Don’t Label Sides as Right or Wrong Before You Understand Both Sides

Don’t Label Sides as Right or Wrong Before You Understand Both Sides

By Emerelda

Channel: A. S.

Posted on February 14, 2024

 

Dear people of Earth,

This is Emerelda speaking. As I shared in my previous two messages: I am a Pleiadian squad leader, roughly a sergeant in Earth terms, who was captured and then tortured and raped by reptilians for nearly a month before I was freed.

To the people who responded with kindness and empathy to my previous messages: from the bottom of my heart, thank you for that. It means a lot.

I would like to share something that isn’t an iron-clad law, but it is a rule of thumb that I find useful. It is the following:

If two sides are in a conflict, you can only determine who is right and who is wrong, and what methods are and aren’t acceptable, once you genuinely understand both perspectives.

Before you genuinely understand both perspectives, you don’t have enough information to determine who is right and who is wrong, and what methods are and aren’t acceptable.

Or to word it in another way: if your side is in a conflict with the other side, and you don’t fully understand the perspective of the other side, then you don’t have enough information to determine who is right and who is wrong, and what methods are and aren’t acceptable.

I mean right and wrong here in a practical, “what should we do” sense and not in a moralistic sense. Let me explain what I mean. Let’s say we’re debating immigration. Then I don’t think it’s helpful to ever label the anti-immigration side as morally good or morally evil. But after you understand both sides, I do think it can be valid to say the anti-immigration side is either practically right (i.e. we should indeed limit immigration) or practically wrong (i.e. we shouldn’t limit immigration).

Now, people love to claim that they understand the other side perfectly well, and people on the other side are just dumb or selfish or delusional or racists or virtue-signallers or whatever. And yes, that makes things very easy, doesn’t it? You understand them, they’re just stupid or evil, and therefore everything your side does is justified.

Of course, in reality, things usually aren’t so black and white.

A great way to understand the other side is to actually listen to them — and listen with the intention of understanding them, not listening with the intention of finding something they say that you can later attack.

How do you know that you understand the other side to a reasonable degree? Well, one great indicator is that you can sum up the strongest arguments for the other side, in a way that people on the other side would agree with. If you’re unsure about this, you can literally just ask the people on the other side: I’m trying to learn, do you think this is a fair summary of the strongest arguments for your side? If not, can you please explain what I am missing, or point me to some good sources? Most likely people would love it if you approached them in such a way.

Alternatively you can imagine that an extraterrestrial has just arrived on Earth, and she knows nothing about a certain debate. It’s up to you to tell her both sides of the argument in a fair and even-handed way, so that she can make up her own mind. How would you summarize both sides of the debate to her? If you can’t do better than say: “the other side believes this clearly wrong thing, because they’re dumb or selfish” then it may be time to do some research or to listen to someone from the other side.

Now, yes, absolutely there are some people who are wrong about something. However, even wrong people usually have one or two genuinely good points, or at least valid concerns that your side probably isn’t addressing. Maybe they’re proposing the wrong solution for their legitimate concern, but they may still have a legitimate concern. Can you perhaps find a better solution for their legitimate concern than what they are proposing?

That’s another indicator that you have a nuanced understanding: you agree that the other side has some reasonable points and has some amount of virtue somewhere and has some valid concerns that aren’t being addressed. Or you can see that people of your side sometimes unfairly stereotype or strawman the other side (“they’re all racists” or “they’re just virtue signalling, that’s all it is”).

Now, what I’ve been saying may sound logical on one hand. And yes, I think it is. On the other hand, it is also completely radical, because almost no one does this. The vast majority of people just learn one perspective, subconsciously label the people on the other side as evil or wrong without understanding them, and then go on a moral crusade. Or at least they quietly judge and label the other side.

For some reason, in Western society on Earth, it’s seen as cool to always confidently state a strong and not necessarily nuanced opinion about whatever topic currently happens to be discussed. I think this is a bit silly, because to a wise person, it’s much more impressive when someone says “I don’t know” than if they just jump on the moral barricades and start crusading for one side or the other.

And look, it’s perfectly okay to say “I don’t know.” It’s okay to not research everything, I get that you don’t have the time and energy for that. I would just like to invite you that until you understand both sides in a conflict, that you don’t label one side as right and one as wrong. Or if you must label, at least don’t hold onto that label too strongly. For example, you can say: “I think this side is right, but I don’t fully understand the other side, so I’m not completely sure.”

