept of 'dependent co-arising'. this ties in with your discussion of quantum entanglement and the implications at all levels of heisenberg's uncertainty principle — what does it mean that the measure one particle affects another particle? it means everything is energetically connected! and that everything is energetically conscious and/or aware. that goes to 'we are the observed and the observer' etc.
that has a nice synchronicity with me tonight, and perhaps the main reason i am writing this. i just finished listening to a conference talk with tommy rosen, of r20, with his work to create the consciousness shift that life is about thriving in joy, which is that life is way beyond the basic idea that recovery from addiction is about simply surviving in life! tonight i listened to one of his teachers, sadhvi bhagawati saraswati, who recently wrote of her having become a guru after moving into and then out of her extreme life-threatening addictive behaviours in her book 'hollywood to the himalayas'. in the talk she does a great job of deconstructing how her narratives of sexually abused victim were the most pernicious form of the abuse she experienced because it continued to be her identity. eventually she tangibly understood that after 30 years of telling the narrative, there was no aspect of her physical being that had been traumatised, and so that narrative as a victim was in fact the current abuse because the narrative kept it alive in the moment as a limiter to her power and possibility of discovering that life is joy. she eventually elaborates the discussion to 'dependent co-arising' or quantum mechanical entanglement — not her words. she presents the idea that our consciousness, once expanded well enough to see beyond the temping delusions of mind and body and mind-body is much more than the 'i'-mechanism that sees true. it is that our consciousness is what is dependent co-creativity with the totality of life, wholly the creator of our mutually expanding consciousness of the our experience of reality.
at a basic level, this goes to tereza's basic theme that for this society to change, our narratives are to change. no change of narrative, there are no sets of good moralist rules derived from any 'good' bible of god (tm), science (tm) or humanistic social ideology (tm) will change the society. i will extend that, pragmatically, to how do we change our narratives? (that was part of the synchronicity tonight with saraswati, who does a great job of that process). basically it comes down to changing our conscious awareness of our place in life that can most easily be begun by seeing 'true' (patanjali's and gautama's first rules to reduce suffering!) and that is to see that all is dependent co-arising. how to do that? for me, by experience, i think the most direct and easily acted on — albeit still not easy — is to stop using the spell words that keep us blind to our power as creators of 1) our limiting narratives and 2) that we are co-creators by nature of our experiences of life.
pragmatically, at this time, a simple exercise is to stop using words of brutality, judgement and separation, whether towards ourselves or towards others. stop using anywhere at all times the disempowering spell words 'have to', 'should', and 'deserve' (which creates the undeserving that we shun and kill as the other as unworthy of being inimate with and so expendible and, often times, necessarily expendable as the traumatised and traumatising societal saving scapegoat. this change will dependently co-arise with our ceasing to 'blame and complain', which when done is a measure of failure to understand quantum entanglement ie dependent co-arising.
thank you.
thank you for the link! i hope to get to it soon, with all the other stuff that is calling to me these days.
Glad to count you as a true friend! Thanks for the shout out. I've been creating and saving memes for years so it's fun to share them. Happy Mother's Day! ❤️💕❤️
After I'd warned you that I was stealing an embarrassing number, I went back and swiped more. Once I was telling the story about Gina and Lisa, there were so many that fit so well I couldn't resist. I have a hunch you guys would like each other.
Great article - deep insights. and I loved the graphics and Heather's memes.
Changing our 'narrative' ...
“Every act of conscious learning requires the willingness to suffer an injury to one's self-esteem. That is why young children, before they are aware of their own self-importance, learn so easily; and why older persons, especially if vain or important, cannot learn at all.”
Thomas Szasz, author, professor of psychiatry (1920-2012)
I really like that bit about being different with different people. It's definitely true for me. With some people I can have fun geeking out about technical stuff; with others, it's playing music for each other; and so forth. Each person brings out a different part of me.
I also like that meme, "You are the greatest project you will ever get to work on." It reminds me of one of Ashleigh Brilliant's Pot-Shots: "I'm trying to live my life -- a task so difficult it has never been attempted before."
Yes I really liked it too. And it gave me a way of letting go of other relationships. It's not rejecting the person, I just don't like the dimension of me that they bring out. If you have a moment, you might watch her. She has a nice delivery and it's very succinct.
I always love your Ashleigh Brilliant quotes. That meme spoke to me too and helped me slow down and take my time getting the post out. I don't often think of my self as a project, more like a byproduct of whatever I'm supposed to be doing for other people or leaving behind. The idea of 'taking my time and creating magic' felt like letting go of outside accomplishments and just 'being'. Whew! What a relief.
Thanks! I did watch the video -- good message, though without other context I'm not sure what "soul contract" was all about. (I am not on Meta so Instagram is almost unusable unless I have direct link like the one you provided.)
How many furry excuses are you up to to never drink alone? I told that one to my dance teacher and she said, "But you don't even have a cat!" But that's not gonna stop me.
13! Your lucky number. Until you find another scrappy little feisty thing and you have to build another extension to the extension. A neighbor said she had dreams of a little farm when she got her dog, cat and chicken. She pictured them playing together, the chicken riding on the back of the dog. Then she realized they all wanted to kill each other, so she keeps them all separate and closely monitored.
Reading this post was like walking through a friend's house, where each room brings new delight. I wanted to just stop and hang out in every room! Except the one about my piece -- I've spent enough time there 🤣! But thank you for creating space for me among the other weirdos you're curating; it's clearly time for all the weirdos to step up to the mike to tell their stories...🤪
This was the last thing I read last night before my eyelids were too heavy to hold open. But I loved that it was the button to my Mother’s Day. Every time I read a post by my favorites, I feel like I’m staring into a bit of myself, or rather the dimension that is reflected, and my heart expands.
