The Ascension and Moral - The Ascension Explained from My Point of View

The Ascension is the most common name for what is believed to be an evolutionary shift of the collective consciousness on Earth. As it has been talked about for very long and the belief that humankind is going from one level of existance to another is very widespread, then it would certainly be one of the biggest scams of all time if it wasn't true! The background that I have in Ken Wilber's philosophy helps me understand that consciousness does evolve just as anything else, and that there are stages humans go through individually as well as on a collective level. What follows here are some notes on the moral aspect of it all, but they are my personal speculations and not forged in stone. I have yet to encounter anyone who really seems to know what will happen. It does seem as if we're right in the middle of a transformative process, however, as chaos and confusion is all around and people appear more selfish than ever when in fact we are supposed to become more heart centred. After all, selfishness is the epitome of individuality (establishing a firm sense of self), which is what last evolutionary phase has been all about. It occurred to me, that there's a very good ontological (basic) reason why a selfishness that borders on plain narcissism is at the very centre of attention these days. Selfishness is the heightened and extreme expression of individuality, and we are hopefully leaving a stage of evolution that is mainly about the development of ego. Of course it's kicking as much as it can if change is ahead. It usually gets darker just before dawn, doesn't it.

I have observed New Age people and their thoughts for quite some time as well and have been influenced by the movement in certain ways. I have, however, sometimes been taken aback by the way that simple common sense ways of being have been twisted to suit some purpose that appears rather self-indulgent if not conceited. Many have been boldly proposing that there's going to be a "suvival of the fittest" kind of scenario with a fascist twist unless I have misunderstood it; people who are spiritual enough will according to this all heal physically and emotionally quite quickly now and so they will be superior to those who cannot keep up. Considering how many people are out there without a clue about any evolutionary shift, this seems rather supercilious and unrealistic to me. I doubt that physical illness will magically disappear. Some illnesses are also not fixable. I'm not sure how but surely people will continue to be in the need of challenges that develop the soul? Now another challenge might be that of affluence. I am personally not very keen on all the propaganda that "you can have it all because you were really meant to" since there seems to be way too many pitfalls when people start wanting and grasping. Poverty is certainly not a great state of being and it can drag you down a great deal. In short; worrying about money or thinking about it all of the time seem to me like a rather negative and extreme pursuit that takes away awareness from more "noble" and constructive ideals such as compassion and altruism. These are after all what the ascension promises to imbue the collective consciousness with. I personally try and avoid extremes and go for the middle path whenever possible.

However, if you do have money it seems to me that you would be better off thinking what good you can do with it. Not saying you can't enjoy it yourself too, only that it might be better for you if you strike a balance and really think about the ethical aspects and how this situation can help you grow as a person. It seems to me that while actively growing you automatically pay service to the rest of the world/universe - many of those things come as a biproduct that you don't need to worry too much about nor try and control. This would be one of the beautys of self-development...

I've also encountered view points according to which at this point of the ascension there's a division between the ones who have chosen their standpoint and those who haven't. The first could with good conscience leave the latter alone to wallow in their misery. Trouble is... there is never (as far as I've seen) any definition of exactly who is what. How do you know that you're on the "right side"? In my opinion this creates a lot of stress and hyped up feelings in people who think that they need to show their supremacy 24/7 so as to show everyone and the universe that they are on the ascension boat. On the other hand people are often guilt ridden because they feel they don't match up with ideals that they've read about somewhere...

Again, most people are living their lives clueless of what's happening... maybe they are going through some inner processes of re-evaluation but it's hard to know for sure since only spiritual people are vocal about these things (and have a frame of reference). Surely we can't just dismiss people callously, according to some vague definition on who would fit the bill of being the devil's advocate? I've seen too many so-called spritual aspirants show really nasty sides of themselves to believe that all this would be so black and white. I'm not even convinced that Obama, who is almost deified, is solely on the side of the good. I think in the end mistakes will be made simply because he's human and the collective is affecting everybody. On the other hand, this guy has indeed dipped into the worst kind of chaos and we can only hope that there will be a new regime with a new value system.

So how to determine if you're someone who should step up and be a leader? Well, having gone through a long training in spiritual strength could possibly qualify you as someone with enough wisdom and stamina to stand up for sound values and face the ignorant without fear. I think it's something a person should be able to do on their own, since the idea of gathering disciples or followers seems to me very "old world" like (or "3D" as opposed to 4D or 5D as people often call the levels when referring to the shift). I think a person can be a leader in a less than obvious way. Not ruling out certain situations where leading people in a very concrete way might be necessary, but only hoping that such a person is truly beyond any desire to be admired or at least able to keep such desires in check. I don't think there are any obvious external signs of who could be that sort of person. I do think that to some extent, people still need to be led and that dismissing the one's who are ill or poor as not vibrating high enough is against all common sense about compassion and the basic unity of humanity. People should at least be made aware of their choices, but how is this going to take place? In short I'm troubled that too much selfishness is still ruling people's choices but let's just hope evolution will take its natural course regardless and that all these questions will be solved in a natural manner.

