Twin flame awareness.

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by naturesflow

Only if you believe this yourself. So where are you in all this I wonder firstandlast? I bolded the part I thought was important to all this.

I find your channellings interesting all the same. Seems to be a touch of Abraham hicks showing in all this.

Reading through it, I agree with most of what you sharing. That the process is as important as the defining moment of awareness. That it is life reflecting itself in the way life and people do. So for me personally, there are no sides in me posting things like this. If anything all sides end when you are in moving and being from more complete formless awareness. And of course life continues to bridge awareness from the nature of form and formless. Being as we are being in everyway life is being and are aware of.

I had to look her up-- Idk about her--

It would be easier to declare who I am as a mystery itself, and that I am something of a revealing in it of itself-- In simple terms, there is nothing I could not say that would not sound like your own experience, that I am so totally involved in myself that I simply talking about the same experience we are all having-- What I have to show is concrete when in full effect, but that I await my consort which is all important to have faith in the self, to be not alone in understanding.. because my relationship with reality is mine alone, and no one's experience will be any different, except that it is their own-- The only difference between your experience and my experience is degree, but that each degree is important to the whole because it completes it--

Which makes it absolutely difficult to describe the difference when it isn't any different for your own, yet the consequences are different-- But what is worse than being unable to communicate such an important thing to me yet, is the fact that I realized every sacred scriptures deepest understandings and came to a different conclusions as to not base my view in any of them, but to see what they are and their vital essence in necessity--

The only difference between then and now, was my realization of my immortality-- Not based on any light, or thing; but on who I am-- There is a major difference between seeing how you are immortal, to knowing how you yourself surpass the mortal existence independent of anything or relation-- Because I know what to do when I die, I cannot deny my own realization-- For me it is a reality, in its final consummation of a future who regardless of form understands its intent as a living thing--

That is where I am at, plain and simple--

[hineahuone]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Naturesflow, first of all...wonderful post and followup commentary
You rock and very much agree with the sentiments above.

I'm going to change up a few things just a bit on Ms Marciniak's wording for clarity..and comment a bit..

I replaced "desire" with "choice". Here, desire means what one honestly wants to do. Desire as the author uses it is not limited to a physical desire, or to any kind of craving or need except a craving of the heart and soul. However, because many will interpret "desire" first and foremost as physical desire and physical need, it then becomes just another form of need or base need. And yet, she says it's not about need.

It's really conflating the whole issue for all those who seek primarily sex and touch in partnership without ever wanting to own that as a need, and in fact it's a really base need if they equally "desire" no emotional or spiritual connection with the "partner". Moreover, it's just extremely disingenuous to call one's own stuff "desire" whilst the stuff of others are "needs" (often in the pejorative sense, hahaha). In fact, it's all "needs" and/or base or ego-related cravings if they override authentic love (seeking the highest good of the other equally to the self, and vice-versa). And I really think that was what the author was trying to get at. So replacing the whole word is sometimes clearer...


A few comments here from me to paint a bit more of a picture of where we're at and what this new type of relationship might actually look and feel like, just to get the discussion rolling...I added this bit.

It's certainly true that of all close human relationships, the intimate partnerships between men and women (historically often lifelong) have typically been severely or wholly lacking in an authentic love of one another simply for who they were, whether as people or as beloved friends or family.

The modern era is not a whit different thus far in that regard, simply because people have more freedom of choice regarding the ability to have sex more freely and with more partners, or to forego commitment and/or family altogether. In fact, the utilitarian, exploitative, and highly narcissistic and self-absorbed norms and behaviours promoted by modern culture in the West since mid-20th century (post 1960) have taken loveless, emotionally avoidant, primarily sexual relationships to new heights. None of these modern freedoms have transformed our capacity to love in deeper, more authentic ways.