I’m totally stealing the phrasing about physical friends and meta-physical friends from a comment in this thread. I have very few weirdos I share in my tribe IRL. There’s a lot more of y’all out here. 🤗
Lol. I didn’t even realize I made the switcheroo. Meta-quantum… the sentiment is the same! I’m just glad that inertia of common phrasing didn’t cause me to write “physical theatre” friends which is the water I swam in for yearrrrrrs. ‘Cause that would have really confused everything. Like mimes at a debate competition. [see, there isn’t even a mime emoji]
i mention below in a comment to nefahotep's comment, that what really caught my ear in this one was the expansion of myss's concept of 'spiritual contract'. what this goes to to a 't' is buddhist yogic psychotherapist teacher michael stone's definition of yoga as that which creates intimacy. intimacy is living the experience that we are all interdependent, which is buddhist thich naht hahn's phrase for quantum entanglement and dependent co-arising.
your talk here provided me with a lovely synchronicity with the american born guru sadhvi bhagawati saraswati's dialogue with tommy rosen who, with his organisation recovery 2.0 life beyond addiction, makes the same argument.
Thanks very much, Guy. I love Thich Nhat Hahn's phrase of Interbeing. Thanks for reminding me of it. That's a beautiful concept of Michael Stone's that yoga is that which creates intimacy.
you're welcome. yes, 'interbeing' is also a really great expression of this concept.
and i've not heard anyone else describe yoga that way. and yet, since hearing stone describe it that way, the truth of it resonated powerfully and has become a part of my experience and movement towards my expression of yoga.
Oh my gosh, I don't even know what to say. I am just ................so moved. Thank you, my friend. You are so good to me. I am glad they were having fun with it! Aw man, this post feels so good today. Thank you, thank you. and you put it "and like Amy" before the title Strength and Vulnerability. I am so heartened right now. Whew. Golly. Thanks honey bunch. I feel cared for and appreciated. Isn't that all anyone ever wants? I love ya :)
Haha, glad to see you couldn't wait until after your next block of work! That's my kind of self-discipline. Yes, when I showed up at dance class in my usual medley, Lisa stepped back and said, "Hyperrealistic, tilt shift, paisley leggings, polka dot top, Pikolinos sneakers for full body perspective" (okay, I made that last one up, she didn't know my shoe brand).
She's having fun trying to create art about Galaxy, their blind and aging American Water Spaniel with crystal eyes. Gina doesn't sit still long enough but is having long-delayed foot surgery next month so maybe it will help her get through it.
Much much love to you, my life is so much richer and more fun with you in it!
That is AWESOME! Hahhahahaha. I am here if anyone needs help. How funny. I have done that in real life also, but no one knows what I am talking about! :) Haha.
Can we "re-story" our collective narrative? I think you say NO, when you say "our narratives are already controlled even by the words we have available to write our story. They corral us into metaphors of force, coercion, captivity, and black and white in the contracts that we hand our lives over to.
Can we see someone as they really are? Maybe in silence you could? But otherwise, we know nothing as it truly is. Word pictures are only snap-shots of how we think we would want something to be. These are just more of the corral of judgments you mentioned above.
If you suggest to someone to write their own narrative, how would they go about that? Sounds good, but don't we need a hint? There's a Johnstone quote, "humans are storytelling animals whose inner lives are typically dominated by mental narratives about what’s happening". I would say 100%, that everyone explains what they are doing in the context of their perception, and excuses what they are not doing.
That other people are trying to influence that story is also a constant occurrence. We are trying to influence those around us in the same way, in whatever our "reach" may be. Here we are all using Substack. Johnstone is still locked in the context of force and coercion, so she is illustrating what she is talking about.
"Soul Contracts" is a term that pushes into "otherworldly", a process that is normal as breathing. You don't need to seek a contract to begin to understand the different styles of communication, and not be offended by the "speaking rituals" that other people have adopted. If you enter into true dialog, you can easily discover that your ideas are a catalyst for my further thinking, and how I hold my "self" will gradually transform. You don't need a contract, or even a soul for that one.
I guess people think if they can tie something to the otherworldly, it will be a shortcut to god, or a right-life. Isn't that just another corral of metaphors?
I do know about John Taylor Gatto. Quote:
For five years I ran a guerrilla school program where I had every kid, rich and poor, smart and dippy, give 320 hours a year of hard community service.
Dozens of those kids came back to me years later, grown up, and told me that the experience of helping someone else had changed their lives. It has taught them to see in new ways, to rethink goals and values. It happened when they were thirteen, in my Lab School program. It was only possible because, due to various breakdowns, my rich school district was in chaos. When "stability" returned 5 years later the Lab School was closed. It was too successful with a widely mixed group of kids, and at too small of a cost to be allowed to continue.
Thank you for reading my post, Librarian. How to deal with the corruption of words? It really struck me (and there's a violence metaphor) when I was looking to describe why stories activate the participation of the listener in a way that facts and logic don't. I think about this often because my book on decentralizing economics is full of history, facts, numbers and logic, but it requires a story for people to put themselves into it and imagine their lives.
All the words I tried out with imagination had some kind of force or hidden trap to them. None of them opened up more freedom by offering more possibilities or doors that someone could open and walk through to new places, not of my making. So it was serendipitous that Kathleen used that same phrase in her title. When we say something 'captures the imagination,' we mean that to be a good thing. But looking at it more closely, it's the opposite of what we intend.
Kathleen's answer to this dilemma is silence and nature. My remedy tends towards more words. Somewhere I read that all words are fossilized metaphors. I try to be conscious of the etymology of words I use and avoid the shortcuts that maybe lead subconsciously to a different place.
I like the metaphor of 'influence' as flowing water that joins and shapes by its addition. Looking up the etymology, I found it's an astrological term so I'll be using that in my episode today. But a word that might better describe my goal is 'exfluence'. Rather than a 'push' marketing of my ideas, I'm introducing exits from the main stream. That offers a different option for those who choose to join me. I'm pretty certain I've never changed the mind of anyone who already had it made up.
I love your use of 'true dialog,' for which Thich Nhat Hahn said both sides needed to be willing to change. And 'catalyst for further thinking' is a great way to express that. Yes, the 'soul contract' seems to be trending but seemed to only confuse what she was saying, from the responses to it. I think NLP was all about changing your 'speaking rituals' to reach the person. As Mary's husband showed, in the episode I did on him, that can be used for opening up new possibilities or coercing them.
John Taylor Gatto is someone I greatly admire. I have a couple of his books and mentioned his guerrilla school program in some radio programs I did a decade ago. He's one of the clearest thinkers I've ever read and his Underground History of American Education changed everything I thought I knew about the subject. I mention him in these episodes: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/reinventing-education and here I quote "as John Taylor Gatto—author of Dumbing Us Down—would say, he knows how to read for power": https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/matt-ehret-and-cynthia-chung-geopuzzle. And also in this one about reading, From FOMO to JOMO: the Joy of Missing Out, which ironically I only have in video: https://youtu.be/5ZGY7uPs8K4. I may need to change that.
