^There are those who claim bravery and there are those who are actually brave. And then there are those who are simply willing to consciously and lovingly respond to every situation they encounter through a willingness to engage with every type of creature, understanding their (own) actual invulnerability. The encounter with the spider was an explicit test to find where on that parameter-set you presently are. It does no good to self-recriminate. Such things are a present condition. If you wish to learn to love that particular species of spider you will have to go to its territory and meet it there. We do not necessarily recommend that, for that would constitute an invasion of its territory, for which there is no great gain to either party. To confront it in your imagination is effective and to learn of its habits to the degree they are known is probably sufficient, for you are unlikely to encounter one again.
Nevertheless the opportunity was seized in order to shock you out of your complacency, for you have undeniably become complacent in your approach to the natural world. Not only that, but to the spiritual world as well. That such a relatively tiny creature could so alarm you is evidence of a lack resolution of that acquired fear and it is an example of the extent to which an extremely uncomfortable method of death can echo down into another present life in such a way as to subconsciously condition behaviour.
There is little to be gained …
P I'll negate that prior part-sentence due to the leftwards trajectory by which it arrived to my awareness. Rightward focus is easily subverted, it seems.
^It is advisable to actively and consciously confront all such items of fear within the personality so as to eliminate the limits to love. We can begin this now if you wish?
P And I do so wish. … What I'm getting is detailed imagery of a large spider foraging on the forest floor. And it is as if I'm just about small enough to sit on its back. Or at least if not myself, my point of observation. And I think the significant aspect of this is the close attention it has to its very local environment, wandering about in the dark so as to not be prey for its own mortal enemies seeking to make a meal of it. Retiring at dawn, backing into a burrow, waiting for the day to pass. Not a web-building spider, a different species from what I killed, I think, but perhaps representative of that class, knowing how to act within its environment and constrained in its awareness of other life forms around it.
^And we simulate this examination to enable the complete lack of knowledge of, regard concerning humans, to be observed as completely absent from its life. Having never met a human before, that spider last night had no idea what to do and was as frightened and confused as you were. A compassionate act would have been to place it outside again in its natural environment. It did not intend to come into your house - we guided it there. It is that important to explore the limits of your willingness to face the unknown that we placed a creature who had already bred and was at its full development to confront you in yours. Using the language of the sacred, it was a sacred opportunity for an introduction. Your brutality did not serve you. And so it is with every creature, frightened by confronting the unknown. Every creature faces the question “will I survive this day or not? Am I prepared to meet my demise? Have I bred in order to leave behind others in my place?”
Your lack of progeny is of no consequence. Its lack of progeny was, for you who would conquer the Earth are doing exactly that, to the cost, again and again, of multiple life forms unable to provide for their own continuity both as individual and species. And so is played out a small drama in a remote location in a remote country to echo those larger dramas carried out daily internationally whereby wild-life is displaced and destroyed through habitat infringement or complete destruction with no thought for cooperative living, but only dominance by competition.
The human is out-breeding most other species. It must stop. The international ethos of population control is a required self-discipline. We recommend that the very tactics by which population constraint of species comprising pest or harm to humans, such as releasing sterile members into a population to take up the activity of breeding with a known outcome is exactly what is required in the human population. This will be controversial and we do not care. It is the only effective constraint. The human is without a control species to limit, in a natural way, that is, by predation, the burgeoning human population. Therefore, understanding dynamics well, to apply that knowledge to the self-limitation of the species by proclaiming that the fecundity of the species exceeds the capacity of the planet to support it, therefore in genuine concern for the rights of all other species, the only valid act is to self-limit your own population in order to leave space for the balance of the species. This will be an arduous and multi-generational task. It is absolutely required, and we do not hold back on our language here. The techniques are available. They must be used. For who in good conscience would wish the beauties of this planet, the opportunities for every other life form both macroscopic and microscopic to be so crushed into oblivion as to have no space to survive, to have no environmental niche remaining for their occupancy, to have no chance to live out their life to its proper conclusion as individuals and species. Are you going to be so blind, so self-focussed, so willing to bulldoze all before you as to render the entire planet a desert in your stupidity, greed and disrespect!!!
The solution is obvious. Take the medicine. Be disciplined. Educate to achieve this. And if not to educate, then to sterilise, by force if necessary. For is it not what you do to others? Exterminate all in your path?
And so this small vignette of confronting between highly unequal species in the sense of potential dominance and willingness to control others is a small example comprising one member of just one species. The activities of the human have similar impact upon millions or billions of species internationally.
How cruel is that?
How self-serving is that?
How unjust is that?
How disrespectful is that?!!!
So this has been an opportunity to make some clear statements about the impact of the human on other life forms. It is repeated daily everywhere on the planet for all intents and purposes. Even the pattern of activity comprising a stress on all other populations by the changes in climatic distribution, requiring a species to migrate or die due to the changes in the location of temperature zones currently initiated. And it will take centuries to recover from that. So these are the magnitude of the changes that you have wrought upon this planet, unthinkingly, unaware, blindly seeking to maximise your dominance, to invade the space occupied by other species in their natural territorial distribution, to use the technology available to you to multiply your impact by the energy consumption at your command. This is alienation of life to dangerous degree. We urge restraint in your own best interests and the interests of the myriad of other creatures whom you displace routinely because you give them no rights to voice their preferences. There is no such thing as a dumb creature and yet that is part of your rhetoric of disrespect.
