Full Transcript: 2009-12-13 – Open Floor

December 13, 2009
Troy Tolley, Channel

MICHAEL SPEAKS – Open Floor

[Michael Entity] Hello to each of you. We are here.

[Question] Hello, Michael. 1) Who was this mysterious Mikao Usui who created the modern Reiki System? 2) What were his overleaves? 3) From your perspective, what is this REIKI or SPIRITUAL ENERGY that practitioners channel…4) what are the factors that have made this practice so popular around the world?

[Michael Entity] For purposes of this format of exchange, we will share a brief response to each of the questions.

The fragment known as Mikao appears to be a Warrior-cast Priest who recognized the validity of subtle energies and their capacity for being harnessed and directed. The energy that is harnessed and directed is not unique to the practice called “Reiki,” but that system does help bring tangible tools to the process of using the energy. The same energy could be said to be shared from the exchange of laughter, awe, and happiness or pleasure.

The modern system referred to as “Reiki” has become highly political and hierarchical in many circles, but we see that this has begun to deconstruct and return to its roots in many ways. Both the political structure and this deconstruction have their flaws.

The political structure is a false hierarchy of learning that can bring about false healers who have gained credibility by simply paying enough money to buy a label. The deconstructing of this political structure requires little more than reading a book and can bring about delusional exchanges of “healing” that are little more than nice thoughts. Knowing the extremes of that spectrum, we would say that the only valid method for developing the strengths capable for use of energy in this way would be through practice, feedback, and tangible evidence of effect.

The energy that is used is the basic “life force” of your universe. This life force could be understood through the analogy of a computer screen that allows for a cursor to move through the pixels and light, showing up as itself wherever it is, but literally connected entirely to everything on that screen. “Reiki” then could be said to be that affect that allows for the repair of a pixel, or pixels, bringing light back, so to speak, to areas of the screen that have dimmed or have gone out.

In the same way that a piano can be played by any of you, so can Reiki (or energetic healing) be practiced. However, to continue the analogy, in the same way that one can simply peck at the keys, or pound on the keys to make noise, so too can some “healers” generate energy that has no effect, or only brings irritation. And in the same way that one can learn to play a piano beautifully on one’s own, through an instructor, or through a hierarchical fee plan, so can healing be learned. The piano and the noise it generates is up to the player, and how that player learns to play is up to the player. It just so happens that “Reiki” has come to be a recognizable system, and for that matter can lend itself as a strong platform for the work that a healer might wish to do.

No direct harm can come from false healers, but irritation, and distraction from legitimate care, can certainly have effects.

[Question] I’d like to know something about the Lemurians and their cycle off that you mentioned to me as happening 35,000 years ago. You said they were “a sentient species who cycled off en masse”, and that this was profound for my cadre (c1).
[Comment] I’d like to know how an entire sentient species can have simultaneous cycling-off
[Question] did we run them off?

[Michael Entity] The Lemurians were a species that were of a finer density than your human bodies, and some may have remembered them as “etheric,” or as having “Light Bodies,” but they were more like the luminescent “jelly-fish” of your ocean. They were a sentience living through very delicate bodies and this lent them to isolation and insularity away from other species. Their process of cycling off would be akin to how you understand a reunited entity moving from the Astral to the Causal in its evolution.

Their species was few in number, relatively speaking, and their lives were of great length, structured tightly in groups, so that large groups would reach a point of cycling off at the same time. We say “at the same time,” but we mean this in terms of relative perception of time; it could take several years for the exit of a group, but once it started, it was an exponential process. Some of our students who remember the Lemurians were deeply affected by the exit of the last of the Lemurian groups.

[Question] So Ramtha was a jellyfish-like entity?

[Michael Entity] No. Ramtha is a conglomeration of the channel’s own higher self (Essence), her ego, and then some legitimate guidance by a cycled-off entity of Human sentience. We wish to point out that the conglomeration we describe as “ramtha” does not diminish the value of what is taught to those who find it meaningful. It just happens that the Sage/King entity enjoys theatrics as their Medium.

[Question] So, they weren’t going through the Soul Age Levels while on earth — but were more like using earth in an Astral-like manner?

[Michael Entity] No, they progressed in Soul Age as any other sentient species extant, but progressed in groups so that the cycling off for each was in conjunction with masses of other fragments.

[Question] So we did have some interaction clearly, even if they were isolated?