1. Are words corrupt? Well, words have a connotation which moves in time. It moves very fast on social media. The connotation is the important and current part, more than the denotation or the etymology, which is only a curiosity for an old fogy, (someone looking backwards). There is a buried part too, as you mentioned, "Us & Them" is under much of our language.
2. Stories may activate the participation of the listener in a way that facts and logic don't. But I don't believe that stories change how people act, react, and believe. Only experience changes your outlook on life. Do the stories stimulate you to do something different? Action changes thoughts into experience. Our talking, and convincing, and all of our facts might be received just as a curiosity. It is a form of entertainment, but I will never imagine that a story could change the way I see myself. ({I'm already complete, by the way.})
3. Words and phrases are a model of how our culture sees the world. Surely a flexible model is going to be more accurate than a fixed (fossilized) model, fixed for even centuries or millennia. A flexible model cannot be based on the concept of an eternal truth. Any "Truth" blocks the advocate to only that one course of action. So if it is not working, bear down harder, or go into resignation. To change, we have to learn to "hold our truths lightly".
Models can better be based on how it will stimulate me to act on the future. What will be my trajectory be with that different model?
4. Flowing water that shapes and influences, acts a little at a time as it seeps in. How to manage that in words. I think nothing can happen unless a reader is willing to "do something". Do something can also mean entertain a different thought. I won't say what that is, or "should be". Once started, it will bring to light the next step, it will seep in. Therefore life begins to be held as an experiment. You can't "fool-around" with how you live, but you can reserve one corner of life as a laboratory. You can try things.
5. Exfluence is beautiful, pointing toward exits from conventional failed wisdom.
6. Gatto has his take on the inner city New York Schools. He's good, but there is an enormous discussion on education in America. and he is just one part of it.
I acknowledge you do so much work on this site. I don't do a fraction of that on my site. I am approaching 2 million words, but it is all other people's writing, and I only translate, read and edit. (Or nowadays I find the translations.) Now I am investigating anti-Semitism, which I thought I would never do. It is probably your influence that got me started. I will post a comment about it here somewhere, but on this thread it is off-topic.
Hello again, Librarian, and thanks for responding.
On words: in a purposeful dialogue with someone, where both are concerned with finding the right answer rather than being right, both need to know how the other defines the words, especially the ones used in the question.
This is maybe an example of my point. As far as I know, there's no word for the concept I just expressed. Debate is now a game with a winner. Argument is a belligerent quarrel. But the root of argue comes from 'to make bright, enlighten, to clarify, prove, present reasoned statements in support of a proposition."
If argue once had the meaning of a convivial pursuit of the truth, it's been lost to us. And maybe the reality behind it. I find that it's very difficult to disagree without giving the perception of 'trying to win.' As an abstract idea without a word to capture it, there's no place in our minds for the concept to land.
I was surprised to learn that Latin was a synthetic language that was created rather than evolving from an indigenous language. I also didn't realize that Rome started as a military encampment that kidnapped women in the Rape of Sabine to bear them children. All of the languages of conquest evolve from Latin: English, Spanish, French, Portuguese. So all our mental constructs are based on a language of occupation and colonization, not languages of place and rootedness. We have a lot of industrial and violent metaphors, and a dearth of ones to describe the nuances of human relationships.
What to do about this? I do think that in a question of the 'real' meaning, etymology is essential to show where words have been usurped or twisted. But that's just my preference. Do you find that Russian expresses a different way of seeing the world than English?
Thanks for liking 'exfluence' and acknowledging the work I do on my site. What you're doing is substantial, I am so impressed by the work you do.
We write because our life and our outlook has changed. We therefore think that others could probably change, (in their own way), and enjoy what we will all call growth. That's how I prioritize it. If it all moves toward more cooperation, we can also enjoy a greater sustainability, and security. From there we can develop our society and our life interests.
Can we share our growth and our new outlooks with others? Or can we share any "methodology" of how we unshackled our own thoughts, and began to widen our perspectives? This is the key focus of writing, and it is not so easy to motivate others. There must be 1,000 ways that don't work. What's the knack of looking at life in a new way?
✓One thing is that the new way must be compatible with the old way. We're not going to flip a switch and be in a new life. They must exist together, as one begins to influence the other. This on a world level, but also on the personal scale.
✓The new is weaker, with less adherents. Usually it is blotted out.
✓Even on a personal level (which is probably the best place to start testing), it has to be one step at a time, day by day.
✓I claim that you can't seek something called the truth. First it is only a model and not the thing, and if you believe in it, it sticks you to this one outlook. The concept of the "truth" is like a tar-baby. A long period of stasis follows.
✓You have to come to believe in experimenting, (do something different). You have to judge the experiment by concrete results, not by broken promises.
✓As your statement about "an abstract idea without a word to capture it," we have to start by broadening our contexts (world views), so that there is a place for new concepts to land. I call these contexts "verbal containers", and our whole work revolves around examining the sides of this container. Are these limitations substantial?
If we talk about this knack, maybe some people will find that a light has TURNED ON?
Beautiful post, Tereza! I hope you had a wonderful Mother’s Day:)
I loved everything about this commentary, but I related to the meme about the caterpillar and butterfly languages. I must be in the pupa stage because I don't yet feel the free flight of the butterfly, but rather I'm stuck in the dark pupa of bridging the gap of their different languages, between what the caterpillar’s narrative is and what the “free” butterfly comes to know.
Anyway, I wanted to share something that is part of their biblical narrative, and something you were right about. Abel WAS Bael/Baal! And Cain represents the territory of Canaan and who their ancient god was – Baal. Cain was a “tiller of the ground,” and Baal was the god of rain and agriculture, so when Baal was destroyed the story really is implying that the Canaanites won’t have their rain and agricultural god anymore, so things might not go so well for them, however the new inhabitants of Seth’s, also the “keeper of the sheep,” (aka livestock) will take over. Further, the allegory of Noah, with Canaan being cursed, is just more of their mind-manipulating narrative tactics against Baal - or what we would view today as an ancient Great Reset. In a strange twist, it would seem they projected that Baal’s flooding, or “rains on the grains,” against all those evil Canaanites, then turned into the promise of never flooding the earth anymore – drying it up and then Baal goes bye-bye – and they allegorically saved all that livestock onboard the ark for the new inhabitants/descendants of Seth, to ultimately become Israel. All of that part was probably written over the period of time it would take to write a Hollywood script.
