1203 POC Point of View: Acceptance

Private Session 12/03/22: POC Point of View: Acceptance

Channeled by Babylove

Comment: POC = person of color

___________________

[long pause]

MEntity: Hello, everyone. We are here, now. And although we are still finding our footing, so to speak, with our channel, we believe we can begin.

Cary: Hi, Michael. Thanks for joining us. You're here today with myself, Cary, and Kendra. And we have a few questions. The first question that I wanted to ask is [about] the goal of acceptance. How does it work when you are a targeted minority. It seems to me like a lot of the language that describes arrogance [I think Cary meant acceptance, here] describes it from the position that everyone is from the same space. But if you are a targeted minority in America especially, things are different. And in particular, I was wondering, so, in the case of African Americans, we often have to code switch, and I'm wondering if code switching counts as ingratiation? So, I'm just wondering if you could speak a little bit about how acceptance as a goal works in that way?

MEntity: Yes, we understand.

[pause]

First we will say that it is GOOD WORK to continue to validate our teaching from the context of, or from within the context of being a historically oppressed group. For we understand that...we understand the different perspectives and experiences from within various groups and from within the various dynamics of privilege, empowerment, freedom, rights, etc.

We are appreciative of these types of questions as it allows us to further refine our teaching and further communicate our teaching to our students. This is why we choose to work through various channels, rather than only one channel, so that we can reach all of our students, and so that more of our students can actually hear what we have to teach.

The goal of acceptance will always be the goal of acceptance no matter the context [and] no matter the group that is exploring acceptance.

We think that what may be most relevant to talk about from within the context of [an] historically oppressed group or a "targeted" group, as you put it, we think it might be most helpful to speak about the core of what acceptance or the goal of acceptance is about.

Remember that the positive pole of this goal, the aim of this goal, is agape which is that...force or state or reality that can be accessed through essence, that is a state in which there are no conditions for your existence as you are. There are no conditions under which or for which you must uphold in order to be that which you are, or to be that which you are in relation to other fragments...and them being that which they are, so that there is a resonance between you and other fragments. Or more accurately put, a oneness which represents the energy side of the equation of essence.

What we mean by all of this is that acceptance is all about accepting what is. What is in terms of being a targeted person or a person within a group that is historically oppressed, what is is often anger, pain, fear. What is can also be a great deal of convolutedness in terms of your sense of being and adjusting that being to the environment to such a degree that you can lose your sense of what you are with no conditions because of the continuous calculation that can come with being in this position...the continuous "flavor" of self-consciousness that can come with being in this position.

So, acceptance in this case would mean accepting all of that. Acceptance never means that you must deny, dismiss, or ignore your reactions, your reality, your truth. Put more simply, acceptance never means you have to accept or you must accept your oppressors, their behavior, the injustices, and so forth. It never means that. It means you accept where you are right now and what is true for you right now. That is the pathway to agape.

Many of our students often misunderstand this goal of acceptance. For example, misunderstanding this goal would mean, and this is not the only factor that would feed into ingratiation, but many of our students misunderstand acceptance and think that it means ingratiation, that you must force yourself, so to speak, to be accepting. This will never work. You can only be where you are. And even if you intellectually try to impose a position on yourself, try to accept before you are actually accepting, you will know the difference. Your bodies will know the difference between false acceptance, ingratiation, and true acceptance.

We think that some of the most successful fragments from within oppressed groups, successful in the sense of resisting oppression and making an impact on politics and legislation and real world impact in the lives of the oppressed groups and beyond. Many of these fragments are able to accept their own anger, their own pain, even their own fear in the face of their reality, as well as accepting "the fight," so to speak and "the long road ahead," so to speak, of that fight. They do not split themselves. They own their passion. They own their hate, even. This allows them to be whole as they choose to do what they do in response to the oppression.

More specifically to your question about the ingratiation, from within this context, sometimes making the choice to cooperate or express yourself in certain ways, or to even hide your true feelings, would not be ingratiation, but an actual wise choice in the face of a very real threat. This is not ingratiation.

Cary: That's good to know.

MEntity: It is only ingratiation when there is no real threat. Sometimes you will not know if there is a real threat or not, and this can of course feed into patterns of ingratiation that have nothing to do with real threat.

Cary: Yeah, this is starting to sound complicated.

MEntity: Yes.