I would also like to invite you to not fall into the trap of thinking: “yes, Emerelda, you make a good point, but you don’t understand, in this situation innocents are dying. It’s an emergency. Therefore now is not the time to listen and study. Right now is the time to make bold statements and tell everyone that they must support my cause. Also, because it’s an emergency, everything my side does is justified and necessary.”

But the thing is, it’s likely that the other side ALSO views this as an emergency that justifies everything they do. And so, if you don’t understand the other side, then how can you possibly be sure that your side is right? Of course your side of the let’s say immigration debate feels that they have a pressing emergency, but the other side of the immigration debate also feels that they have a pressing emergency.

I’m not saying that you shouldn’t take action or have opinions. I’m just saying that before you do that, it’s good to first understand the other side.

After all, don’t you wish that all those wrong people on the other side had actually listened to your side before they started taking action? Well, be the change you wish to see in the world. Plus, as Hakann pointed out last week: listening to others actually does good in and of itself, because it makes them feel safer and therefore makes them more reasonable.

Let’s look at an example. Some parts of the American political left are trying to censor some parts of the American political right. Are they justified in doing that? I am inviting you to answer before continuing with this message.

Three, two, one…

Of course, you’re entirely free to think and act how you wish. I’ll just share my personal view.

Personally, I think a great answer would be: “I don’t know, I need to understand both political sides better before I can answer that.”

If you answered “yes” or “no” to the censorship being justified, then I would like to invite you to reflect on if you actually understand both political sides sufficiently to be able to answer this. I gave some indicators earlier in this message to evaluate if you understand the other side.

To those who would argue that censorship is always wrong, I would like to ask you: suppose that Stalin, or whoever you think is the worst possible political figure, looks likely to win the next election. If he enters office, liberty or democracy might be lost forever and millions might die. Do you think it’s acceptable to censor this person to prevent that?

In this situation, if you’re still against censorship, then you have a very clear moral value, and that’s entirely valid. However if in this situation you would be in favor of censorship, then I would like you to reflect that Trump is this kind of figure to many on the left. Now you can say that the left is completely wrong about Trump, but at least it’s good to understand the left’s perspective. Because then it’s no longer a conflict where one side says that censorship is always wrong and the other side feels misunderstood and like the other side isn’t listening. Then it becomes a discussion where the right-winger says: can you explain to me why you think Trump is so awful?

Again, even just listening to the other side is beneficial in and of itself.

Let’s look at another example: Israel versus Palestine. Everything in the following section is my opinion.

The pro-Israel (or pro-Zionist) side says: the only way we can be safe is through strong action against Hamas. If you try to stop us, you’re denying our right to defend ourselves, you’re denying our right to exist because we’re not secure in our existence unless we do this. You also don’t understand just how much anti-semitism is out there.

The other side alleges: Israel is committing a genocide right now, which can clearly be seen because they’re targeting hospitals and destroying agriculture and because they’re refusing to let in food and water and medicine. Also, Israeli decision makers are clearly calling for genocide and soldiers on the ground are echoing those words. Legally speaking, literally nothing justifies a genocide. There literally is never a justification for a genocide, no matter how bad the other side is, or what they do, or how threatened you feel. Therefore Israel must stop, because so many innocents are dying — and keep in mind that half of all Palestinians are children.

In this conflict, we see the thought pattern that I warned against earlier, which is that Israel labels itself (in my opinion) as good and virtuous and as the victims, and therefore everything it does is justified — without understanding the Palestinian side. Other countries do this too, but Israel is a very relevant example right now.

For example, torture is effectively legal in Israel, and Israel sees that as justified. Why? In my opinion, it’s because they started out by labeling themselves as virtuous and they never learned the Palestinian perspective. In my opinion, that is how they can effecitvely legalize torture, feel that they are justified in doing so, and still see themselves as the good guys.

This is something that I have a strong emotional reaction to, but I’ll try to discuss it in a level headed way.

I’m not saying that no Palestinian has ever tortured an Israeli person, but if Palestine tortured Israelis as regularly and habitually as Israel tortures Palestinians (in my opinion), then you would never hear the end of it. Whereas most people don’t even know that torture is effectively legal in Israel.