I think that if I were a person suddenly compelled to step into leadership I'd hope that the tasks would come to me naturally without any forcing on my part. We can wish all we wish... ultimately I do not think that a truly wise person will be able to resist the voice of conscience and do what they are supposed to do for the good of the whole. I (as the spiritual people who believe in the ascension) assume that people are inherently good and only clouded by ignorance. Being in touch with your authenticity and goodness would compel you to be a compassionate being, because your core is of a divine nature and divine in this case is defined as equal to love. The ignorance and false beliefs about reality and self would have dissipated. This state of being is often referred to as Christ consciousness.

In my humble opinion the ascension has to do with listening to internal voices as opposed to external ones. Take for instance religion: exoteric religion that relies on dogmas and rituals seems to be making way to a more widespread interest in esoteric religion, which again relies on contemplation through inner states of being (mysticism). The New Age resembles mysticism to a large extent as presented in the world religions throughout the ages. So one would assume that moral would become something that arises from the inner self rather than the typical old world need to be told what to do (as if we were children). If we're in transition right now, then one can only assume this transition is difficult, since taking responsibility for your inner states no matter what they are is a tough thing to do.

I thus conclude that an evolved being has an innate sense of moral which is connected to a deep insight into the oneness of all beings. The sense of oneness is also one of the things that esoteric beliefs strive towards. Oneness (non-dualism or the belief and experience that we are all one on a deeper level) is what would compel an evolved person to the highest good for the whole rather than seeking self-indulgent pleasures alone. Not saying though that this person cannot experience pleasure and joy, on the contrary. It would just be different from the kind emanated from selfishness (what people refer to as the simple "ego", an illusory self).

I think that as you evolve, paradoxes become more evident. You go from an either-or kind of thinking to embracing both-and, and from there it also continues in a sort of dialectic way. Thus there may be no contradiction regarding an inherent moral that compels you to do good for the whole of existance, and an individual feeling of pleasure in doing so.

Power in my opinion is not necessarily a sign of a highly evolved being, as power can be understood in too many ways. There is a lot of talk of being empowered vs disempowered, and sure these are important aspects of the transformation of self. But to put too much emphasis on power per se can in my opinion make the whole thing tip over.

Artwork: "All the World's a Stage...", artwork on paper by author, all rights reserved 1998

Avoiding Spiritual Elitism In Favour of Love

As I was reading the excerpt that accompanied Karen Bishop's latest energy alert I was a little taken a back - this time it was all about how people moving into higher frequencies will want to avoid the lower ones. The rest of the alert did in fact hit home as usual - there are many contradictions at play on the energetic level right now(check it out at

www.whatsuponplanetearth.com/latest.htm).

Anyhow, I got to thinking about this thing about avoidance. I understand KB's point but I think it could use some elaboration. Very often, people talk about how they don't respond to anger or they don't want to be close to such and such because this person drains them or whatever. It's all very well but this sort of talk sometimes has an aura of snobbism/spiritual elitism about it that I feel quite sad about. Who wants to hear that they are toxic - who wants to feel avoided? Then it occurred to me, that there are two ways in which to react in this manner; there is the high way and the low way. So my suggestion is that we examine the reasons why we feel repelled by certain people or things before lashing out at them. Again there are two options: you may not want to face the shadow issues that a certain person or situation is triggering in you, thus it is a case of denial which will certainly not be buried and forgotten. The other reason is very simply that you cannot relate to the lower energy anymore. Truth to say I find this latter one a bit difficult to fathom as I think that a fully enlightened person would have nothing to fear and would thus not have a need to 'stay away'. On our journey, however, I can understand that such feelings and experiences might occur. I truly believe that these are issues worth considering with great thought since we are supposed to be in this together - yes, TOGETHER!

It seems that there's a gray scale from impersonal to personal that matches our mirroring/learning processes. I am assuming that everything we encounter in the world is a mirror of sorts. So the confusing energies in a mall or massmeeting would be somewhat different thing to deal with than a confrontation with someone on an internet site (more or less semi-personal, for the most part) or the argument with a beloved/close person. Whereas it may be annoying for others to be around someone who's fussy about public energies, I presume it's usually easier to solve than hearing personal accusations about how we 'always' drain so and so because they "have" to read our "negative" comments on a site - yes, someone actually said this to me recently and I wondered, why does this person read my stuff if it "sucks her dry" and how can they throw an unspecific point about "negativity" in my face that is totally meaningless, let alone helpful! It's interesting what people feel they can throw at you on the internet, not having to take responsibility for the consequences. In any case, going up the ladder there are the cases in which people are obliged to deal with us for instance through work, or by encountering us within the family, and these are obviously the more tricky situations that should normally force us to take more responsibility for our actions. I admit when I was writing this blog I was mostly thinking of confrontations that concern other people's feelings.

