08-24-2015, 01:51 PM
Aion, what you wrote about transmutation is very beautiful, sincere, and interesting. I especially like that you are bringing these energies up through the lower chakra centers to the heart for forgiveness. I agree that forgiveness is at "the heart" of karma and evolution at this point. I am dubious though, that we can directly assist others in forgiveness.
I suppose that is where study in alchemical mysteries helps. It has been my observation that one must forgive one's self, because no matter who or what else forgives you, the need for forgiveness persists until you can forgive yourself—which I think is why the karmic wheel even turns. I do understand that we may forge energetic pathways that now make it "easier" for others to follow (which is at the core of living master work). I would like to explore this concept further, if you would care to elucidate.
What about free will in the context of what you are doing, specifically transmuting the energy of the "food" you eat? I gravitate to the idea of free will being returned to the natural world—animals and plants and the planet. By free will I mean not controlling it—let the natural world do what it will, freely. Just as we suggest through the Law of One that all humans be allowed to experience their own free will. And from my perspective, there is a level of free will in the natural world and it's not just for humans. For example, an animal in a zoo has lost its ability to go where it will and experience its full range of animal-ness, and a plant controlled by a farm has lost its ability to interact with the environment freely, seeking sunlight, having relationships with insects and animal life.
By transmuting energy in the food, it seems to me that you are 1) participating in its production, and 2) trying to "fix" it. While I do align with the idea of loving support, I'm not sure I align with "fixing." In this matter, fixing the results of suffering seems like a lot of work (especially if one is contributing to the suffering by participating in its production) as opposed to supporting the traumatized energies with the love in your heart and not adding to the trauma in any way. I am speaking to the matter of transmutation, and not to the idea of food in general and the specifics of this food or that food, and which suffers most etc.
I don't mean this in a derogatory fashion, and I commend your intentions and knowledge, and level of commitment and practice. In fact, I find it pretty amazing. But I find it to be too controlling and contradictory. Though I can see the practicality of directly interfacing with the "food," Monica's suggestion of working with these energies without participating in their production seems more efficacious.
And one more aspect: the taking on of suffering. This is very messiah-like. Of course this is supposedly what Jesus did. But it seems to me that it takes away the opportunity for the entities to resolve the issues (possibly chosen) themselves. In the case of Jesus in the bible (and assuming the veracity of the stories), his taking on the sins of the world may have relieved the burden of sin, but denied those who had committed the sins their own accountability. So weren't they robbed of their own evolution in a way?
In the case of animal and plant life, it is very attractive to me to think I might be able to help in the way you do and transmute their suffering. But I am inclined to do this by not causing it in the first place. That way I can allow the free will of humans and not get enmeshed with the horror that goes on here, in line with "prime directive" idea. It is hard though, to bear it and not take direct action. I can understand working "in the trenches" down here, as you are doing. But the practice seems convoluted, rather like a Christian priest causing suffering (torture) to relieve suffering (to be united with God)—(Spanish Inquisition). I don't mean this comparison as an insult to you in any way; it's just the only—albeit it gross and extreme—example I could come up with to illustrate my thoughts.
I am just exploring these ideas. I would love to hear others' viewpoints on this.
I suppose that is where study in alchemical mysteries helps. It has been my observation that one must forgive one's self, because no matter who or what else forgives you, the need for forgiveness persists until you can forgive yourself—which I think is why the karmic wheel even turns. I do understand that we may forge energetic pathways that now make it "easier" for others to follow (which is at the core of living master work). I would like to explore this concept further, if you would care to elucidate.
What about free will in the context of what you are doing, specifically transmuting the energy of the "food" you eat? I gravitate to the idea of free will being returned to the natural world—animals and plants and the planet. By free will I mean not controlling it—let the natural world do what it will, freely. Just as we suggest through the Law of One that all humans be allowed to experience their own free will. And from my perspective, there is a level of free will in the natural world and it's not just for humans. For example, an animal in a zoo has lost its ability to go where it will and experience its full range of animal-ness, and a plant controlled by a farm has lost its ability to interact with the environment freely, seeking sunlight, having relationships with insects and animal life.
By transmuting energy in the food, it seems to me that you are 1) participating in its production, and 2) trying to "fix" it. While I do align with the idea of loving support, I'm not sure I align with "fixing." In this matter, fixing the results of suffering seems like a lot of work (especially if one is contributing to the suffering by participating in its production) as opposed to supporting the traumatized energies with the love in your heart and not adding to the trauma in any way. I am speaking to the matter of transmutation, and not to the idea of food in general and the specifics of this food or that food, and which suffers most etc.
I don't mean this in a derogatory fashion, and I commend your intentions and knowledge, and level of commitment and practice. In fact, I find it pretty amazing. But I find it to be too controlling and contradictory. Though I can see the practicality of directly interfacing with the "food," Monica's suggestion of working with these energies without participating in their production seems more efficacious.
And one more aspect: the taking on of suffering. This is very messiah-like. Of course this is supposedly what Jesus did. But it seems to me that it takes away the opportunity for the entities to resolve the issues (possibly chosen) themselves. In the case of Jesus in the bible (and assuming the veracity of the stories), his taking on the sins of the world may have relieved the burden of sin, but denied those who had committed the sins their own accountability. So weren't they robbed of their own evolution in a way?
In the case of animal and plant life, it is very attractive to me to think I might be able to help in the way you do and transmute their suffering. But I am inclined to do this by not causing it in the first place. That way I can allow the free will of humans and not get enmeshed with the horror that goes on here, in line with "prime directive" idea. It is hard though, to bear it and not take direct action. I can understand working "in the trenches" down here, as you are doing. But the practice seems convoluted, rather like a Christian priest causing suffering (torture) to relieve suffering (to be united with God)—(Spanish Inquisition). I don't mean this comparison as an insult to you in any way; it's just the only—albeit it gross and extreme—example I could come up with to illustrate my thoughts.
I am just exploring these ideas. I would love to hear others' viewpoints on this.