Imagine you’re a Palestinian. You’re arrested by Israel and dragged in front of an Israeli military court. You are surprised and ask, why am I in front of this military court? Well, it turns out that an acquaintance of yours got arrested by Israel’s secret police. They tortured her until she couldn’t take it anymore, and then to make the torture stop, she falsely claimed that you are guilty of some crime. And now this court treats that torture-extracted confession as legitimate proof against you. Good luck defending yourself from that.

Here is an Israeli article with the title “Tortured Into Confession: Two Palestinians Recount Hellish Interrogation”: 

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2022-05-23/ty-article/.premium/tortured-into-confession-two-palestinians-recount-hellish-interrogation/00000180-f6c5-d469-a5b4-f6fdd5cc0000

Here is an Israeli article with the title: “The Shin Bet [Israeli secret police] Breaks You. You’d Be Insane Not to Give a False Confession”: 

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2021-11-19/ty-article/.premium/the-shin-bet-breaks-you-youd-be-insane-not-to-give-a-false-confession/0000017f-ea57-da9b-a1ff-ee7fd9890000

According to 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/1/30/israels-shin-bet-to-face-first-ever-torture-probe : 

“Many Palestinians are jailed based on confessions either they or other Palestinians make during Shin Bet [Israeli secret police] questioning. Israeli military courts almost never examine how such confessions were obtained or whether they are reliable, say lawyers, contributing to a 99.7 percent conviction rate.”

That last article also gives some further context, including context that Israel supporters might want to point to, so you can read the entire article if you want to know more about this topic.

Now, I’m not saying that Palestinians have never done anything wrong. But I do have a pretty strong opinion about torture. Pointing out that some Palestnians do bad things too, which is true, doesn’t prove that Israel is morally right. That’s just the old false binary thinking pattern, where one side must always be good and one side must always be evil, and so if you show that the other side is evil then that automatically makes you good. No, that’s not how it works.

You don’t get to torture and, in my opinion, commit genocide and then claim the moral high ground. If you behave like that, then I think that at most you can argue that it’s a situation where both sides are in the wrong — and the other side being in the wrong doesn’t justify torture and, in my opinion, genocide. Nothing does.

But, sorry, I’ll try to keep my anger in check. I’ll go and take a deep breath.

So in my opinion: Israel thinks it has the right to torture Palestinians, and use confessions extracted through torture as evidence. Yet obviously, Israel doesn’t think that Palestinians have the right to torture Israelis, let alone use confessions extracted through torture as evidence.

In my opinion, this illustrates that if you start out by labeling yourself as virtuous and never learn the perspective of the other side, then you can end up doing some awful things and feel completely justified in doing so. Hence today’s message: before labeling one side as right and the other as wrong, learn both perspectives first.

Also note that once someone assumes that they’re the good guys or that they’re the victims, almost no evidence can sway them from that position, because everything gets interpreted through the lens of “well this is unfortunately necessary for us good people to protect ourselves.” It is emotionally comfortable and egoically pleasing to confirm your worldview and your self-image, after all. Even an international court saying that Israel may be committing genocide isn’t enough evidence to get Israel to stop, because in my opinion everything gets interpreted through the lens of “we’re virtuous, we’re victims, everything we do is justified. Therefore anyone standing against us must be evil in some way.”

Another important thing to note is that once you label the other side as being evil, their resistance starts looking like proof that they’re evil, when it wouldn’t look like that if you hadn’t started out by labeling them as evil. As Norman Finkelstein pointed out: if a Western person says: “give me liberty or give me death”, then that is a heroic and noble person. But if you start out by labeling Palestinians as being evil, then if they say the equivalent of “give me liberty or give me death”, suddenly that is proof that Palestinians are inherently evil, and they can’t be reasoned with, and that military operations are the only solution. I’m not saying that Palestinians are justified in killing Israeli citizens, they’re not. I’m just saying that I would seek to understand both sides before labeling one side as right and one side as wrong.

This principle doesn’t just go for the Israel – Palestine conflict, but in other situations as well. It applies in political debates. It applies if you get into a conflict at work. It also applies if both you and another guy want the same parking spot.