After all, everyone's point of view is subjective so why go out and make it into an objective truth that would hurt others? I would put grace and discretion at the top of my list though I can't claim to be there myself yet (but I try). Some people just do this avoidance thing out of habit and a mental picture of the situation - I'd say in this case, ego rules. If you do it with a true sense of respect and kindness for those who are less fortunate/wise, juvenile or whatever, you can surely not go wrong... See what I mean? I myself find this thing very difficult to deal with so by no means am I an expert myself. It's not my place to say whether someone's choices are good ones, but my point is that we should try and be really sure of who and what we want to be. I've just noticed that other people's view of myself varies dramatically from person to person. That certainly speaks volumes to me!

I don't really think we can ever bypass the fact that our perception is subjective and so all our explanations are too, nor that everything mirrors our perception in one way or another. This would be the reason we, and only we, can take responsibility for our own perception. Yes? It doesn't mean that nobody else is concerned, of course, but primarily reality comes into being through us, ourselves.

To be accepted for who we are is crucial no matter what stage we are at, then it's another matter altogether whether we feel we can be around that person or not... I myself had to make a change on the relationship arena, I think that besides the general state of the energies, this relationship was contributing to a lot of my anxiety. It was tough because I feel so incredibly sorry for this person, but I had to... It happened just on the day KB said a change would occur for many of us though I didn't know it at that point. So I myself had to make a choice in which I still accept and love a person but I just can't be tied to them.

I see a peril in talking about energies in an elitist way that discounts the struggles some people have either because of the automatic workings of karma or challenges they have taken on in order to better understand humanity. Substitute "high frequencies" with "arian" and you have... you know what. However, I do recoqnize that now is a time to focus on our own well-being so that we can become stronger and better light workers in a world that is in an obvious state of confusion and chaos. All I'm asking is that we consider what our ultimate intentions truly are. Consider this: are all those who speak of oneness and unconditional love truly an example for others to follow?

Is there a point in time when we can really let go of watching ego-issues? It seems to me, that there are always ego-traps and the further we progress, the easier it may be to self-delude in some way, because we think ok, "I am now this and that, I am that I am for sure, so therefore I cannot have an ego-issue" - ah, ever more explanations to resort to! But can we be really sure that we have gained the level or status or whatever of an enlightened person who has no more ego-issues? How can we know our subconscious mind is empty? When are we truly authentic?

I would also like to point out that when we feel superior to another being and not willing to engage in closer contact with them due to their 'toxic' energies, there is always someone more evolved/superior to us who might find US rather undeveloped and naive or something to that effect... (most likely not judgmental though, if they are really far on their spiritual path). It is a very human trait to believe that we (me or a group of like-minded people) are at this moment at the height of evolution - even history can prove that. I also admit that I sometimes catch myself thinking that I can't put up with some "childish BS" (to borrow a line that was delivered to me today), but it is nonetheless not the kind of judgmental person I'd like to be! Besides, there is no way that we can truly determine where we or anyone else is at on their evolutionary chart, we are way too complex for that - and maybe way more complex than we can even imagine. Everything in this universe is surely relative. It is my belief that unconditional love can only exist when these truths have been firmly anchored in our consciousness. Where is your mind at today? ;-)

Post Scriptum: I think that all the varied opinions that my blog provoked already shows that this truly is an issue of a complexity and magnitude that needs attention and deep analysis. We can basically concieve of the idea of taking care of ourselves so as not to get dragged down into lower frequencies fairly easily (something I myself was warned against by an external source, and though I don't know if the source was for real an authority in the field it did make sense - the reason being that I am more of an empath than I actually realized myself). But putting this into practice or living the truth is not that easy. Since many of us are not 'there' yet ('there' a place where there is nothing more to fear, embracing unconditonal love with no more ego traps), we are still prone to judgmental thinking and so if something feels bad there is the instant label of 'toxic' or 'negative' or whatever. This is a subjective perception, of course, but I feel that people don't always remember or realize that. And so they usually also express their dislike. Now it seems innocent enough when it comes to mass gatherings and other chaotic places, but when it comes to people we are in touch with it would surely be a spiritual act to show some heartfelt respect for the level this person is on even if you don't wish to dwell there for long? No one can really know what's going on with someone else, so why assume anything - PLUS make someone feel bad??? Ego is always around somewhere and thus elitism is too. I have heard some horrifying viewpoints at times that sounded downright fascist (such as 'there will be a Darwinian selection of the healthiest and spritually fittest'). And yes, as you're suggesting, ego can also show as an excessive need (note that this is hard to point at objectively though) to reform and act as a missionary. I personally have a tendency to being a martyr though I don't think I'm a missionary - just as an example of various scenarious that I assume we all have.

Artwork: "Encounter Engenders Life", mixed media on paper by author 1998, all rights reserved