Speaking of Hollywood, one last thing occurred to me, as well. In reading Gen. 4 more critically, it states in the first-person perspective, “I have gotten a man from the LORD.” Then the LORD is speaking to Cain and instructed to say, “Where is Abel thy brother?” Then Cain is to reply, “I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper.” These are just a few examples, showing it’s written like a Hollywood movie script(ure). They paint the imagined backdrop and then tell the actors what to say. What a scam!
I can picture you, Rhonda, like that little girl yelling at the caterpillars ;-)
I've been really enjoying the Guyenot book you told me about. I'm a little more than halfway. I think he might have something that confirms the Baal interpretation too. Cain might also be the Kennites, who were metal workers, like Tubal-Cain. Coinage and taxation is part of their 'charm.'
Funny, I was just mentioning the Jubilee years as Great Resets. And I just typed on the episode I'm working on: "As an aside, going back to Noah and Shem, there’s an international trade currency being considered by the BRICS called The Unit. It would be run by the UN and was designed by Arkhangelsk Capital Management, with Ark spelled like the Noahide Covenant with God that Shemites would rule the world, take possession of Canaan, and be served by its former inhabitants as the lowest of slaves. Anyone else see a problem with this?"
I'm also looking at the Sethian gnostic script-ures. I'd hoped it might be a more balanced male-female view of divinity but I'm finding it still leaves the 'sons of Seth' pure while Sophia causes all the problems, like Pandora's box. I'll be writing about that sometime soon.
I laughed out loud about me being the "girl yelling at the caterpillars." I didn't like most caterpillars growing up but always loved butterflies.
Interesting about the Jubilee years, and as I see it, a debt forgiveness to the Israelites, as Great Resets. No Gentile in business can compete with that "Set-up," or "Re-Set." Also, I instantly saw "The Unit," as "Uniteth," which is more of the "we are all one," spellcasting, on a temporal level. It reminds me of them telling everyone we should get the vaccine so we can all be safe, when those in power weren't taking them. Also, revealing about the word Ark-h-angel-sk. I'll have to look into all of that more, but YES, I see a major problem with that!
Glad you're enjoying Guyenot's book. He does bring up the Cain Abel story vs. Set/h Osiris, but as I remember, he didn't equate Baal with Abel, nor Baal being the agricultural god, however he did equate it to Osiris. I got that epiphany from reading about Baal, after remembering you saying Abel was Baal:) And I think you said that before you got Guyenot's book, as well. Gosh, who knows, as I'm having a hard time keeping everything straight - information overload! Lol!
Anyway, thank you for continuing to share your free-flying butterfly stories:)
I suspect 'forgiveness of the loans' meant repossession of the assets. I remember reading about the Hebrews choosing 'lots' so they would divide the land evenly, not knowing ahead of time which lot they'd end up with. But once it was chosen, it could never be bought or sold. So that, once again, turned all the Gentiles into feudal serfs, able to lease the land but with all contracts broken in the Jubilee Year, ready for the Great Reset.
Yes, now that you mention it, I think Guyenot buys into Baal being a bloodthirsty god not an agrarian diety. I must have gotten the latter somewhere else. Information overload is right!
What a wonderful post Tereza.
I loved this line:
"To love someone is to see them as they really are, beneath the surface, giving credit for their best intentions. It’s a mother’s-eye view."
Indeed it is. There is no depth, no height, no lift, no task too great for a mother when it comes to her child. It's a force that has surprised me many times.
Appreciate the shout-out and wishing you a wonderful Mother's day. I know your children are fortunate to call you mom. ❤️
At first I wrote "Without trying to change them." And then I thought, that's not like a mom at all. I burned through half my brain cells figuring out how to keep my kids from thwarting their own best interests.
In fact, if my daughter Cassandra is right, you can only change what you love. So love, in the sense of seeing someone's intentions, is the prerequisite for trying to change them.
My oldest daughter and I spend a lot of time talking about people behind their backs. We distinguish this from gossip because our overarching question is "Why? Why are they doing this thing that isn't making them or anyone else happy? What's our best strategy for getting them to change and think it was their own idea?"
I'm so happy to have your friendship, Kathleen. I hope your mother's day is warm and full of love from your lucky kids ;-)
This is such a beautiful one Tereza, I love the art and the memes too.
You wrote:
"Soul contracts aren’t about who you’ll marry, but about what dimensions come into being with someone else’s. A true friend is when you like the dimension of yourself that person reflects back to you." --- I think this ties in with the post I just sent on Energy Frequency and Vibration:
https://nefahotep.substack.com/p/energy-frequency-and-vibration-from
Though mostly scientific, there are elements to the Quantum study that reflects the Mystic view of Oneness. This is near the very bottom of the post:
Quantum Mechanics, Entanglement at a Cosmic Level, all of it points to the fact there is only One Thing. And that’s Consciousness, we are each a unique focal point within Infinite Awareness, temporarily experiencing this thing called Human.
What the science is pointing to; we create reality and the nature of the cosmos is based on oneness; even though it appears to have a duality from a human frame of reference. The physical universe is only possible because of the Primacy of Consciousness. We are Consciousness, Knowing is not because of Thought, it is because of Sight. Knowledge is a direct reflection of Being. True Intelligence is not the product of the mental process; it is a distillation originating from consciousness itself. The Observer.
Quantum entanglement implies that separateness of experience is not possible as a final fact. It is the One Self perception in the act of Observing Itself; Each focal point of Self Perception is actually experiencing its own world or Reality.
We are both the Observer and the Observed. We are both the Lover and the Loved.
There is not one World having 7.5 billion lives in it; there is one Consciousness experiencing 7.5 billion unique worlds. (perceptions of experience)
By the way, this had me really laughing; "Sign/If/I/Can't." ;-)
I was just thinking that, had I read your post prior, I would have distinguished between my physical friends and my quantum physical friends ;-) But as we were discussing, you have to call it quits sometime and stop reading to hit send. I've given up on ever doing a post that doesn't exceed the email limit, with so many smart and artsy quantum friends.