[Michael Entity] Yes, there was a great deal of interaction between your species, but in measured and highly-structured ways.

[Question] oh, so none of us ever actually had lives as lemurians?

[Michael Entity] Not that we know of. To switch bodies in such a way is not something that is very appealling to sentience, unless there are hundreds of years of integration and communication between the species.

[Question] Contrary to what Micheal teaches I feel that sometimes my guides tap into my future, sometimes seemingly to a future that just happens, please comment on this phenomenon. Time is an illusion is it not?

[Michael Entity] What you experience is not in contradiction to our teaching, and we understand what you describe. We refer to these as Sequences and Vectors. These are events that, when lined up and feasible, fall like dominoes in a momentum toward an end. It is not predestination, anymore than a line of dominoes are guaranteed to fall perfectly every time, but the lining up, or the Sequences and Vectors, do tend to bring about fairly predictable paths.

[Question] sequences?, please elaborate

[Michael Entity] A Sequence is an arrangement of Agreements or Events that create a pattern toward an end result. A Vector is that “point of no return” so to speak, that is a mathematical momentum toward that end result.

Time is only an “illusion” when you are not experiencing it. It is a disservice to pretend that the Physical Plane is void of the experience of Time. If you have Emotions, you experience Time. So while you, as Personality, must take your next steps in Time, your Essence does not have the same constrictions and can work to arrange probabilities in ways that are appealling to your Personality; that is, if the Personality is manifesting Essence. Even your Personality is not restricted entirely by the function of Time, as it has Imagination as a source for planning, memory, and choice.

[Question] Good afternoon Michael; Yesterday evening we were discussing the “close but no cigar” meetings between concurrents. I would like you to elaborate on what occurs when one of your concurrents dies…does the Essence’s other concurrents “pick up” where that one interests, queries, lessons etc “leave off” this lifetime,in other words sort of an assimilation?

[Michael Entity] In most cases, no. The lives of Concurrents are their own, and though Essence will absorb the experiences from all Concurrents, it does not shift the life of one onto the life of another. There would be little point to that. However, in some cases the Personality of one Concurrent becomes aware of the validity of the concept of Concurrents and that can open that Personality to exploring the life of another Concurrent in some way, either through Imagination, or through bleedthrough.

[Question] bleedthrough?

[Michael Entity] Yes, bleedthrough; a natural exchange of energy that comes from intimacy. In other words, it is no different than the experience of feeling resonance with a past life when that life resonates to a current life.

[Question] a cosmology question :) – the Universe is said to be 14 billion years old. Recognizing the problem with ‘time’, when were the cadres/entities ‘cast’ out from Tao in relationship to the creation of this Universe? Before, during, or after? (I have been told my essence/soul is also 14 billion ‘years’ old -I am curious how this ‘fits’).

[Michael Entity] Cadres and Entities are cast over and over within a Universe with every return to Tao, which includes the choice of your Essence’s new Role, new Entity, new Cadre, etc for every Grand Cycle. The measurement of time for that Universe and its first casting of Entities is always relative to the Planetary System of the Sentience at the time of such a question.

[Question] the earth is said to be just over 4 billion years old so we were cast ‘last’ 4 billion years ago? Where does the 14 billion ‘age’ come in? or was this in relationship to a prior planetary system of sentience?

[Michael Entity] What we mean is that if we were answering this question for another fragment in another planetary system with a different measurement of time, we would have to answer with a very different scale. In terms of time measurement as can be understood in any practical sense, we can safely say that your (and our) current Sentience is at least 14 billion years old, “give or take” a billion or so. Keep in mind, however, that your ROLE may not be as “old” since you have returned to Tao multiple times in Grand Cycles.

[Question] Since there are/were 3 of us present that are from Entity 6 of Cadre 2 may I have any Biographical information that you have easy access to along with perhaps a Theme or Task for this particular Entity? If that question is too broad, feel free to pick and choose what you think may be helpful.

[Michael Entity] It could be said that a common denominator, or theme, among Cadre 2, Entity 6 is that of SENSITIVITY. This Sensitivity can show up in different ways that range from crippling sensitivity to profound healing capabilities. This particular Entity is “touched” by life and experiences in ways that are often difficult to understand by other fragments. This particular Entity is often seen as the “open wound” of the Cadre, where the greatest traumas and extremes are drawn in by the fragments. This openness to life in such a sensitive manner can also lead to an awareness of subtleties that, when harnessed and implemented, can come across as works of “miracles” or profound transformation for those within proximity of that fragment’s life.