The Israel – Palestine situation also invites us to examine our underlying and unspoken values and assumptions, which is very useful to do if you intend to spend a lot of time on a certain issue. Because on paper, everyone agrees that a human life is a human life. But in my opinion, much of the pro-Israel side seems to silently view one Israeli life as being worth more than one Palestinian life. I know that people don’t want to say this out loud, but in my opinion, if Israelis genuinely thought that one Palestinian life was worth one Israeli life, then they wouldn’t be torturing Palestinians and using those confessions as proof. They wouldn’t be bombing Palestinian hospitals. They also wouldn’t be blocking food and water and medicine from entering Palestine.

However, keep in mind that the “don’t label sides as right or wrong before you understand both sides” invitation also applies to people who are hostile to Jews.

If your position is that Jews are evil, or that killing Israeli civilians is acceptable, then I would like to invite you to talk to some Jewish people and try to understand the Jewish perspective.

If a person does something bad, then the solution is to hold him or her accountable. It’s not to label everyone in his or her group as being evil.

If we’re going to say that collectively condemning Jews is acceptable, then Israel can say that it gets to collectively condemn Palestinians. Women can say that they get to collectively condemn men. People whose ancestors came from Sub-Saharan Africa can say that they get to collectively condemn white people. Europeans can say that they get to collectively condemn North Africans (the barbary pirates took a lot of Europeans as slaves). Obviously this kind of collective blaming isn’t the way forward.

On an energetic level, it’s also quite divisive and therefore stressful for all of humanity if one group goes “you must agree with me that Jews are evil, or you’re an IDF agent.” And the other group goes: “you must agree with me that Israel should get to defend itself in any way it sees fit, or you’re an antisemite.” This fierce energetic division is one thing that contributes to why many people are feeling tired or stressed right now. Although on 14 January we also started sending energy to directly activate your DNA, as I announced a few weeks ago, and many of you are feeling that as well.

Still this energetic division around Israel is also increasing the odds of world war three breaking out. To be sure, the dark controllers want people to have very fierce, extreme opinions about this topic. If you’re proclaiming that Jews are evil, then in my opinion you’re playing into the dark controller’s hands — because then people on the other side go: “those anti-Israel people are crazy, they can’t be reasoned with, we must back Israel unconditionally”. Also, fence-sitters will more likely side with the pro-Israeli side if the anti-Israeli side wants to condemn all Jews.

So, sure, criticize what Israel is doing. I have done so in this message. But I don’t think it’s helpful to criticize Jews. Of course, you have free will, but that is what I think.

Finally, the channeler isn’t a law expert but has noted that his country of The Netherlands seems to somewhat regularly sue people for perceived anti-semitic positions. For example, David Icke was banned from entering the channeler’s country, and Holocaust denial is illegal. Therefore shortly after October 7th, the channeler asked us galactics not to comment on the theory that Israel let the October 7th attacks happen or enabled them, or the theory that Hamas killed some Israelis but also Israel killed some Israelis, or the theory that the Hamas attack was in some ways understandable because of alleged Israeli attacks on the Al-Aqsa mosque. Because the channeler asked us not to comment on these theories one way or the other, we have not done so, in this message and past messages.

The channeler apologizes for not openly stating that he made this request to us. He promises that if he makes such a “please don’t discuss this” request to us in the future, that he will be open about that.

To be clear, this was the only such request that the channeler made, in the past and present, about this and other topics. Also, we want to note that us galactics also do not lie. At most, we will simply choose not to discuss a certain topic. If we say something, then that is what we mean.

So, that was today’s message. I hope this was helpful.

I very much hope that your situation will indeed improve somewhere during this year or the next, which is likely but not guaranteed. I almost feel guilty, sitting up here and living in comfort, while I know that back there on Earth, some people are currently going through what I went through.

You’re in my thoughts.

I’m not a psychologist. Still, I’m not actually sure that it is possible for a human being, whether Earth human or Pleiadian human, to feel fully connected and fully seen and fully happy, unless you are in a community where you regularly mind read each other and thus are fully seen and loved and accepted.

I can’t imagine how lonely you must feel.

This year or the next, my brothers and sisters and myself may be able to finally physically meet with the people of Earth. This again is quite likely but not guaranteed. We are all very much looking forward to that. It’s not just you who want to meet us, we also want to meet you. I think we will have an amazing time together.

Your star sister,

Emerelda

—-

Disclaimer: I am not denying the Holocaust. I am not denying the right of Israel, or the right of the Jewish people to exist. I am opposed to the murder of Israelis, by Hamas and other groups. I don’t think Jews should be killed or removed from the lands of Israel.

