Sunday, November 15, 2015
Day 93: Children Crossing over to Heaven - Talk with Bernard, Lifi and Veno Part 2
Fidelis found an old recording that was done when a visitor came to the farm with her two very young daughters. In this discussion with Bernard and Sunette as Lifi and Veno they open up points about children and parenting. I will be transcribing the interview and share in parts here. The following is Part 2. To read Part 1, click here. Enjoy!
Jozien: For me it makes sense when I, when I realised that
it’s not maybe ownership but she just wants to experience what the other child
is experiencing. And it’s actually still for me, but that’s how I see it, some
kind of ‘pure’.
Bernard: Let’s look at it, how we experience it when a child
dies.
When a child dies and crosses over into the dimensions, the
experience is different. Explain that.
Sunette: Yes, their experience is different from the
perspective that their immediacy within their directive principle, Equal and
One, is absolute. In other words, there is no
Bernard: There is an inherent ‘purity’.
Sunette: Yes, there is, in children. But it’s interesting
because it’s particular children that have experienced only a short life.
Meaning, two or three, four – seven years – even up to eleven. That’s always
constantly been recycled in the system within the past. So there’s been a
purity that’s existed and that hmm let me maybe start from the beginning point.
There’s been children that’s been recycled within the system
that only always lived ages up to 4 to 11. Eleven was the max, but there
weren’t many up to eleven. Mainly from birth, even in the womb, till about 7
years of age. And they were always recycled, meaning they always died at very,
very young.
That purity was always attempted to be suppressed. That was
the attempt of the entire Unified Consciousness Field System design: to
suppress purity, natural expression.
It was, a way to balance the equation, balance the polarity
because you had the extent where there was no purity, meaning where beings were
complete, absolute, total integrated systems. But that natural pure expression
still existed. The point of where beings if they were to actually up in age,
there would be a chance of them breaking through. Breaking through the systems,
breaking through the mind and actually coming through realization with regards
to what is really happening within existence. Of course, that would be
dangerous from the entire enslavement control system design of the Mind
Consciousness System and the Unified Field. So, that part, that purity, that
natural expression that does exist was contained within children that died at
young ages and just recycled from that perspective. So that’s where the main,
pure, natural expression is contained – so that
Bernard: It doesn’t spill into the possibility of an older
person to access it.
Sunette: yes.
So then the other beings that would grow of age would be the
ones that were processed into long, long, long, long lives over and over and
over again – until their very beingness, their very nature was integrated as
the system to the point where they couldn’t exist without it. The system needed
them as much as they needed the system.
Bernard: So a child normally doesn’t have that, because the
parents stand in as a system initially. The child is still picking up language,
basic systems of control within society and so on – so the child is not
initially part of the system. That is why they will lose their teeth. The whole
teething process is letting go of purity and then the permanent teeth come in,
because the programs and the blueprints from the system are within the teeth
and the enamel, in that which is hardened.
Sunette: And that’s how it physically manifests. The
blueprint, your program.
Bernard: So that’s how that operates in terms of why it is
so fascinating.
Sunette: So from that perspective why children that would
die very young is different when they cross over, is because of that particular
perspective. Their very nature, their being is that expression, is not reliant,
it’s not dependent, it’s not defined, it is not integrated, amalgamated with
and as the system.
Bernard: So they die like at that stage normally also don’t
go through the process in the dimensions. They’re immediately effective. So
they are not part of the dimensional process. And from the beginning of
process, many children were never there, part of what happened in heaven, they
never returned for some time to heaven. They were taken out of the Soul
Construct and only became, what’s it now – maybe two and a half years ago? They
suddenly emerged to take part.
Sunette: So that’s basically when everyone else was ready.
Bernard: So children, to a degree, were protected from what
happened in the system as the system became more manifested. Which is
fascinating.
So now, how does one actually deal with a child, in terms of
wanting to experience? But quite a complexity, practicality problem.
To be continued...
Tuesday, November 3, 2015
Day 92: Toys and Self-Discovery - Talk with Bernard, Lifi and Veno Part 1
Fidelis found an old recording that was done when a visitor came to the farm with her two very young daughters. In this discussion with Bernard and Sunette as Lifi and Veno they open up points about children and parenting. I will be transcribing the interview and share in parts here. Enjoy!
Jozien has got some questions and Lifi and Veno are going to answer them and see who pops through. Okay, your first question
Jozien: My first question is that, what I experience here, Sunette told me about Zina and Loulou – where Zina would always want to play with the toy which other kids are playing with. It doesn’t make sense for me to say to her like “It’s not possible”, she wants to play with the same toy.
Then Sunette said to me that because she wants to experience the same thing as the other kid and that actually she wants to experience the ‘equality’ if you can call it that. And that’s something that I never even considered as a parent. Because the only thing I did was trying to tell her “This is not your toy” or “you have your own toys” and just not understanding what she was actually asking. Does that make sense?
Sunette: Yes, I can see what you are saying.
Situations with regards to that is still – for example yes, the child would for example see another child play with its toy and would and they would kind of be seeing in a self-experience way what the child is experiencing with the toy and they for themselves would like to discover that experience, from that perspective. But, what that is actually revealing is how the child still at that age, is interpreting that experience to be related to or linked to the toy. It’s not yet linked to an actual self-expression experience. Meaning that, ‘who I am’ is not determined according to a toy, or the experience of me is not determined according to a toy, or the expression of me is not determined according to the toy. It’s the basic design with regards to how children are related in relationship to or towards physical manifestations of this world. Where they themselves are linked to something or where their experience of themselves is linked to something. It’s not a natural self-expression, here. However, the other side of the coin, is two perspectives. There’s two manifestations, two experiences which are happening. But the prominent one is the one where they are still linking experience to the toy. Underneath that though, what is being experienced is that particular point of self-discovery from a certain perspective, where they see the child playing with a toy, they see that experience, that expression that the being is going through and they would like to discover that within themselves. But, what is happening with the mind integration, is that it’s being linked to the toy. Not to self.
Bernard: Let’s look at the side of the coin.
What must also be understood is that the whole design of Consciousness as it exists is one of inequality. And the fact that one child plays with the toy and the other one sees it, and now desires to play with it or to experience themselves already creates a separation and a form of competition and conflict. The conflict will then manifest normally between the parent and the child, and not between the child without the toy and the child with the toy. The child will then ask the parent for the toy. They’ll sometimes try and take the toy to experience it, but they will also eventually blame the parent for not having a toy. Because they don’t understand why what is in this world is not equally available for all. And that is then simplistically slowly but surely being integrated and also the parent participates in that extensively then saying “But it’s not yours” – it’s a form of ownership and a form of separation and a form of inequality that is being taught, because we are in a system with many things but nobody can afford to have all the things and give their children all the experiences with every single thing.
Sunette: And understand, the child doesn’t see it as “It is yours / It is mine”.
Bernard: That concept doesn’t exist yet.
To be continued
Subscribe to:
Posts
(Atom)
Popular Posts
-
I was reading in some of the pregnancy/baby magazines that I have and it struck me how many females who read the magazines and send in thei...
-
I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have gone into a negative energetically charged experience when seeing the p... -
Another dimension which I would like to open up in relation to my previous blog Day 69: Introducing Toys & Expansive Play, is that o... -
Lately I have not been feeling as nauseous. Where I used to feel mildly nauseous all throughout the day, I’m now mostly normal during ...
Subscribe and Follow
recent posts
footer social
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