And yes! That was exactly the one that had me crying laughing. So hilarious!
Thanks for this insightful comment, to weave in a thread that fits perfectly and adds so much.
yes, n.
the soul contract elaboration caught my attention too. i became familiar with this from when i met a theta healer and psychic who was astounded at one of my 'soul contract' experiences in line with myss's idea of that concept. she said, paraphrased, 'omg! now i understand what a soul contract is.' until then i'd not heard of the concept and she hadn't, i guess, experienced it with the energy of it in my life at that time.
i love how the alchemist has expanded this way beyond that. very powerfully it aligns with my recent ideas around gautama's concept of 'dependent co-arising'. this ties in with your discussion of quantum entanglement and the implications at all levels of heisenberg's uncertainty principle — what does it mean that the measure one particle affects another particle? it means everything is energetically connected! and that everything is energetically conscious and/or aware. that goes to 'we are the observed and the observer' etc.
that has a nice synchronicity with me tonight, and perhaps the main reason i am writing this. i just finished listening to a conference talk with tommy rosen, of r20, with his work to create the consciousness shift that life is about thriving in joy, which is that life is way beyond the basic idea that recovery from addiction is about simply surviving in life! tonight i listened to one of his teachers, sadhvi bhagawati saraswati, who recently wrote of her having become a guru after moving into and then out of her extreme life-threatening addictive behaviours in her book 'hollywood to the himalayas'. in the talk she does a great job of deconstructing how her narratives of sexually abused victim were the most pernicious form of the abuse she experienced because it continued to be her identity. eventually she tangibly understood that after 30 years of telling the narrative, there was no aspect of her physical being that had been traumatised, and so that narrative as a victim was in fact the current abuse because the narrative kept it alive in the moment as a limiter to her power and possibility of discovering that life is joy. she eventually elaborates the discussion to 'dependent co-arising' or quantum mechanical entanglement — not her words. she presents the idea that our consciousness, once expanded well enough to see beyond the temping delusions of mind and body and mind-body is much more than the 'i'-mechanism that sees true. it is that our consciousness is what is dependent co-creativity with the totality of life, wholly the creator of our mutually expanding consciousness of the our experience of reality.
at a basic level, this goes to tereza's basic theme that for this society to change, our narratives are to change. no change of narrative, there are no sets of good moralist rules derived from any 'good' bible of god (tm), science (tm) or humanistic social ideology (tm) will change the society. i will extend that, pragmatically, to how do we change our narratives? (that was part of the synchronicity tonight with saraswati, who does a great job of that process). basically it comes down to changing our conscious awareness of our place in life that can most easily be begun by seeing 'true' (patanjali's and gautama's first rules to reduce suffering!) and that is to see that all is dependent co-arising. how to do that? for me, by experience, i think the most direct and easily acted on — albeit still not easy — is to stop using the spell words that keep us blind to our power as creators of 1) our limiting narratives and 2) that we are co-creators by nature of our experiences of life.
pragmatically, at this time, a simple exercise is to stop using words of brutality, judgement and separation, whether towards ourselves or towards others. stop using anywhere at all times the disempowering spell words 'have to', 'should', and 'deserve' (which creates the undeserving that we shun and kill as the other as unworthy of being inimate with and so expendible and, often times, necessarily expendable as the traumatised and traumatising societal saving scapegoat. this change will dependently co-arise with our ceasing to 'blame and complain', which when done is a measure of failure to understand quantum entanglement ie dependent co-arising.
thank you.
thank you for the link! i hope to get to it soon, with all the other stuff that is calling to me these days.
Glad to count you as a true friend! Thanks for the shout out. I've been creating and saving memes for years so it's fun to share them. Happy Mother's Day! ❤️💕❤️
After I'd warned you that I was stealing an embarrassing number, I went back and swiped more. Once I was telling the story about Gina and Lisa, there were so many that fit so well I couldn't resist. I have a hunch you guys would like each other.
Happy Mother's Day to you, my dear!
It gives me a lot of joy to see my memes floating around the internet. Many have gone viral on the BlueEff! I love that title for it! ❤️
Great article - deep insights. and I loved the graphics and Heather's memes.
Changing our 'narrative' ...
“Every act of conscious learning requires the willingness to suffer an injury to one's self-esteem. That is why young children, before they are aware of their own self-importance, learn so easily; and why older persons, especially if vain or important, cannot learn at all.”
Thomas Szasz, author, professor of psychiatry (1920-2012)
Excellent, I was hoping you'd repost that here. It's such a great quote.
I really like that bit about being different with different people. It's definitely true for me. With some people I can have fun geeking out about technical stuff; with others, it's playing music for each other; and so forth. Each person brings out a different part of me.
I also like that meme, "You are the greatest project you will ever get to work on." It reminds me of one of Ashleigh Brilliant's Pot-Shots: "I'm trying to live my life -- a task so difficult it has never been attempted before."
Yes I really liked it too. And it gave me a way of letting go of other relationships. It's not rejecting the person, I just don't like the dimension of me that they bring out. If you have a moment, you might watch her. She has a nice delivery and it's very succinct.
I always love your Ashleigh Brilliant quotes. That meme spoke to me too and helped me slow down and take my time getting the post out. I don't often think of my self as a project, more like a byproduct of whatever I'm supposed to be doing for other people or leaving behind. The idea of 'taking my time and creating magic' felt like letting go of outside accomplishments and just 'being'. Whew! What a relief.
Thanks! I did watch the video -- good message, though without other context I'm not sure what "soul contract" was all about. (I am not on Meta so Instagram is almost unusable unless I have direct link like the one you provided.)
Agreed. The soul contract seemed a stretch but it's such a fun phrase that I'm going with it.
Such a fantastic post...they are always such provocative gifts.
And an amazing tribe...!!! Your scribes are so divine...and Nef...such a love child!
And always the best best memes, Heather...
Artwork is gorgeous...
And to all the moms - they come in many forms...even crazy cat moms who never drink alone...
😻❤
How many furry excuses are you up to to never drink alone? I told that one to my dance teacher and she said, "But you don't even have a cat!" But that's not gonna stop me.