[Question] Since this is a 6 numbered entity, is that reflective in its Priestly energies in any way?

[Michael Entity] It is true there would be “priestly” qualities inherent in the dynamic of any Entity 6, lending it a deep Compassion or a strong Zeal. In addition to that mathematical dynamic, Entity 6 emphasizes the spectrum of experiences between the negative pole of Connection and the positive pole of Harmony. In Connection, the fragments of any Entity 6 may find themselves in positions that pivot other lives, or that they may move from one support or social circle to another throughout the life, always drawing a line of connections among fragments or groups like a “connect-the-dot” exploration. In Harmony, the fragments no longer find themselves splintered among various parts of the life, and/or fragmented by relationships to various people in the life, but find that everything plays a part in an overall Harmony.

There is much more that could be said, but we feel this little bit will help add to the understanding of the dynamics of this Entity.

[Question] I am wondering about alkaline water. I’ve been reading about adding alkaline drops to water or getting a water ionizer. Is this just hype? Or is it a helpful, healthful concept? Water Ionizers, btw, are very expensive. Do alkanization drops do similar things–if any? P.S. I know our channel isn’t thrilled with health questions. But I trust his ability to step aside.

[Michael Entity] As far as we can see, most water is already alkanized to a degree that would have benefit, if benefit is valid. We do not see that this is the case, but may often be just the opposite if the alkanizing is high. There are several populations already ingesting high levels of alkaline water on long-term bases, and we see this as having little effect in terms of improved health.

We think that this would be a matter of individual diagnosis in terms of an individual’s “ph” levels, and that in those cases there are balancing remedies that might include alkaline drops, or antacid remedies. We do know that “ph” balance in the blood is important, and that this is a function of the kidneys in a way that can be measured. In that regard, it would be fairly easy to have a diagnosis, if it is of concern.

The consumption of various greens and vegetables as a large part of the diet can help to minimize the acidity of blood that can come with age. It is not that alkanizing of water (or diet) is not important, but that it is important only for specific individuals in the same way that any remedy would be.

[Question] You’ve discussed “templates,” and in an answer to me, you said, “Once that flexible template is in place, any Entity or Cadre can “play” the role for any group or individual as a means to teach, giving rise to a multitude of variations.” You said you’ve played a role as both Ra and the Delphi Oracle. Are you using a template or playing a role when you work through channels at this time in your teaching history?

[Michael Entity] We no longer have to play roles or use templates, except through those channels who wish to speak on our behalf, instead of allowing us to speak for ourselves. We do not mind, though. In those cases, it could be said that we are, in fact, using a template, but not in the sense that we were speaking about in your quote of us from a previous exchange. Our “voice” is just as valid among those channels who speak on our behalf, when the speaking is reflective of our teaching.

[Question] How would you speak for yourself? What would that be like?

[Michael Entity] When it is “our voice” vs the voice of the channel on our behalf, there is little discrepancy from the consistent build of our teaching, especially in a way that would identify a channel as unique to that discrepancy for any great length of time. There will always be new additions to our teaching in a way that only one or two channels deliver initially, but the valid additions propagate. This does not mean that those discrepancies are not valid as their own teaching, or that they are in conflict with our teaching, but it is one of the ways for discerning the authenticity of our “voice,” if that is of interest to a student.

[Question] so is it just personal preference when we think something “sounds” more like you?

[Michael Entity] How we “sound” is far less important than what is claimed that we are saying.

We do have a kind of “check list” for validation of our voice through a channel that any student can use for navigating the various channels, regardless of what we “sound” like. We will include this in the final transcript for this chat. This check list would be one that does NOT reflect the validity of the information that a channel is conveying, as the information may have validity of its own regardless of it’s consistency or lack of consistency with our evolving teaching, but only as a means to discern the proximity and clarity of contact with us and our intentions.

Navigating the validity of channels and their proximity and clarity of contact with us can be complicated; we have “channels” who actually do not channel us but who speak consistently and accurately on our behalf, and we have channels who work directly with us who distort the information to such a degree that this information only serves to distract from our teaching.

