Welcome to the new chapter and higher demands. Today’s post is dedicated to those who understand the level of their participation in collective growth, as well as those responsible for managing or leading collective clusters at a global level. We will continue to use terminology already introduced in previous posts, and will refer to understandings already presented there. This post can inform predominantly those who are familiar with my understanding, views and level of engagement.
I was prompted to share after having observed developments on the ‘international’ scene for a while, specifically how governments and individual representatives approach change. More often than not I am rather perplexed. Not with the amount of complexity which is being revealed as we continue into political unknowns but with the disregard, oversimplification or misinterpretation of complexities ‘inherited’ in socio-political structures. The so called international, human relations have built ‘around’ them but are a different matter.
At an individual, diplomatic level, we have to do with agreements but it seems these are rarely accompanied by understanding. I doubt understanding is ever promoted, rather discouraged. Before honing in on potentialities of individual presence, I’ll focus on the structural realities, specific for what used to be known as political. The main aim is to familiarise ourselves with complexities intimately enough not to be intimidated or overwhelmed when we are asked to assimilate, recognise and implement them at the higher rate.
The fragment I’ll work with is conditioning of concepts at the level of ideology and institution, its operation on vertical and horizontal axis. I will refer to third, fifth and sixth densities. The conditioning refers only to the collective ‘psyche’ of ‘societies’ or nations. The only example I can give is theoretical and I hope this will suffice to map out the vision.
Humans claim their superiority over other species because they have mind or ability to reason. Unlike other species however, human mind had been specifically moulded or conditioned through language as this is how we acquire understanding in traditional way. Anything which humans are met with, either in the physical or conceptual (reality/world/sphere) is filtered through this net of language imprinted in their mind structure. The whole education system is based on the ability of humans to read and write. Whether this ability makes one more sophisticated compared to ‘untrained’ minds is yet to be known.
Through centuries, social, civic and relational lives of humans have been conditioned to perceive themselves in a context of environment unfamiliar to their essence. What is important to keep in mind is that we do not perceive, let alone consider anything beyond that which we had given existence to in ‘our world’.
In collective ‘human’ mind, structures on a conceptual level are stretched horizontally and loop or lock with each other. So, we can see a ‘net’ of what people breathe in and out as democracy locked with what is historically charged as fascism. These then interlock or ‘hook’ vertically with denser or lesser structures of institutions (denser as structurally less complex). Each institution used to have a model or operated on a model relative to the timeline it was created for or which it was to serve. Let us remember the timelines are collapsing. The institutions usually serve themselves and feed back to themselves, fulfilling their own conditioning. Some people recognise this structure as system but systems also serve ideological conditioning. We will see that a structure whose existence was based on prevention of war has no foundation once the weapons are disabled. If it continues to argue for the old foundation it will only exasperate conditions which it was to prevent.
For the most part humans are at the mercy of these structures. Collective human hysteria, anger and displacement don’t affect these structures, only humans themselves.
There are two issues to consider when dealing with social mind conditioning shaped through language.
Firstly, as was hinted in January last year languages occupy different fractals of universal ‘awareness’ spiral. They will be imprinted on ‘a’ fractal relative (that is fractal which is ‘informing’ a timeline) to a timeline therefore a reality. From a human perspective, it would be a perception, filtering or understanding of reality. It is easy to see for example that western and Arabic understandings rarely gel. Representatives of various ideologies push or force ‘the other’ to make a leap jump in understanding, which in conditions of hostility, aggression and violence will never happen. In the most favourable conditions these jumps would be rare. The ‘knowers’ of two or more languages are sometimes equipped to make the bridges between conditioned realities but rarely with the universe itself. We will touch on this in the next blog post.
Secondly, and this is in addition to and inclusive of the above, social conditioning is cemented for the most part in third and fourth densities where fragmentation, ‘solidity’ and partiality predominate the space and condition those bound to/inhabiting it. In fifth dimension conditioning can be seen but doesn’t dominate or subordinate the space or Beings coming or forming into/from that space. The mind in fifth dimension is free of perceiving reality through conditioning and is able to receive ‘what is’ in its environment. Below I’ll try to illustrate why residing in fifth dimension might be of pivotal importance (if not the fundamental requirement or condition) for anyone responsible for collective transitions on a conceptual structural level as well as the physical plane.
Awareness doesn’t really ‘communicate’ with us, it’s a human concept or invention. Awareness is. Reality is presented in awareness through what human mind receives as numbers, which only for or by human mind is translated into information. No ‘numerical’ sequences or waves which are ‘broken’, inconsistent with their context, source or space will ever enter awareness or will be imprinted in awareness as the said numeric sequence. It is not the property, characteristic or ‘competence’ of awareness to sustain incoherence. What had happened to human mind which allowed the level of incoherence we experience today to exist in its environment is for the reader to decide or discover.
In sixth density reality structure presents itself as numerical sequence. It can be received directly as such in any density including the third. However linguistic conditioning prevents humans from creating directly from harmony into their manifested experience. Language encoding (as symbols, regardless of the alphabet) and numerical wave are almost never compatible, they very rarely match in value and for the most part don’t ‘recognise’ each other or the information each element carries. Until I’m proven different, I’ll share that numbers are mostly neutral in their ‘appearance’ and value while language is extremely charged with human engagement or symbolism assigned to language. This influences the vibrational scale making it even more ‘difficult’ to create any connection. Because only conditioning will magnetise itself at different levels and to varying degrees, frictions at collective human level are self-perpetuated.
However, understanding grows within presence of essence. One cannot repeat anything often enough or explain anything clearly enough for the understanding to be had. These are occasionally successful while explaining systems. Numericals can be only received and understood within presence. I will write more about quality presence required for successful negotiations at a later stage. For the time being consider that political and institutional structures as we know them have been shaped through conditioning. This conditioning has almost no sticking point with the harmony of numerical waves of coherent realities. Where is the point of transition? Why would it be important to recognise it?
Do conceptual structures interlock due to magnetisation? Why are their expressions in the physical rarely relevant to or promoting growth?
Additional points to consider: do nations have distinct numeric or only linguistic encodings? Do territories? Do the encodings overlap or interlock? How could we use magnetisation of conditioning to ‘our advantage’ during transitions and beyond? Would we have to?