😻😻😻😻😻😻😻😻😻😻😻😻😻
13! Your lucky number. Until you find another scrappy little feisty thing and you have to build another extension to the extension. A neighbor said she had dreams of a little farm when she got her dog, cat and chicken. She pictured them playing together, the chicken riding on the back of the dog. Then she realized they all wanted to kill each other, so she keeps them all separate and closely monitored.
Reading this post was like walking through a friend's house, where each room brings new delight. I wanted to just stop and hang out in every room! Except the one about my piece -- I've spent enough time there 🤣! But thank you for creating space for me among the other weirdos you're curating; it's clearly time for all the weirdos to step up to the mike to tell their stories...🤪
A beautiful, heart-expanding post. Xox
Ah, heart-expanding! Just the phrase makes me breathe deep and exhale.
And an apt metaphor. It felt very good to be hanging out in all your delightfully weird rooms ;-)
This was the last thing I read last night before my eyelids were too heavy to hold open. But I loved that it was the button to my Mother’s Day. Every time I read a post by my favorites, I feel like I’m staring into a bit of myself, or rather the dimension that is reflected, and my heart expands.
I’m totally stealing the phrasing about physical friends and meta-physical friends from a comment in this thread. I have very few weirdos I share in my tribe IRL. There’s a lot more of y’all out here. 🤗
"the button to your Mother's Day." What a sweet image of you with buttoned-up eyelids in bed!
You improved on that phrasing, Tonika. Physical and metaphysical friends, wow! Even better than physical and quantum physical friends.
Agreed about few weirdoes in my tribe IRL. Plenty of other varieties of weirdoes.
Lol. I didn’t even realize I made the switcheroo. Meta-quantum… the sentiment is the same! I’m just glad that inertia of common phrasing didn’t cause me to write “physical theatre” friends which is the water I swam in for yearrrrrrs. ‘Cause that would have really confused everything. Like mimes at a debate competition. [see, there isn’t even a mime emoji]
hola tereza:
lovely post.
i mention below in a comment to nefahotep's comment, that what really caught my ear in this one was the expansion of myss's concept of 'spiritual contract'. what this goes to to a 't' is buddhist yogic psychotherapist teacher michael stone's definition of yoga as that which creates intimacy. intimacy is living the experience that we are all interdependent, which is buddhist thich naht hahn's phrase for quantum entanglement and dependent co-arising.
your talk here provided me with a lovely synchronicity with the american born guru sadhvi bhagawati saraswati's dialogue with tommy rosen who, with his organisation recovery 2.0 life beyond addiction, makes the same argument.
thank you.
Thanks very much, Guy. I love Thich Nhat Hahn's phrase of Interbeing. Thanks for reminding me of it. That's a beautiful concept of Michael Stone's that yoga is that which creates intimacy.
hola, tereza.
you're welcome. yes, 'interbeing' is also a really great expression of this concept.
and i've not heard anyone else describe yoga that way. and yet, since hearing stone describe it that way, the truth of it resonated powerfully and has become a part of my experience and movement towards my expression of yoga.
“When you find people who not only tolerate your quirks but celebrate them with loud cries of Me Too” be sure to cherish them
Because those weirdos are your tribe.”
Happy Mother’s Day to the “tribal” mom of weirdos.
Glad to be a member.
Ha, I'm going to embroider that on a jacket! Glad you're a member too.
The conversation we have when we suddenly realise that we were wwwww**ng - on a different part of the truth spectrum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkqgDoo_eZE
"On a different part of the truth spectrum!" Hahaha!
Hi Tereza.
And kudos to Heather B for meme-spiration!
Cheers!
Summing up nicely "The Aware, and the Afraid."
Oh my gosh, I don't even know what to say. I am just ................so moved. Thank you, my friend. You are so good to me. I am glad they were having fun with it! Aw man, this post feels so good today. Thank you, thank you. and you put it "and like Amy" before the title Strength and Vulnerability. I am so heartened right now. Whew. Golly. Thanks honey bunch. I feel cared for and appreciated. Isn't that all anyone ever wants? I love ya :)
Haha, glad to see you couldn't wait until after your next block of work! That's my kind of self-discipline. Yes, when I showed up at dance class in my usual medley, Lisa stepped back and said, "Hyperrealistic, tilt shift, paisley leggings, polka dot top, Pikolinos sneakers for full body perspective" (okay, I made that last one up, she didn't know my shoe brand).
She's having fun trying to create art about Galaxy, their blind and aging American Water Spaniel with crystal eyes. Gina doesn't sit still long enough but is having long-delayed foot surgery next month so maybe it will help her get through it.
Much much love to you, my life is so much richer and more fun with you in it!
That is AWESOME! Hahhahahaha. I am here if anyone needs help. How funny. I have done that in real life also, but no one knows what I am talking about! :) Haha.
Can we "re-story" our collective narrative? I think you say NO, when you say "our narratives are already controlled even by the words we have available to write our story. They corral us into metaphors of force, coercion, captivity, and black and white in the contracts that we hand our lives over to.
Can we see someone as they really are? Maybe in silence you could? But otherwise, we know nothing as it truly is. Word pictures are only snap-shots of how we think we would want something to be. These are just more of the corral of judgments you mentioned above.
If you suggest to someone to write their own narrative, how would they go about that? Sounds good, but don't we need a hint? There's a Johnstone quote, "humans are storytelling animals whose inner lives are typically dominated by mental narratives about what’s happening". I would say 100%, that everyone explains what they are doing in the context of their perception, and excuses what they are not doing.
That other people are trying to influence that story is also a constant occurrence. We are trying to influence those around us in the same way, in whatever our "reach" may be. Here we are all using Substack. Johnstone is still locked in the context of force and coercion, so she is illustrating what she is talking about.
"Soul Contracts" is a term that pushes into "otherworldly", a process that is normal as breathing. You don't need to seek a contract to begin to understand the different styles of communication, and not be offended by the "speaking rituals" that other people have adopted. If you enter into true dialog, you can easily discover that your ideas are a catalyst for my further thinking, and how I hold my "self" will gradually transform. You don't need a contract, or even a soul for that one.
I guess people think if they can tie something to the otherworldly, it will be a shortcut to god, or a right-life. Isn't that just another corral of metaphors?
I do know about John Taylor Gatto. Quote:
For five years I ran a guerrilla school program where I had every kid, rich and poor, smart and dippy, give 320 hours a year of hard community service.