The exploration of such topics as this can be “dangerous” territory for some, and it is not an exploration that can be undertaken accurately without a high level of intellectual and emotional maturity, as it can easily prompt the younger imprinting of hierarchy, competition, and conflict. When we say that it can be “dangerous territory,” we are not speaking in terms of caution or concern, because with or without our suggestions for validation, the younger imprinting will find its ways into our circles of students. We were merely speaking to the concern that some may have about any process for validating the authenticity of a channel if one were to be in place. There is great fear in that regard, though our students will eventually find it to be an important, and non-threatening process, at some point when the younger imprinting is shed. In other parallels where we work with you, the process of validation is as important and as uncomplicated as validating a surgeon’s claims.

Without the process of validation, the door is wide open for us to work with a wide swath of students and non-students, but it minimizes much of the potential for actual learning. Without the process of validation there is also a consistent division nurtured among the various channels as certain groups form around the discrepancies that are unique to a channel, which then undermines much of the point of our teaching. Validation is vital on many levels, but only for those who choose for that to be a relevant ingredient in their process of learning and discerning.

Many have not considered the possibilities beyond the current courtesies that increase such variations and gaps among the channels.

We will conclude here. Good night to each of you. Goodbye.

A BASIC CHECKLIST for validating the clarity, consistency, and presence of Michael through a person claiming to channel Michael, regardless of the “voice” being used:

We will never tell you what to do.

We will never predict.

We will never speak to you in ways that only seek to comfort you.

We do not use affectionate language as a means of socializing, or as a means to appeal to you.

We will never shame you.

We will never do the work of your life for you.

We teach a philosophy that naturally encourages study and practice, if that philosophy is going to be valid, but it will not do the work of your life for you, or make your life easier. Only your study and implementation of the teaching can do such a thing.

We refer to Past Lives as a means to increase your capacity for choice in the current life, but never as a means to simply explain away your conditions and experiences.

We will never teach that your current life is a result of, or an imposition from, your Past Lives, but that your most relevant Past Lives are because of your current life choices.

Our teaching is an evolving body that builds upon itself, but does not replace or displace itself. We do expand upon concepts that are often previously conveyed or interpreted as concluded, but this expansion is not a replacement or displacement, and will only add dimension that is consistent to the evolution.

When we introduce a new aspect of our teaching, it propagates among our channels and does not become unique to any one channel for any great length of time.

We do not make sensational, urgent, or conditional announcements.

We do not do healing, or “energy work,” as this is a form of interference and potential karma.

We do not work with any other entity in any way as any means to communicate or convey our teaching.

We come to all who ask, but this does not mean we are heard, understood, or clearly communicated.

We come to all who ask, but this does not mean that we come through any channel who claims he or she is channeling us.

We and our teaching cannot be misrepresented because it is either us and our teaching, or it is not; we and the teaching are either heard clearly, or not.

We will always trust that you will hear what you most need or want to hear.

We will never restrict our communication to only what you want to hear, and we will never impose upon you what we see as your needing to hear.

We cannot access private information about any fragment. Private information in the Akashic Records is as private as the individual Personality deems it to be, until that Personality deems it otherwise.

Individual Personalities will always be the authority over their own information.

Overleaves are not private information.

Accessing the Akashic Records is part of our study, and your questions help us in that process. You cannot ask your questions, or for Overleaves, too many times.

We do not evade or avoid questions that seek to help a student in a process of validation.

We do not require questionnaires, birth information, or photographs as a means to access your Overleaves; that is a tool for the channel, not for us.

Our channels are never displaced by us, but only merge with us as a means of communicating for us. There will always be a percentage of consciousness of the channel contributing to even the clearest of information, accurately or inaccurately.

Everything we teach extends from the premise that every fragment carries the primary tool of Choice.

We will always emphasize the tool of Choice as your most empowering tool.
We state that “all is choice,” but this does not preclude the responsibility of learning how to choose in ways that contribute to you and your species evolution.

We make the statement that “all is choice” as a fact of existence, not as a statement of permission.

We are not out to save the world, have no interest in recruiting students, and do not find it necessary to alter our teachings in a way that allows for consumption by the masses.

We do not expect you to take this check list at face value, but we offer it as a means to bring to light the patterns of consistency that establish the strength of our proximity to you through a channel, keeping in mind that the lack of proximity means only a lack of proximity. It does not have any bearing on the validity, or lack of validity, of a channel’s teaching or his or her interpretation of our teaching.