02-20-2021, 03:01 PM
Concerning Ymarsakar's mention of 1996, the main connection of that year to the Cassiopaean Experiment is of course Ark coming prominently into the picture. A decade later, 2006, further big steps were taken, with the QFG organization and the launching of the Cassiopaea forum. In between, Ark's role in pushing up the intellectual standard and qualities of the then email-list-based Cassiopaea community is very significant.
Arguably, Ark's input has fueled something negative. That's certainly my own view. But why and how? For now, I have no information which suggests that Ark is of a basically negative or destructive nature, and the old information I have read on him, his life and his musings, actually suggests the opposite -- an inspired person deeply concerned with ethics and, unlike Laura (with her Cassiopaean backing), not at all inclined to view everything as evidence of being the center around which the fate of the whole world revolves.
For now I continue to give Ark the benefit of the doubt as to his basic nature and motivations. It makes sense that the egocentric core of Laura's agenda, with toxic seeds looking for nourishment, would grow into something distinctly negative when plenty of positive fuel is added to it. Ark could have been duped, on one or more levels, into thinking that he was genuinely supporting the most meaningful cause in the world, without being a crazed egomaniac himself.
Interestingly enough, many decades ago by now, Ark briefly was in touch with a physical Fourth Way group based on Gurdjieff's teaching. Ark described (can be found somewhere in "The Wave" books, like much other background info for him) rejecting joining that group, finding it useless to devote himself to it, as he had something of his own which was important to focus on instead, a strong sense that there was a reason he was in this life basically, that he could approach inwardly -- and belief in such a thing is incompatible with a dogmatic Gurdjieffian approach. I ultimately realized that it's the same with the dogmatic Cassiopaea community approach, for all who have a mission of their own apart from being part of Laura K-J's crowd.
Actually, little proof is asked for in the Cassiopaea community. And early on, the C's said that an approach of requesting proof was contrary to being open to something beyond "3D thinking". But they've focused a lot on predictions, and also material details and other how-to-live-life and how-to-be-spiritual details, what's safe and not, related to positive and negative forces, etc., swallowing detail after detail when it comes from their chosen authority.
In predictions and other things, the community has long been eager to confirm "hits" while not being serious about looking into possible "misses". It's been like a fanclub which usually never speaks of losing and keeps focusing on how it's winning and is better than everyone else.
Their consensus, even in matters mainly physical, implicitly has a special, sacred status, the loss of which leads to risk of the soul being lost, through alignment with entropic forces. There you have the topics of negative disintegration, soul smashing, etc. -- often used to explain why people "go bad" in connection with leaving the fold, since around the time when the Fellowship (FOTCM) was founded. Which made me wonder, does every schizophrenic, and every person with brain illness or damage resulting in dementia or other similarly severe issues, also lose the soul permanently along with the brain-mind? It's a silly idea, but also very close to where the Cass. community consensus points (if they were to follow implications of their general ideas without making arbitrary exceptions on the spot to avoid such obvious silliness).
I think when people begin to develop an all-encompassing "standard", focused on specific nuggets of wisdom, for how to be safe and good vs. lining up with doom and evil forces, as in the Cassiopaea community, then the potential for "us vs. them" division of followers and "the others" attracts intense negative attention. Because the latter is exactly the kind of thing that negative forces want to develop to the maximum so that people end up divided and conquered, too busy categorizing those superficially different from themselves as supporting evil to give any space for understanding to grow.
Arguably, Ark's input has fueled something negative. That's certainly my own view. But why and how? For now, I have no information which suggests that Ark is of a basically negative or destructive nature, and the old information I have read on him, his life and his musings, actually suggests the opposite -- an inspired person deeply concerned with ethics and, unlike Laura (with her Cassiopaean backing), not at all inclined to view everything as evidence of being the center around which the fate of the whole world revolves.
For now I continue to give Ark the benefit of the doubt as to his basic nature and motivations. It makes sense that the egocentric core of Laura's agenda, with toxic seeds looking for nourishment, would grow into something distinctly negative when plenty of positive fuel is added to it. Ark could have been duped, on one or more levels, into thinking that he was genuinely supporting the most meaningful cause in the world, without being a crazed egomaniac himself.
Interestingly enough, many decades ago by now, Ark briefly was in touch with a physical Fourth Way group based on Gurdjieff's teaching. Ark described (can be found somewhere in "The Wave" books, like much other background info for him) rejecting joining that group, finding it useless to devote himself to it, as he had something of his own which was important to focus on instead, a strong sense that there was a reason he was in this life basically, that he could approach inwardly -- and belief in such a thing is incompatible with a dogmatic Gurdjieffian approach. I ultimately realized that it's the same with the dogmatic Cassiopaea community approach, for all who have a mission of their own apart from being part of Laura K-J's crowd.
(09-23-2020, 07:51 PM)Patrick Wrote:(09-23-2020, 07:35 PM)Ymarsakar Wrote: ...Maybe this was the plan all along to pretend to be STO and then convert this group to STS...
This is so typical that it seems to be the case for the majority of channeling material unfortunately. This often happens when proof is requested, which is requested a lot.
I don't know what the contracts are to implement the Law of Confusion on this planet, but it really seems like there is a clause about faith/proof. When proof is requested I think the STO entity has to step out and let the Loyal Opposition answer those type of questions. When this happens a lot, then the STS entity earns the right to just stay there as the main contact.
Actually, little proof is asked for in the Cassiopaea community. And early on, the C's said that an approach of requesting proof was contrary to being open to something beyond "3D thinking". But they've focused a lot on predictions, and also material details and other how-to-live-life and how-to-be-spiritual details, what's safe and not, related to positive and negative forces, etc., swallowing detail after detail when it comes from their chosen authority.
In predictions and other things, the community has long been eager to confirm "hits" while not being serious about looking into possible "misses". It's been like a fanclub which usually never speaks of losing and keeps focusing on how it's winning and is better than everyone else.
Their consensus, even in matters mainly physical, implicitly has a special, sacred status, the loss of which leads to risk of the soul being lost, through alignment with entropic forces. There you have the topics of negative disintegration, soul smashing, etc. -- often used to explain why people "go bad" in connection with leaving the fold, since around the time when the Fellowship (FOTCM) was founded. Which made me wonder, does every schizophrenic, and every person with brain illness or damage resulting in dementia or other similarly severe issues, also lose the soul permanently along with the brain-mind? It's a silly idea, but also very close to where the Cass. community consensus points (if they were to follow implications of their general ideas without making arbitrary exceptions on the spot to avoid such obvious silliness).
I think when people begin to develop an all-encompassing "standard", focused on specific nuggets of wisdom, for how to be safe and good vs. lining up with doom and evil forces, as in the Cassiopaea community, then the potential for "us vs. them" division of followers and "the others" attracts intense negative attention. Because the latter is exactly the kind of thing that negative forces want to develop to the maximum so that people end up divided and conquered, too busy categorizing those superficially different from themselves as supporting evil to give any space for understanding to grow.