Dozens of those kids came back to me years later, grown up, and told me that the experience of helping someone else had changed their lives. It has taught them to see in new ways, to rethink goals and values. It happened when they were thirteen, in my Lab School program. It was only possible because, due to various breakdowns, my rich school district was in chaos. When "stability" returned 5 years later the Lab School was closed. It was too successful with a widely mixed group of kids, and at too small of a cost to be allowed to continue.
.
Thank you for reading my post, Librarian. How to deal with the corruption of words? It really struck me (and there's a violence metaphor) when I was looking to describe why stories activate the participation of the listener in a way that facts and logic don't. I think about this often because my book on decentralizing economics is full of history, facts, numbers and logic, but it requires a story for people to put themselves into it and imagine their lives.
All the words I tried out with imagination had some kind of force or hidden trap to them. None of them opened up more freedom by offering more possibilities or doors that someone could open and walk through to new places, not of my making. So it was serendipitous that Kathleen used that same phrase in her title. When we say something 'captures the imagination,' we mean that to be a good thing. But looking at it more closely, it's the opposite of what we intend.
Kathleen's answer to this dilemma is silence and nature. My remedy tends towards more words. Somewhere I read that all words are fossilized metaphors. I try to be conscious of the etymology of words I use and avoid the shortcuts that maybe lead subconsciously to a different place.
I like the metaphor of 'influence' as flowing water that joins and shapes by its addition. Looking up the etymology, I found it's an astrological term so I'll be using that in my episode today. But a word that might better describe my goal is 'exfluence'. Rather than a 'push' marketing of my ideas, I'm introducing exits from the main stream. That offers a different option for those who choose to join me. I'm pretty certain I've never changed the mind of anyone who already had it made up.
I love your use of 'true dialog,' for which Thich Nhat Hahn said both sides needed to be willing to change. And 'catalyst for further thinking' is a great way to express that. Yes, the 'soul contract' seems to be trending but seemed to only confuse what she was saying, from the responses to it. I think NLP was all about changing your 'speaking rituals' to reach the person. As Mary's husband showed, in the episode I did on him, that can be used for opening up new possibilities or coercing them.
John Taylor Gatto is someone I greatly admire. I have a couple of his books and mentioned his guerrilla school program in some radio programs I did a decade ago. He's one of the clearest thinkers I've ever read and his Underground History of American Education changed everything I thought I knew about the subject. I mention him in these episodes: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/reinventing-education and here I quote "as John Taylor Gatto—author of Dumbing Us Down—would say, he knows how to read for power": https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/matt-ehret-and-cynthia-chung-geopuzzle. And also in this one about reading, From FOMO to JOMO: the Joy of Missing Out, which ironically I only have in video: https://youtu.be/5ZGY7uPs8K4. I may need to change that.
Thanks again, Librarian.
You raise a lot of good points:
1. Are words corrupt? Well, words have a connotation which moves in time. It moves very fast on social media. The connotation is the important and current part, more than the denotation or the etymology, which is only a curiosity for an old fogy, (someone looking backwards). There is a buried part too, as you mentioned, "Us & Them" is under much of our language.
2. Stories may activate the participation of the listener in a way that facts and logic don't. But I don't believe that stories change how people act, react, and believe. Only experience changes your outlook on life. Do the stories stimulate you to do something different? Action changes thoughts into experience. Our talking, and convincing, and all of our facts might be received just as a curiosity. It is a form of entertainment, but I will never imagine that a story could change the way I see myself. ({I'm already complete, by the way.})
3. Words and phrases are a model of how our culture sees the world. Surely a flexible model is going to be more accurate than a fixed (fossilized) model, fixed for even centuries or millennia. A flexible model cannot be based on the concept of an eternal truth. Any "Truth" blocks the advocate to only that one course of action. So if it is not working, bear down harder, or go into resignation. To change, we have to learn to "hold our truths lightly".
Models can better be based on how it will stimulate me to act on the future. What will be my trajectory be with that different model?
4. Flowing water that shapes and influences, acts a little at a time as it seeps in. How to manage that in words. I think nothing can happen unless a reader is willing to "do something". Do something can also mean entertain a different thought. I won't say what that is, or "should be". Once started, it will bring to light the next step, it will seep in. Therefore life begins to be held as an experiment. You can't "fool-around" with how you live, but you can reserve one corner of life as a laboratory. You can try things.
5. Exfluence is beautiful, pointing toward exits from conventional failed wisdom.
6. Gatto has his take on the inner city New York Schools. He's good, but there is an enormous discussion on education in America. and he is just one part of it.
I acknowledge you do so much work on this site. I don't do a fraction of that on my site. I am approaching 2 million words, but it is all other people's writing, and I only translate, read and edit. (Or nowadays I find the translations.) Now I am investigating anti-Semitism, which I thought I would never do. It is probably your influence that got me started. I will post a comment about it here somewhere, but on this thread it is off-topic.
.
Hello again, Librarian, and thanks for responding.
On words: in a purposeful dialogue with someone, where both are concerned with finding the right answer rather than being right, both need to know how the other defines the words, especially the ones used in the question.
This is maybe an example of my point. As far as I know, there's no word for the concept I just expressed. Debate is now a game with a winner. Argument is a belligerent quarrel. But the root of argue comes from 'to make bright, enlighten, to clarify, prove, present reasoned statements in support of a proposition."
If argue once had the meaning of a convivial pursuit of the truth, it's been lost to us. And maybe the reality behind it. I find that it's very difficult to disagree without giving the perception of 'trying to win.' As an abstract idea without a word to capture it, there's no place in our minds for the concept to land.
I was surprised to learn that Latin was a synthetic language that was created rather than evolving from an indigenous language. I also didn't realize that Rome started as a military encampment that kidnapped women in the Rape of Sabine to bear them children. All of the languages of conquest evolve from Latin: English, Spanish, French, Portuguese. So all our mental constructs are based on a language of occupation and colonization, not languages of place and rootedness. We have a lot of industrial and violent metaphors, and a dearth of ones to describe the nuances of human relationships.
What to do about this? I do think that in a question of the 'real' meaning, etymology is essential to show where words have been usurped or twisted. But that's just my preference. Do you find that Russian expresses a different way of seeing the world than English?