Cary: Should we then not be worried whether or not we are in ingratiation? Like if I have to, you know, anticipate that I need to change my hair to get a job or...or hide, you know, who I'm dating to not get fired, but then if I meet someone new and I don't know at all, I'm gonna default to doing what I think is safe. But then until I know the situation, I'm not going to know if I'm in ingratiation or not.

MEntity: Think of it this way, and we will use one of your examples-you would like to change your hair color or change your hairstyle, and you fear that this may have negative repercussions with your work and employment. You want to make the decision, but you find that it is extremely hard to do so. You are torn. You are racking your brain. This is a conundrum. You are getting and seeking counsel from friends trying to make this decision, and you ultimately end up with or land at the conclusion for the moment that you just cannot do it because you do not want to take the risk. This would be acceptance aiming for agape and not ingratiation because you are accepting where you are now.

Cary: Ok

MEntity: This will actually open you up to more possibilities. For example, you may get the impulse to speak with your boss about this, to actually see if the threat is real. This is just one possibility among many. But we think you can see the difference in our example and description between forcing yourself to accept that you must not make the change you would like to make even though it upsets you and not making the change because you accept that you are afraid of the risk. And that is simply where you are at the moment.

And this has to be a moment-by-moment affair, so to speak. You can speculate about a moment in the future or even retrospectively analyze a decision or choice having to do with [this goal of acceptance], but you can really only become clear in the moment, as you can only become clear about what truth is for you in the moment.

Cary: Ok, I think I understand. Is it ok to move on to the next question, or do you have more to say?

MEntity: Yes, of course it is ok to move on.

Cary: Ok.

MEntity: We always have more to say.

Cary: Ok, Avi had a question about how stubbornness worked from the perspective of a historically oppressed group. I don't have more details about exactly what she wanted to know, but that was one of the things that she brought up.

MEntity: How stubbornness works for historically oppressed groups?

Cary: Mmhm.

MEntity: The chief feature of stubbornness?

Cary: Yes.

[pause]

MEntity: Stubbornness is, as we have said, as we have taught, the defense against the fear of change or the fear of the new and unknown. So, rather than acknowledging the fear and evaluating if this fear of the unknown, this fear of change, is necessary in most cases, is something that needs to be defended against the reality of change, the reality of the unknown, stubbornness makes fragments dig-in their heels and say no to what is a natural part of life...which is change and the fear of change.

For oppressed groups...one pattern that we can see in terms of this chief feature and how it is either chosen by individual fragments within the group or simply related to by the group itself, even if it is not technically a chosen chief feature by various fragments within the group, is that there can be, of course, this defense that comes into play, this defense that is chosen and used sometimes by fragments in oppressed groups as a means to secure the level of privileges that are already in existence. Privileges, safety, security, that already currently exist within their circumstances, rather than pushing or fighting to participate with changes because the risk of the unknown, the fear of the unknown, the possibility of things becoming worse is simply too great.

Quite specifically, the worse case scenario for most fragments within oppressed groups is death. So it is this kind of thinking: "Well, I am alive. Death would be worse. So I will say no. I don't know what the change will bring".

We are not sure of the specific angle from which Avi posed this question or what specifically she wanted us to communicate about in regards to this question, so we are just choosing our own angle and sharing general patterns that we can share when we look into this.

Cary: What you're saying so far makes sense. And it's not something that I had thought about, but now that you're saying it, it makes perfect sense. So, thank you. I think she'll probably find value in what you're saying now. But if you don't have more to say, then I'll move on to the next question.

MEntity: We can also say that stubbornness comes into play with certain fragments within oppressed groups in the sense of spinning their wheels from the opposite direction for those that are willing to fight and resist and push for changes and to reach into the unknown due to their vision of what is possible, what is right in terms of justice and equality and changing circumstances for the group. But there are cases where these fragments will be in much activity and spinning their wheels, so to speak, and this is very individual and must be looked at in individual cases in terms of the fragment's relationship to stubbornness, but in the case of using the chief feature as a defense and a protection, it would be the case of these fragments pushing, pushing, pushing, blocking out all feedback, resisting listening which could be very beneficial to manifesting more of their vision and allowing that ideal to coalesce into form over time. But the defense of stubbornness keeps them butting their heads against a brick wall, so to speak, when they would very likely be more successful with stopping and allowing change and the unknown and the new to come in ways that they simply do not expect or think about or foresee.