The capacity and desire to love authentically has nothing to do with consumerist sexual freedoms and ego-based choices in primarily sexual partnerships and liasons. Authentic love in partnership still awaits a transformation to the heart-led consciousness by each and every individual, at which point a critical mass may bring this true alternative to the fore of our collective mind, rather than waiting in the wings as it is at present. Most have absolutely no concrete idea that it is possible, nor what it would look like. With the simple awareness that an authentically loving relationship could even exist -- then ALL THINGS become possible, and all things as they are at present are suddenly up for deep revision and massive renegotiation. Oh hallelujah, hahaha

This new type of relationship pretty clearly means IMO one that offers the realistic, commonplace expression of authentic love in our day-to-day lives, grounding the relationship (including physical intimacy and sex) within a larger context of a mutual and reciprocal authentic love which provides the balance and parity necessary for true sustainability without the force, coercion, power over and imbalance of the old way. Where one side primarily takes and benefits through exploitation and/or manipulation of the other side in various but usually different and separate ways.

Instead, within the context of authentic love in a truly free and loving society, we are each empowered to be and do and live freely and singly. Because only as fully developed autonomous beings can we truly choose freely and truly bring the capacity for authentic love in giving and receiving without any coercion or manifest dependency or imbalance. Where each gives and receives freely, such that there is no taking or long-term imbalance or exploitation by one at the expense of the other. With authentic love being that which seeks the highest good of all. Not seeking the highest good of the other at your expense, nor your highest good at their expense.

Peace & blessings
7L

It all sounds very idealistic and altruistic. I do not really subscribe to the imperative that twinflames be in union. I think that leads to expectations and I had none when I met my twin, still have none and happy to live seperately from him as I was happy on my own anyway. We are both free spirits anyway. I do think he is a catalyst for my spiritual growth and I have acknowledged his role in that respect.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by firstandlast

I had to look her up-- Idk about her--

It would be easier to declare who I am as a mystery itself, and that I am something of a revealing in it of itself-- In simple terms, there is nothing I could not say that would not sound like your own experience, that I am so totally involved in myself that I simply talking about the same experience we are all having-- What I have to show is concrete when in full effect, but that I await my consort which is all important to have faith in the self, to be not alone in understanding.. because my relationship with reality is mine alone, and no one's experience will be any different, except that it is their own-- The only difference between your experience and my experience is degree, but that each degree is important to the whole because it completes it--

Which makes it absolutely difficult to describe the difference when it isn't any different for your own, yet the consequences are different-- But what is worse than being unable to communicate such an important thing to me yet, is the fact that I realized every sacred scriptures deepest understandings and came to a different conclusions as to not base my view in any of them, but to see what they are and their vital essence in necessity--

The only difference between then and now, was my realization of my immortality-- Not based on any light, or thing; but on who I am-- There is a major difference between seeing how you are immortal, to knowing how you yourself surpass the mortal existence independent of anything or relation-- Because I know what to do when I die, I cannot deny my own realization-- For me it is a reality, in its final consummation of a future who regardless of form understands its intent as a living thing--

That is where I am at, plain and simple--

I find your plain and simple rather amusing, not in an insulting amusing way, so don't get me wrong, but rather it is like you as the mystery are contained by the mystery in some way, but that is ok. Life opens us in many ways of being to deepen and ground us in being and as we know life goes on and the mystery known or otherwise, delights us in any number of ways in being ourselves.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by hineahuone

It all sounds very idealistic and altruistic. I do not really subscribe to the imperative that twinflames be in union. I think that leads to expectations and I had none when I met my twin, still have none and happy to live seperately from him as I was happy on my own anyway. We are both free spirits anyway. I do think he is a catalyst for my spiritual growth and I have acknowledged his role in that respect.

What is the twin you speak of?

How do you define and create this twin to actually be a twin as such? What makes you believe this?

I like your last line. That is something I learned through the perception of twin flame creation. They were a catalyst for deeper growth. A reflection that offered me a mirror for myself to go deeper in me.

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by naturesflow

I find your plain and simple rather amusing, not in an insulting amusing way, so don't get me wrong, but rather it is like you as the mystery are contained by the mystery in some way, but that is ok. Life opens us in many ways of being to deepen and ground us in being and as we know life goes on and the mystery known or otherwise, delights us in any number of ways in being ourselves.

I would rather be taken as amusing rather than serious; not because I am not dead serious about the totality of my being; but that how could I expect you take me serious if the totality is not apparent--

Why would I want anyone to take seriously that which that have not understood of me? that would be my own foolish mistake to need you to take seriously something which has clearly not been understood-- And then for me to insist you take your misconceptions seriously?