This is an ethical dilemma of major dimensions to your species. Consider it well.
P Bloody hell !!! :-(
07:30 Discussion. Very cold! Knocked sideways into unfamiliar emotional territory, one way or another. Feeling a bit disturbed and jumpy! ^We come into this zone in order to not only promote but to provoke our agenda. It is with your agreement that we do this. You are a pawn of ours in the positive senses to which you have agreed to. There is nothing wrong. It is our capacity to influence your life in the ways you have agreed to let us that has enabled a useful opportunity to be not only created but continued and this is the continuation of your role to which you have agreed. There is nothing wrong. It is to our great advantage that this happens, that your generosity is sufficient to enable these things and by your willingness to respond, to convey into humanity that which it has asked for. So reminding you of this is part of our attempt to quell your fears, to bring you back to a condition of comfort, for it is not our intention to alarm you unnecessarily. A little, yes, but for not longer than is appropriate. And so it is sufficient and already achieved. It is what you contracted before your life began, to submit to in the interests of your species as well as personally. So this is the outworking of your life plan. Welcome it. We come on this occasion in order to convey a broader discussion of the species dilemmas imposed by the expansionary nature of the human across the surface of the planet. This is effectively and could be regarded as, a professorial lecture to backward humanity. Take heed, for it will affect you all. What was said moments ago about the only available option for the species 'human' to so self-limit their population growth as to restore it to one tenth its current size is made in deadly earnest, one could say, because of the billions yet unborn who would remain unborn, were the required policy to be adopted. The compassion missing by which to allow every other species their opportunities to self-regulate, one by another, thereby fulfilling their ecological niches and not to be swamped by the plague of humans upon the planet, is a required discipline, as we have said. It will be unpopular in the same way as the Chinese imposed self-restraint has been unpopular and yet tolerated at the same time, precisely because it is an imposition from a political level inaccessible to them to effectively change. It has been imposed by top-down command. It will be similarly necessary for every other population group to accept as probably unpopular imposed discipline, whereby there is a strategy generated from the highest levels and probably by the coming World Council, that in the interests of not only humanity in the long term but also in respect for every other species, visible and invisible for whatever reason, that self-restraint by population control, using whatever mix of techniques is deemed appropriate, to so promulgate that message, and using force if required, to constrain the future growth rate into a future population reduction. There is a stark choice available. You can choose between self-restraint and starvation. Which do you choose? The fecundity of the planet in terms of traditional and non-traditional food sources has been thoroughly explored across the millennia. There is nothing unknown about what can be consumed as food by the human rat. For that is its functional equivalent in consumption patterns. The omnivore has proven its capacity to survive across multiple species. The omnivores compete with one another and with each other, as the human programs for rodent control attest. A related choice for the human is to consider the relative merits of self-preservation in their own interest, preservation of all other species by self-restraint on the part of the human, and the ethics of the balance between those positions. When the human population was one billion there was plenty of opportunity for all other species to survive and flourish, occupying their own environmental niches and position in the food chain. And so it was at all lower population levels for the human. At ten times that population magnitude, there is now severe impact in many places across the globe whereby other life forms are limited in practical ways by the claimed space of the human displacing them from their survival. An ethical human will recognise that situation and giving respect to all other species, will find gentle and humane ways to restore the condition of the human population to a sustainable balance. And we suggest that a one billion population level be the target. What is required is vigorous promotion of the zero-child family. The fact that this individual has chosen exactly that for his life pattern is irrelevant on a personal level and yet indicates, through the impact of the discussion concerning population in the 1970s, as an illustration of the potential impact of such idea promulgation internationally, that ethically-minded individuals can respond. The difficulty is that ethically-minded individuals are thereby rendered into a prospective zero concentration in the resulting population mix. And so it is insufficient to utilise only that technique for population limitation on the part of the human. And so all of the techniques well known and understood in the field of advertising and social control will need to be adequately funded in order to shift the opinion towards human fecundity and make the prospect of a human birth a sought-after privilege, not a right. And if this smacks of eugenics, then let it. The situation is now so far from balance and with the prospects of an acceleration of human population even yet to be exceeded, there is necessarily, in accumulated international wisdom and understanding about the restoration of balance across the entire face of the planet, to be accorded the highest levels of support and funding. It will not happen easily. It will take two hundred years, but it is required. For the alternative is starvation, as we have said. And let that be sufficient motivation to drive the adoption of the necessary policies, mandatorily imposed on the international community by their council of wise elders, for most individuals have insufficient breadth of understanding and capacity for self-control. The Chinese decision will become lauded in the future as the first example of self-discipline in human population regime. With that we end our environmental lecture. P I did not see all this coming at all !!
Peter Calvert - AgapeSchoolinz