Thanks for liking 'exfluence' and acknowledging the work I do on my site. What you're doing is substantial, I am so impressed by the work you do.
We write because our life and our outlook has changed. We therefore think that others could probably change, (in their own way), and enjoy what we will all call growth. That's how I prioritize it. If it all moves toward more cooperation, we can also enjoy a greater sustainability, and security. From there we can develop our society and our life interests.
Can we share our growth and our new outlooks with others? Or can we share any "methodology" of how we unshackled our own thoughts, and began to widen our perspectives? This is the key focus of writing, and it is not so easy to motivate others. There must be 1,000 ways that don't work. What's the knack of looking at life in a new way?
✓One thing is that the new way must be compatible with the old way. We're not going to flip a switch and be in a new life. They must exist together, as one begins to influence the other. This on a world level, but also on the personal scale.
✓The new is weaker, with less adherents. Usually it is blotted out.
✓Even on a personal level (which is probably the best place to start testing), it has to be one step at a time, day by day.
✓I claim that you can't seek something called the truth. First it is only a model and not the thing, and if you believe in it, it sticks you to this one outlook. The concept of the "truth" is like a tar-baby. A long period of stasis follows.
✓You have to come to believe in experimenting, (do something different). You have to judge the experiment by concrete results, not by broken promises.
✓As your statement about "an abstract idea without a word to capture it," we have to start by broadening our contexts (world views), so that there is a place for new concepts to land. I call these contexts "verbal containers", and our whole work revolves around examining the sides of this container. Are these limitations substantial?
If we talk about this knack, maybe some people will find that a light has TURNED ON?
.
Beautiful post, Tereza! I hope you had a wonderful Mother’s Day:)
I loved everything about this commentary, but I related to the meme about the caterpillar and butterfly languages. I must be in the pupa stage because I don't yet feel the free flight of the butterfly, but rather I'm stuck in the dark pupa of bridging the gap of their different languages, between what the caterpillar’s narrative is and what the “free” butterfly comes to know.
Anyway, I wanted to share something that is part of their biblical narrative, and something you were right about. Abel WAS Bael/Baal! And Cain represents the territory of Canaan and who their ancient god was – Baal. Cain was a “tiller of the ground,” and Baal was the god of rain and agriculture, so when Baal was destroyed the story really is implying that the Canaanites won’t have their rain and agricultural god anymore, so things might not go so well for them, however the new inhabitants of Seth’s, also the “keeper of the sheep,” (aka livestock) will take over. Further, the allegory of Noah, with Canaan being cursed, is just more of their mind-manipulating narrative tactics against Baal - or what we would view today as an ancient Great Reset. In a strange twist, it would seem they projected that Baal’s flooding, or “rains on the grains,” against all those evil Canaanites, then turned into the promise of never flooding the earth anymore – drying it up and then Baal goes bye-bye – and they allegorically saved all that livestock onboard the ark for the new inhabitants/descendants of Seth, to ultimately become Israel. All of that part was probably written over the period of time it would take to write a Hollywood script.
Speaking of Hollywood, one last thing occurred to me, as well. In reading Gen. 4 more critically, it states in the first-person perspective, “I have gotten a man from the LORD.” Then the LORD is speaking to Cain and instructed to say, “Where is Abel thy brother?” Then Cain is to reply, “I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper.” These are just a few examples, showing it’s written like a Hollywood movie script(ure). They paint the imagined backdrop and then tell the actors what to say. What a scam!
I can picture you, Rhonda, like that little girl yelling at the caterpillars ;-)
I've been really enjoying the Guyenot book you told me about. I'm a little more than halfway. I think he might have something that confirms the Baal interpretation too. Cain might also be the Kennites, who were metal workers, like Tubal-Cain. Coinage and taxation is part of their 'charm.'
Funny, I was just mentioning the Jubilee years as Great Resets. And I just typed on the episode I'm working on: "As an aside, going back to Noah and Shem, there’s an international trade currency being considered by the BRICS called The Unit. It would be run by the UN and was designed by Arkhangelsk Capital Management, with Ark spelled like the Noahide Covenant with God that Shemites would rule the world, take possession of Canaan, and be served by its former inhabitants as the lowest of slaves. Anyone else see a problem with this?"
I'm also looking at the Sethian gnostic script-ures. I'd hoped it might be a more balanced male-female view of divinity but I'm finding it still leaves the 'sons of Seth' pure while Sophia causes all the problems, like Pandora's box. I'll be writing about that sometime soon.
Thanks for reading!
I laughed out loud about me being the "girl yelling at the caterpillars." I didn't like most caterpillars growing up but always loved butterflies.
Interesting about the Jubilee years, and as I see it, a debt forgiveness to the Israelites, as Great Resets. No Gentile in business can compete with that "Set-up," or "Re-Set." Also, I instantly saw "The Unit," as "Uniteth," which is more of the "we are all one," spellcasting, on a temporal level. It reminds me of them telling everyone we should get the vaccine so we can all be safe, when those in power weren't taking them. Also, revealing about the word Ark-h-angel-sk. I'll have to look into all of that more, but YES, I see a major problem with that!
Glad you're enjoying Guyenot's book. He does bring up the Cain Abel story vs. Set/h Osiris, but as I remember, he didn't equate Baal with Abel, nor Baal being the agricultural god, however he did equate it to Osiris. I got that epiphany from reading about Baal, after remembering you saying Abel was Baal:) And I think you said that before you got Guyenot's book, as well. Gosh, who knows, as I'm having a hard time keeping everything straight - information overload! Lol!
Anyway, thank you for continuing to share your free-flying butterfly stories:)
And Uni-teth as One World Tether, good one! I saw 'hang' in the middle of Ark-hang-elsk. But that's all I got.
I suspect 'forgiveness of the loans' meant repossession of the assets. I remember reading about the Hebrews choosing 'lots' so they would divide the land evenly, not knowing ahead of time which lot they'd end up with. But once it was chosen, it could never be bought or sold. So that, once again, turned all the Gentiles into feudal serfs, able to lease the land but with all contracts broken in the Jubilee Year, ready for the Great Reset.
Yes, now that you mention it, I think Guyenot buys into Baal being a bloodthirsty god not an agrarian diety. I must have gotten the latter somewhere else. Information overload is right!