Consider this a distant voice of two spirits who haven't even truly met each other yet, haven't even dealt with each other yet, we have been dealing with phantom selves for so long, that everyone is dealing with ghosts of each other-- you want to see the underworld? Look at what I am lord of, people who have never truly dealt with each other, and struggle enough to try and realize it in themselves alone-- I could not be proud of my own authority unless my own authority is brings justice for those spirits whom make me up--

So feel free to play with me, because depending upon the approach; such conversations could go very differently-- =) I am more than any moment holds, but no more than the moment I am in--

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by hineahuone

It all sounds very idealistic and altruistic. I do not really subscribe to the imperative that twinflames be in union. I think that leads to expectations and I had none when I met my twin, still have none and happy to live seperately from him as I was happy on my own anyway. We are both free spirits anyway. I do think he is a catalyst for my spiritual growth and I have acknowledged his role in that respect.

Hello there!
Sorry you may have misunderstood where I was coming from, because I didn't make it clear I was speaking very generally.

Let me try again and be very clear Words are such a difficult medium but at present it's basically what we have to work with most times

NONE of what I said applies only to any one person, group, category or label.
ALL of what I said was intended to apply to humanity at large regarding the application and relevance of authentic love for self and for all others.

Regarding the specific history and current situation of human male-female relationships or partnerships (committed or otherwise) at the collective level --> most individual partnerships comprising that collective have historically lacked a mutuality of authentic love in partnership in their foundation and therefore also in their day-to-day expression.
AND most male-female individual partnerships at present continue to lack a mutuality of authentic love in partnership in their foundation and therefore also in their day-to-day expression.

NONE of what I said is intended to either state or imply that any two persons "should be" together. Absolutely not, hahahaha!!! LOL...I have no crystal ball . All I was saying is that authentic love is what is lacking in partnerships in particular, relative to all other kinds of human relationships, and it is IMO a HUUUUGE part of the crux of humanity's issues at present.

But...I do believe that IF anyone here or elsewhere were to read this and reflect and come to the realisation that hmmm...I do not receive authentic love in this friendship or this family relationship, OR hmmmm....I do not give authentic love in this partnership, but rather I only tend to take....or whatever the case may be...clearly, that points to where there is lack and imbalance which is clearly or ultimately not in the highest good of all.

Persons can then apprehend and deal with the logistics of their individual situation more clearly. Giving authentic love *in expression*, meaning in word and in deed and in ways that are meaningful to others, where needed. And also asking and receiving where needed (as we can't expect others to read our minds, but need to allow and present opportunities for others to give in ways that are meaningful to us).

IMO...authentic love as a foundation is the "being love" or being centred in love such that you desire and actively seek the highest good of all. Secondarily, it also comprises what we might call the feelings (bliss, joy, lovingkindness) that are associated with the "being love". But the bliss is always secondary to the desire or love of Spirit and to align with our centre. Otherwise, the bliss is always ephemeral and will slip away ;) Meaning, the desire to be love and do love is always primary...whilst the bliss is secondary, or follows on -- even when it is very powerful and even when it becomes a regular part of us.

So...none of this is particular to any one person or any one type of relationship -- although I am calling out male-female partnerships as particularly lacking in authentic love, both historically and present-day. Beyond that, of course, authentic love is something that belongs at the centre of all of humanity's relationships, whether friend, fam, partner or stranger, as is appropriate. In fact, the vast majority already know this as they've already experienced authentic love from some fam and/or from beloved friends growing up.

The problem humanity has always had is in limiting authentic love to familial or friendship relationships, whilst designating partnerships as strictly based on utilitarian/exchange-based, sexual foundations. Where authentic love has occurred, it is typically feared as uncontrollable and dangerous, and thus it is typically quickly sublimated and suppressed in the current male-female relationship paradigm beneath demands for sex, control, and possession by the dominant forces in society. And equally by the dominant partner whose ego is severely threatened by any loss of control. Whomever this may be.