I actively discourage violence of all types. I also actively discourage discrimination of all types, including (but not limited to) discrimination against Jews.

Information in this message is for informational and educational and entertainment purposes. This message contains humor, parody, and satire.

There is a comment section. Comments do not necessarily reflect my views and opinions.

End disclaimer. Have a good week.

Emerelda 

https://www.youtube.com/...

 

For Era of Light

 

These channelings are exclusively submitted to EraofLight.com by the channeler. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to this original post.

 

 

The Afterlife and Selling Your Soul Clarification

The Afterlife and Selling Your Soul Clarification

By Emerelda

Channel: A. S.

Posted on February 12, 2024

 

Dear people of Earth,

This is Emerelda speaking. I greet you with empathy and love.

Last week Hakann made a remark about selling one’s soul. Someone in the comment section disagreed with Hakann’s statement. To that person: thank you for your comment, I appreciate it because it nudged me to discuss this topic in more detail.

As you may have realized: creation was set up with the central value of free will. Creation wasn’t set up with the central value of niceness, or comfort, or of people being protected from bad or destructive choices. Instead, it was set up with the central value of free will, and the amount of free will you can exercise is actually quite extreme when you think about it.

For example, I am a mother and I think it’s quite outrageous that a person is able to intentionally kill a baby. That is clearly a very destructive and hurtful choice. Yet, it is possible. You can do all kinds of horrible things to other people, and in general no law of nature or angel will step in to stop you.

Similarly, nothing in the universe stops you from using hard drugs, or stops you from drinking alcohol until it kills you. Nothing in the universe stops you from grabbing a knife and wounding or even mutilating yourself. I think this illustrates that creation is set up to allow for an extreme amount of free will, including allowing actions that are clearly destructive to others or yourself.

With this in mind, is it possible to make a deal with a demon along the lines of: “give me riches and fame now, and in exchange after this life I, as a soul, will agree to go to a dark place and / or serve you”? Yes, that is possible. You have an extreme amount of free will in creation, why wouldn’t this be possible? If you make such a deal, the demon will attempt to pull you down to a dark place after your death, feeling justified in doing so. And it will probably succeed in doing so. What would normally prevent a demon from trying to pull you down, will not protect you in this case because you made a free-will choice. And higher consciousness beings are pretty big on allowing people to make free-will choices, even destructive ones.

And that is what is called: selling your soul.

Now, selling your soul is not an irrevocable or a forever-process. Even after you do it, you can call on for example Jesus for help, and he will help you. Or if you raise your vibration and level of consciousness sufficiently through spiritual practice, you can end up in a situation where you can either resist being pulled down because the dark place doesn’t energetically fit you. Or if you already were pulled down you can become high-conscious enough that you just drift up and out of the dark place you were in. Or you can grow to become powerful enough that you can defeat and usurp the dark master you promised to serve.

Still, I don’t recommend selling your soul.

But yes, selling your soul is a real thing. You can do a search and note just how many people talk about or sing about selling their soul.

Now, yes, I do know what a metaphor is, but metaphors don’t spring up out of nothing. If selling your soul wasn’t possible, then the term “selling your soul” wouldn’t have any kind of emotional resonance — then that would just be a combination of words that no one would ever actually say, similar to how no one says the words “duplicating your soul.” Because, you know, duplicating your soul is impossible, which is why no one says the words “duplicating your soul.” Well, similarly, if there wasn’t such a thing as selling your soul, then no one would say those words, and instead people would talk about “selling your freedom” or “selling your principles” to refer to the idea of a person giving up their freedom or principles to become rich or famous.

That’s a good rule of thumb in general: if a term has emotional resonance, then there’s probably something real though possibly misunderstood there.

Now, maybe the words “selling your soul” create a picture in people’s minds of their soul being irrevocably lost forever. Maybe that is why some people have a strong reaction against this concept, why they perhaps feel that “selling your soul” doesn’t resonate to such a strong degree that they feel they can say it’s nonsense. Indeed: it is true that you selling your soul doesn’t mean that it’s irrevocably lost forever.

So, selling your soul is one thing you can do. Another thing you can do is what Elizabeth April called “selling your body.” That is when you make a deal, and a hostile extraterrestrial or a demon enters your body and pushes your soul to the back. Then you can do nothing but watch, as the demon or hostile extraterrestrial takes control of your body and starts moving it. If there is no intervention, you can remain like that for a long time or even until death, at which point you go to the afterlife as normal.