As you can see, with everything we have shared, these two points that we are looking at with stubbornness and oppressed groups, the mechanics of stubbornness, and the essence of this chief feature, why it is operating and how, is the same. It is simply the context that is different.

Cary: I have a follow-up question, then. Are there particular chief features or goals or attitudes that people in oppressed groups tend to use over and over again? Does that make sense? Like in comparison to non-oppressed groups, what overleaves -

MEntity: Yes, we understand. No, there is no discernible pattern we can see here because essence's perspective before each lifetime, by the time essence becomes very good at designing personalities anyway, essence is choosing from a perspective that is very much aware of truth, love, and beauty, very much aware of evolution, very much aware of probability and possibility, the balancing of karma, its interests, its agreements, etc., that each individual fragment is choosing its overleaves from this, for lack of a better word at the moment through our channel, "higher perspective". You would think that there would be more of a pattern for choosing these overleaves, but this would be from the perspective of the personality already in the lifetime and not that of essence outside of the lifetime.

So we see that with all oppressed groups all around the world the choices in overleaves still tend to match the overall percentages in terms of selection of overleaves that we can see in the collective. For example, in the collective, observation, growth, acceptance, are very popular. This is still the case within oppressed groups, as well.

We think what may be more specifically related to your question or the context of your question is that of the manifestation of essence.

Those within oppressed groups have a different set of challenges with manifesting essence than those who are not. Manifesting essence does not necessarily come easy in any of the younger souled ages, but the manifestation of essence for those fragments within oppressed groups is simply another layer added onto this understanding.

Manifesting essence is about being one's self, self acceptance, and about acknowledging the existence of the self beyond the moment. So you can see how a fragment within an oppressed group might be challenged more so than another fragment in this regard.

Cary: And to be honest, manifesting essence is just not something that I have ever focused on because...it seems like...it's too much to worry about. I have other things to worry about. Manifesting essence is just low on the priority list.

And I don't know-

MEntity: Manifesting essence is never something that needs to be "worried about". Manifesting essence is a natural part of life. One does not ever need to have the concept of being one's self or manifesting essence to manifest essence.

In other words, manifesting essence happens quite naturally when any fragment learns to acknowledge their individuality apart from the family (3rd internal monad process), when they free themselves from imprinting that does not serve their own definition of self (4th Internal Monad processing), and when they free themselves from even their own ideas of who they are (5th Internal Monad processing). These monadal processes are moved through and can be moved through without any conscious awareness of our teaching or the language used to describe such matters. And a fragment might never assess their journey in terms of manifesting their essence and yet still move through these processes.

You may be able to see that even within your own position within your own life and your own life experience, that had you never heard of The Michael Teachings you would still relate to the journey and processing around being yourself, being true to yourself. And this is in relation to not only your cultural context but within every context. Your family, for example. Your friends. Sexuality. Creativity. Communication. It is across the board.

Cary: This is sounding like a topic for a larger session. Um, I think there will be a lot of questions about this...um...I appreciate-

MEntity: Yes.

Cary: -what has been said so far, um, but I would like to move on to a couple more questions, if that's ok?

MEntity: Yes.

Cary: Ok. Um, so let's switch gears a little bit, well not a little bit-a lot. Um, previously you had said that, uh, an essence is attracted to a location to reincarnate into over and over again because of their connection with the ley lines and that ley lines are like chakras...um, and so I'm wondering...and they create vortices...and so I'm wondering if particular regions or cities or areas have a certain energy or feeling that attracts certain types of people? So for example, I think like Taos, New Mexico, maybe attracts old souls who are interested in spirituality or something like that and different regions just have like different flavors...so I'm wondering if that's because of the chakra energy or the ley line energy or vortices...how does that work?

MEntity: Yes, that is one factor but there are others. It is one factor that is considered by essence as essence is planning the lifetime or even as impulses from essence within the lifetime as personality evolves through its choices. However, there are simply too many other factors to be considered to make it the priority because everything is so relative in terms of what essence is interested in and what it hopes to accomplish, so to speak, for the lifetime. How it wants to begin the lifetime and how the lifetime is set up through agreements and the overleaves, the family, the location at the birth, etc.

We would say that more so than the particular flavor of a particular place that has to do with the energetics, so to speak, of the place, having to do with the ley lines and "vibrations" of a location, the resonance of a location, even more than that for priority for essence would be the agreements and the proximity of other fragments that are important for the intentions of essence.