Authentic love is not something which can be controlled or possessed...and so there is huge resistance to opening to love, to grace, and to Spirit by those whose ego rests on control and dominance, unless they can first break it, cage it, and destroy its integrity in order to control it. Or failing that, they may try to break you, cage you, and destroy your spirit in order to control you, instead. And this fear-based behaviour is still applicable to a vast majority of men vis-à-vis most women regarding authentic love, though it may apply to anyone whose ego construct rests on control and dominance.

Of course, I acknowledge some of our connections and relationships are closer or more resonant or impactful than others. There are soul connections who will always be very close to our heart and whom we will always love very deeply. Regardless of what has come to pass or what we have experienced. Regardless of where they are at on their journey. We love them authentically...just as they are, and we desire and actively support their highest good for no other reason but their good.

But regardless, the absence or presence of a mutuality of authentic love in expression (word and deed) in any relationship, connection, or communication is crucial, IMO. And very telling. And which neither can be nor should be avoided or minimised. Whether fam, friends, partner, or other. For without a mutuality of authentic love in expression to one another, the relationship is neither balanced, nor in our mutual highest good, nor ultimately even sustainable (without great trauma).

Did I make better sense this go round? Hope so
Peace & blessings,
7L

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by firstandlast

I would rather be taken as amusing rather than serious; not because I am not dead serious about the totality of my being; but that how could I expect you take me serious if the totality is not apparent--

Why would I want anyone to take seriously that which that have not understood of me? that would be my own foolish mistake to need you to take seriously something which has clearly not been understood-- And then for me to insist you take your misconceptions seriously?

Consider this a distant voice of two spirits who haven't even truly met each other yet, haven't even dealt with each other yet, we have been dealing with phantom selves for so long, that everyone is dealing with ghosts of each other-- you want to see the underworld? Look at what I am lord of, people who have never truly dealt with each other, and struggle enough to try and realize it in themselves alone-- I could not be proud of my own authority unless my own authority is brings justice for those spirits whom make me up--

So feel free to play with me, because depending upon the approach; such conversations could go very differently-- =) I am more than any moment holds, but no more than the moment I am in--

F/L, hello there.
If you just speak from where you are as best you can...and if you do so with good intentions (seeking the highest good) toward self and others,
then no one can do more. Nor would anyone expect more from you on this forum, in my experience.

Peace & blessings,
7L

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by firstandlast

I would rather be taken as amusing rather than serious; not because I am not dead serious about the totality of my being; but that how could I expect you take me serious if the totality is not apparent--

Your very much alive being yourself as you are. Serious has it's place in the whole scheme of things.

Why would I want anyone to take seriously that which that have not understood of me? that would be my own foolish mistake to need you to take seriously something which has clearly not been understood-- And then for me to insist you take your misconceptions seriously?

So you converse and don't understand yourself fully yet in that relating what are who you are being?

Consider this a distant voice of two spirits who haven't even truly met each other yet, haven't even dealt with each other yet, we have been dealing with phantom selves for so long, that everyone is dealing with ghosts of each other-- you want to see the underworld? Look at what I am lord of, people who have never truly dealt with each other, and struggle enough to try and realize it in themselves alone-- I could not be proud of my own authority unless my own authority is brings justice for those spirits whom make me up--

Here you go again into your channelling mode. I find this whole thing rather silly on your part. Why don't you just speak more real?

So feel free to play with me, because depending upon the approach; such conversations could go very differently-- =) I am more than any moment holds, but no more than the moment I am in--

Why don't you just become all this instead of speaking in tongues like your a detached zombie?




I find your way of conversing almost like your moving in and out of yourself, speaking like a detached guru where as in the nature of totality in being all that I doubt it would sound like this, but that is just me wanting you to fit the real I want to converse with. Not the unreal you are creating to relate with. All the same, it really it is just a request on my part and what I want, and no doubt you will do as you will.

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by naturesflow

Your very much alive being yourself as you are. Serious has it's place in the whole scheme of things.




So you converse and don't understand yourself fully yet in that relating what are who you are being?



Here you go again into your channelling mode. I find this whole thing rather silly on your part. Why don't you just speak more real?



Why don't you just become all this instead of speaking in tongues like your a detached zombie?