“Afterlife as normal” means that a nice person goes to a nice place, while a person who seriously harmed others goes to a still relatively pleasant but not as nice place. We’ll discuss why later in this message. Right now, I want to mention that no soul is sent to be tortured for eternity. That doesn’t happen. Hell, in that sense, doesn’t exist.

Now, what does exist is a real, physical series of caves underground, where physical demons and hostile extraterrestrials were hurting humans. Fortunately, those caves were cleared between 7 December 2020 and 28 April 2021, through the efforts of an exceptional Earth human lightworker plus angels plus the galactic confederation. The humans in those caves were rescued and the demons and hostile extraterrestrials were dealt with.

Those series of caves were the thing that gave the term “hell” its emotional resonance. Now, souls were never sent to those caves by the creator of the universe, but still, there were humans there and they were suffering terribly. Fortunately, no more — these are just empty caves now.

That was one of the mechanisms that the dark forces used to lower the vibration of humanity and actually that of the Earth itself: deep in the Earth, they made a group of humans suffer terribly and never again let them see the sun. Through the collective subconscious, this stressed out and dampened all Earth humans. Plus, the dark forces feed off suffering.

It makes me very happy that these Earth humans were freed. They’re currently guests of us, the galactic confederation, and they have recovered. Some of them joke that they went from hell to heaven, although I don’t think our society is quite heaven. Though it’s certainly a whole lot more pleasant than Earth.

I empathize with these people — although I also want to physically help you, who are still on Earth.

It’s not impossible that some of these rescued people will serve as ambassadors when it’s finally time for us to land, basically to say: “those extraterrestrials aren’t evil, they’re actually really nice.” But, of course, it’s up to them if they want to do this or not. Alternatively, maybe Hakann can do a peace dance to break the ice.

Earlier in this message I remarked that nice people go to a nice place after death, and people who seriously harmed others go to a still relatively pleasant but not as nice place. This isn’t actually to reward the righteous or to punish the wicked. The universe doesn’t try to reward the righteous or punish the wicked. The universe is set up with free will as the central value, remember, and hurting others is a valid path from a high perspective. Besides, even people who hurt others are still part of Source, and why would Source hurt parts of itself if they so-called misbehave? If anything, those parts need love and help, not punishment. That’s why the afterlife is relatively nice even for people who do bad things — souls need some rest and recuperation before reincarnating again, after all.

No, the reason why souls who hurt others in their last life go to a slightly less pleasant place, is because souls want to know what it’s like to be on the other side of that unpleasant experience. By knowing what it’s like to both do something unpleasant, and have that unpleasant thing done to them, they can gain soul growth and greater understanding.

So if Tom does something horrible to Anna in life, then in the afterlife Tom’s soul may experience having that thing done to him, or Tom’s soul can look through the eyes of Anna and feel what it was like for her.

Hence Tom can know what that unpleasant thing is like as both victim and perpetrator. This way, Tom can learn his lesson and complete the circle, you might say. And this isn’t the universe punishing the soul of Tom, this is Tom’s soul actually wanting greater soul growth — souls are more concerned with gaining soul growth than with comfort.

Then once Tom has learned this lesson, he can move up to a nicer afterlife, or reincarnate again. Or if Tom doesn’t learn that lesson, he can also just reincarnate again and perhaps learn his lessons in physical existence.

Your soul isn’t in resistance to you, for example, in your current life hurting people and thereby ending up in a less pleasant place after death. Similarly, your soul isn’t in resistance to you making a deal with a demon and thereby ending up in a significantly less pleasant place after death, which on Earth is often called “selling your soul.” You may be in resistance to that, but your soul is not. To your soul, it’s all just free-will choices, it’s all just existence and experiences. All paths are valid.

To you, ending up in a dark place after your death because you sold your soul seems like an absolute disaster. And sure, I indeed don’t recommend that. Yet to your soul, it just looks like another chapter in a very, very long journey back to Source.

I hope that was interesting. I enjoyed sharing this with you.

In empathy and love,

Your star sister,

Emerelda

Emerelda 

https://www.youtube.com/...

 

For Era of Light

 

These channelings are exclusively submitted to EraofLight.com by the channeler. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to this original post.