This is becoming somewhat less important because of how your world is evolving with the use of technology and the internet and social media, etc. But even so, this is still of greatest priority to essence when choosing a location, whether outside of the lifetime or within the lifetime working with personality's choices.

Cary: So, do the vortices correspond to different meanings like chakras do?

MEntity: We are able to assign themes to locations in connection with these vortices and ley lines just as we are with just about anything. We can use the overleaf system. We can, of course, use concepts that are beyond our overleaf system to describe these themes. So, yes, this would be valid.

Cary: Can you give me an example of one location, like, say, New York City?

MEntity: If we are using the chakra system, the 7 chakra system, we would say that New York City, in terms of the patterns that are generated with its particular resonance of ley lines and vortices, in relation to fragments that are drawn to this city, [excluding] all the other factors we have mentioned, it has a strong 3rd chakra and throat chakra resonance. Which we could also translate into "personal power and self-determination" [3rd chakra] and "hearing and speaking one's truth and creativity through intellectual expression" [6th/throat chakra].

Cary: That sounds exactly like New York City. This is very interesting. I feel like this will also be a topic for further exploration. Um, do you have anything else to say about this, or can I move on to the next question?

MEntity: We always have more to say, so you may move on.

Cary: Ok, so my next question is, um, I'm wondering how many different countries are there currently [where] people are channeling you? Where is the Michael Entity being channeled on Earth?

MEntity: In terms of those consciously channeling us, meaning they know who we are, whether they are using the name of our last fragment to cycle off or not, those channels would be in every continent except for Antarctica. And there are those channels that are also channeling us on those same continents but not necessarily consciously.

Correction: they are working with us but not necessarily consciously.

Cary: That's interesting. Ok, which continent has the most people that are consciously channeling you?

MEntity: That would be Europe and America.

Cary: Ok, thank you. Nick wanted me to let him know about the time. It has been fifty-five minutes since we started. So, I don't know what he wants to do next, but he wanted a time check. So, it's currently 12:49pm where I am. So, 10:49am where he is?

And I have one more question. And I think this will be the last question. I'm gonna ask a personal question just because it's about dreams. Years ago I had a series of dreams that involved my friend Chris. And the first dream it was-in real life we're friends. In the dream we went through an entire relationship. And in each dream was a different stage of the relationship. So, in the first dream we got together and by the last dream, we got a divorce. And I'm wondering, if these were a series of symbolic dreams or if I was dreaming about a parallel self...and was this, did this relationship actually happen in another parallel? Do you have any insights into these dreams?

MEntity: We missed the first part of your question due to losing focus through our channel. If you could repeat it please?

Cary: Yeah, each...I had a series of dreams. And in the first dream, we had gotten together. Um, and each dream that I had after that was a progressive stage in the relationship. In real life we were friends, but in the dreams, we were together. So, I'm wondering is it possible-were these dreams about a parallel self, or were these dreams symbolic.

MEntity: We understand. Both.

Cary: Both...

MEntity: They were symbolic in the sense that your resonance to them and remembrance of them (as you know not all dreams are remembered), so your remembrance of them, we think, had to do with your processing at the time, your processing on two main levels: one level specifically having to do with intimacy and relationships and what could have been and on another level processing around what could have been in a much more general sense in terms of life.

But yes, parallels do exist where you are in relationship with this fragment. So that is why we said both.

Cary: Oh, I see. That's...how will I be able to tell if I'm dreaming about a parallel life?

MEntity: You will not always be able to. What we were just about to say is that the dream that you remembered was not completely snapshots or like a video of the parallel, but pieces that were integrated into the dream that were very much pieces or segments from the parallel. It is almost as if, on one level, essence was aware of the parallels, of course, while you in the dream state and the subconscious (for lack of a better word through our channel at the moment) in creating the dream, were picking up on this resonance, therefore constructing the dream around these bits and pieces from essence, if that makes sense?

Cary: It does.

MEntity: So that much of the framework and some of the plot-line was very much valid. But not the entire dream or dreaming or dreams.

You will not always be able to tell. But in your waking state when you get glimpses of a parallel, it will be hard NOT to tell. It can also be hard not to tell in the dreaming state because looking into a parallel in a more specific way than what you were doing at the time, can also feel like astral dreams in the ways we have described previously to our students, which we of course can revisit at another time.

We will conclude here for today.

Cary: Thank you, Michael.

MEntity: Goodbye to each of you and good day.