I find your way of conversing almost like your moving in and out of yourself, speaking like a detached guru where as in the nature of totality in being all that I doubt it would sound like this, but that is just me wanting you to fit the real I want to converse with. Not the unreal you are creating to relate with. All the same, it really it is just a request on my part and what I want, and no doubt you will do as you will.

I get it-- I am here, not trying to put out my name; I am here because there is a perfect mix of people here for my work, which really has to do with the different styles you may hear of me-- But I assure you such things were present as a child, as I had a real fascination with pretending to be a robot and would attempt to read things in class as fast as possible in a monotone for as long as they would let me-- I am here playing with my words, and seeing how you all relate; as there are things that I am working on in these words--

You should understand that just because I have realized my totality, does not at all mean that I have not come here just as fragmented as everyone else; in fact, I am fragmented by everyone else; everyone is fragmented by everyone-- So I will indeed have to excuse myself from worrying whether I go in and out of your frame of self, because if I appear to be going in and out of myself-- Than yeah, simply that you aren't trying to recognize me, just deal with me-- Because if people think ima follow some order other than being myself.. and that they want me to declare some other truth; ain't happening-- And I am something as simple as that.. myself-- Not that I don't want to get along, but that I know exactly when I am compromised in spirit and that if I am compromised you are as well.. because unless I am being myself, who ever that damn well may be; than they cannot possibly be as either, because how could they make an honest choice when they don't understand me--

See I am not saying any philosophy, and that everything gets distorted and fragmented as I bring it down into comprehension; nothing I am saying is more than a dream-- but that I am awake to the dream, the things I say as truth now are simply grounds for another truth later-- Because my wisdom is not in anything but the ability to guide myself, my dream; and that I recognize it as our dream-- But that the leap to understanding what I say is coming vs what I am trying to even point to now.. is that of life to death, into that reflective pond to realize that we are going from death to life; and that these are the same--

All religion is meant to nullify itself; except for one string of pattern that is usable to guides ones self-- But one doesn't realize the dream, so that which he comes up against is merely a ground to walk upon to the next ground to be found-- We are wandering in a dream, and we keep waking up thinking we are waking up--

I hold the opposite of all trends in that one string of pattern, I am going to sleep; because I am the dreamer--

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by firstandlast

I get it-- I am here, not trying to put out my name; I am here because there is a perfect mix of people here for my work, which really has to do with the different styles you may hear of me-- But I assure you such things were present as a child, as I had a real fascination with pretending to be a robot and would attempt to read things in class as fast as possible in a monotone for as long as they would let me-- I am here playing with my words, and seeing how you all relate; as there are things that I am working on in these words--

You should understand that just because I have realized my totality, does not at all mean that I have not come here just as fragmented as everyone else; in fact, I am fragmented by everyone else; everyone is fragmented by everyone-- So I will indeed have to excuse myself from worrying whether I go in and out of your frame of self, because if I appear to be going in and out of myself-- Than yeah, simply that you aren't trying to recognize me, just deal with me-- Because if people think ima follow some order other than being myself.. and that they want me to declare some other truth; ain't happening-- And I am something as simple as that.. myself-- Not that I don't want to get along, but that I know exactly when I am compromised in spirit and that if I am compromised you are as well.. because unless I am being myself, who ever that damn well may be; than they cannot possibly be as either, because how could they make an honest choice when they don't understand me--

See I am not saying any philosophy, and that everything gets distorted and fragmented as I bring it down into comprehension; nothing I am saying is more than a dream-- but that I am awake to the dream, the things I say as truth now are simply grounds for another truth later-- Because my wisdom is not in anything but the ability to guide myself, my dream; and that I recognize it as our dream-- But that the leap to understanding what I say is coming vs what I am trying to even point to now.. is that of life to death, into that reflective pond to realize that we are going from death to life; and that these are the same--

All religion is meant to nullify itself; except for one string of pattern that is usable to guides ones self-- But one doesn't realize the dream, so that which he comes up against is merely a ground to walk upon to the next ground to be found-- We are wandering in a dream, and we keep waking up thinking we are waking up--

I hold the opposite of all trends in that one string of pattern, I am going to sleep; because I am the dreamer--

Oh dear here you go again.