 

 

About “I am not good enough”

About “I am not good enough”

By Emerelda

Channel: A. S.

Posted on January 20, 2024

 

Hello,

This is Emerelda again. I communicated a message to you last week, titled “Emerelda: Life can be hard, please be kind to yourself.” If you missed that message, please read or listen to that one first.

Like last week’s message, this message may be a bit intense and will mention psychological after-effects of myself having been captured, tortured and raped by reptilians. Those psychological after-effects are not the focus of this message, but I will mention some of them as they become relevant.

To start off, I would like to share some intel.

The dark side or the service-to-self side often lives in denial and often underestimates and doesn’t understand the light. Yet even the dark side has realized that they’re losing their grip on Earth humans. And because your DNA comes from many galactic races and because of your experiences with the light and the dark, Earth humans have a huge psychic potential. You have the potential to become incredibly powerful at some point in the future. And Earth humans are on a path that is going to lead to most of you ultimately siding with the light.

Because of this, the reptilians recently attacked, around Earth and elsewhere. Their primary goal was to take control of Earth. After all, we had chased away or arrested most hostile galactics from Earth. The people who are currently oppressing you are mostly Earth humans.

We successfully defended you and ourselves from these reptilian attacks. However, we unfortunately took quite some casualties in the process. One friend of mine died, and one person died who was somewhere between a friend and an acquaintance of mine.

Personally I did a few things of military value by doing some coordination work in the rear, but I contributed less than I would have liked. I guess I’ll have to remind myself of one of last week’s lessons, which is that it doesn’t make sense to compare yourself to some theoretical standard. After all, most likely that theoretical standard isn’t actually based on anything real.

I contributed less than I would have liked because these battles were psychologically triggering for me. The galactic confederation’s military defenses were very solid. Yet I was petrified for a time by the irrational fear that we would lose, that I would be captured once again by reptilians and that they would continue doing the things to me that they did the last time they captured me.

I also horrified my family when they read in my mind the firm conviction that if any of us were close to being captured by reptilians, that I would end my life or the life of whatever family member of mine was about to be captured. There is no way that I am going to allow myself or anyone in my family to be captured by reptilians, ever again.

Fortunately, the galactic confederation won convincingly and we beat back these attacks. We had some tactical setbacks and local retreats in non-critical areas, but we are currently reversing these. By the time you get this message, we will probably have mostly or fully recaptured those areas.

The reptilians are quite good on a tactical level, but they neglect the strategic and operational levels. Or to put it in plainer terms: they’re ferocious fighters on an individual level. They’re also quite instinctively clever about winning battles. However they don’t work well or coordinate well together on any scale larger than a battlefield. They don’t think well in terms of a bigger strategic picture, and they don’t spend enough time thinking about logistics and formations supporting each other and positioning and control of critical areas and about consolidating captured positions. If they’re not immediately successful, they also can engage in backstabbing and fighting among themselves. A group of reptilians can fall apart if their leader dies. How effective reptilians are depends very much on whether or not they have a strong, smart, cunning leader.

I personally have had some resistance to R’Kok ever since my capture by reptilians. Yet R’Kok is still a very smart reptilian who, before he turned to the light, operated at the highest levels of reptilian society. And I must say, R’Kok gave a lot of very useful advice that saved quite a few lives. The one time I saw him recently, he seemed less down on himself and more in his element than usual, at least in that moment. So that’s good.

Hakann also did well, in as far as I can evaluate someone who is significantly higher in the military hierarchy than myself. The troops also love him, for understandable reasons. And if a soldier has to fight, it feels so much better to fight when you believe that the military decision-makers above you are competent and are making the right decisions.

Now, to be clear, our successful defense doesn’t mean that we’ll land tomorrow. Still, if these attacks had been successful in destroying our fleet around Earth, then reptilians would have taken control of Earth. They would likely then have killed 90% of Earth humans within six months and thoroughly enslaved the rest. If they had won these recent battles, they likely would have had enough reptiles on the ground to actually be able to do that.

To be fair, if the reptilians had beaten us, maybe Source or certain non-physical, very high-consciousness beings or collectives would have intervened directly. Generally these types of non-physical, very high consciousness beings or collectives don’t intervene directly if it’s not absolutely necessary. They prefer to let physical beings such as us deal with matters of physical reality, if at all possible.

