02-23-2021, 02:11 PM
A second thread focusing more on the Cassiopaea forum now exists, started by another reader. (Earlier in this thread, that topic is very mixed with the topic of the channeling, however it ends up from here and on.)
It was also linked to by 'zvonimir' on the previous page, but it's certainly worth a look.
In an older post, here, I build upon Montalk's description (which seems to be from sometime between 2006 and 2009) -- he described two stages of different spirituality in different years -- and describe what happened later, with a third stage newer than what Montalk describes (gradually approached from 2011-2016, with 2016 a bit like the new 2003 as a big year of negative change).
I've heard from one reader saying that the latest channeling admits to them having been stuck in "3D thinking", suggesting some change may happen, but I'm still pessimistic about the nature of possible change. (I've not followed events on the Cassiopaea forum myself for a year, still haven't got to checking it out.)
I've wondered what, and how much, to make of the theme of Cassiopeia in mythology, where the constellation goes with the image of a vain queen combing her hair.
Here there's the usual questions of theory, practice, and the gap between the two.
It's worth noting that Laura K-J's approach has been to read extremely widely, following trails in her personal research-journey which jumps between topics towards an end only she knows, and to view the messages of the C's as mainly relevant to her personal quest, and attempts to interpret the meaning differently as invalid.
The overall style, which jumps between many, many topics, with short questions and answers per topic before the next jump, is because of her basic approach since the beginning of the contact in 1994. She's written about both the good and bad aspects of it -- the good is the range of exploration, the bad is of course how scattered the material can be as a result. But she thinks she understands what's essential better than critics, while Montalk and those who find his basic view and similar credible, obviously have very different ideas about what's essential.
(02-22-2021, 12:47 PM)dreamoftheiris Wrote: Here's an interesting essay on what happened to the Cassiopea channels and why it got so corrupted.
https://montalk.net/montalkvsqfs.htm
It was also linked to by 'zvonimir' on the previous page, but it's certainly worth a look.
In an older post, here, I build upon Montalk's description (which seems to be from sometime between 2006 and 2009) -- he described two stages of different spirituality in different years -- and describe what happened later, with a third stage newer than what Montalk describes (gradually approached from 2011-2016, with 2016 a bit like the new 2003 as a big year of negative change).
I've heard from one reader saying that the latest channeling admits to them having been stuck in "3D thinking", suggesting some change may happen, but I'm still pessimistic about the nature of possible change. (I've not followed events on the Cassiopaea forum myself for a year, still haven't got to checking it out.)
(02-22-2021, 02:05 PM)MrWho Wrote: "The devils favorite sin is vanity"
I've wondered what, and how much, to make of the theme of Cassiopeia in mythology, where the constellation goes with the image of a vain queen combing her hair.
(02-22-2021, 06:28 PM)Dtris Wrote: I have read some of the Casseopeia transcripts and after the third published book found the material lacking in usefulness.
I think that it is part of the nature of humans to resist change and the nature of the material is such that if you don't do the work, you get the same message. Getting tired of the same message it is then easy to look for transient material as Ra would say. Then channeling becomes more about entertainment and its own distortion than a meaningful exchange for learning and progression along a chosen path.
Here there's the usual questions of theory, practice, and the gap between the two.
It's worth noting that Laura K-J's approach has been to read extremely widely, following trails in her personal research-journey which jumps between topics towards an end only she knows, and to view the messages of the C's as mainly relevant to her personal quest, and attempts to interpret the meaning differently as invalid.
The overall style, which jumps between many, many topics, with short questions and answers per topic before the next jump, is because of her basic approach since the beginning of the contact in 1994. She's written about both the good and bad aspects of it -- the good is the range of exploration, the bad is of course how scattered the material can be as a result. But she thinks she understands what's essential better than critics, while Montalk and those who find his basic view and similar credible, obviously have very different ideas about what's essential.