So I guess it’s the old principle of “as above, so below.” Some of you want us to directly intervene on Earth in a big way, and so far we haven’t, and you’re suffering because of that. Similarly, on a slightly higher level, the same happens. Namely, some of us wished that non-physical higher consciousness beings would directly intervene to help us against the reptilian attacks, and they didn’t, and because of that we had quite some casualties.

On a positive note: “as above, so below” also implies that because destructive beings just lost on a more galactic level, they may very well also lose on Earth.

Of course, I am not saying that people should just sit on the couch and wait for other people to liberate Earth. I still recommend that you do your best in terms of your own inner work, and / or in terms of helping others or being kind to others. You can’t do more than your best, but you should do your best.

Meanwhile, we of the galactic confederation are not sitting still. We already were sending positive energy to Earth, mostly to raise your vibration and to raise the energy on Earth. Those energies had the effects of slowly awakening your dormant, so-called junk DNA, however that was more of a side-effect or a secondary benefit.

On 14 January of this year, we started sending energy to Earth that is directly and primarily aimed at awakening your dormant DNA, and thereby expanding your psychic powers and your inner knowing.

Because of this, the probability that Earth humans will actually free themselves in 2024 or 2025 has risen substantially. I’m not saying that this is guaranteed to happen, but I am saying that this is now substantially more likely. If Earth humans fail to do so, we still have our intervention plan ready.

Now, these new energies do not mean that everyone will be immediately fully unlocked. Rather, people will become more and more psychically unlocked over time. The great awakening, as it has been called, may accelerate even more.

For many of you, you won’t immediately be able to move objects with your mind, but you might notice your intuition or your dreams being a bit sharper. It may be good the coming months to practice listening to your inner guidance, if you’re not yet doing that already. Just make sure that you’re not confusing emotions with intuition, because while emotions are valid, they can also lead you astray. To distinguish between them, your intuition isn’t judgemental or fearful, while your emotions can be.

On the other hand, some of you are currently so emotionally blocked that this energy will take quite a long time to activate you in this way, and you won’t notice anything in the foreseeable future.

For those among you who are currently blocked, one good practice is to observe whatever comes up. And while this may sound obvious, few people do this consistently. Instead, people often go immediately inside the emotion or inside the thought without observing it first.

For example, a thought in someone might arise such as “John is a jerk” and that person will immediately take that as truth and start thinking about John indeed being a jerk. Instead, before immediately going into that thought and accepting it as real, it’s a good step to first observe that a thought has arisen that says that John is a jerk.

Because after all, it’s possible that John is indeed a jerk, and that is the proper thing to think about. But it’s also possible that John is a jerk, yet it’s still better to look inside rather than start pointing fingers at the outside world, even if justified. It’s also possible that John isn’t a jerk at all, and John just said something true that you emotionally didn’t like, and now your ego is projecting negative things onto John. It’s possible that John is indeed a jerk, but he’s also right. Or it’s possible that John is partly wrong but also partly right. Or it’s possible that John is a jerk, but you too were behaving in a bad way. Et cetera.

Hence, if a thought comes up, it’s more productive to observe that thought, and possibly observe the relevant context, rather than immediately accepting that thought as true and going inside that thought and thinking in those terms.

Also, when it comes to labeling others as bad or when judging others, it’s important to keep in mind that the natural state of people is to act with love and compassion and understanding towards others. It just doesn’t happen that a Pleiadian is raised in love and surrounded by kind people all his or her life, and then he or she randomly decides to start mistreating people. Hence, if someone else is not behaving lovingly, then there was some illusion or distortion or pain that they experienced. They may be wrong, they may be behaving unkindly or even destructively, but it’s also true that ultimately they have been hurt themselves and it’s good to keep that in mind too and have some compassion. This doesn’t mean that you don’t defend your boundaries, just that you also have compassion and treat the other person with as much love as possible.

After all, there have almost certainly been times when you acted in a less than ideal way because of pain or loneliness that you experienced earlier. In those situations, didn’t you want other people to treat you with love?

Admittedly, I myself sometimes have a hard time keeping this in mind. But it’s still true.

Note that a few things can be true at the same time. It’s true that some people are making free-will choices that are harming others. It’s true that they shouldn’t do so, from a conventional every-day perspective. It’s true that people have free will. It’s true that people have personal responsibility. It’s also true that people who hurt others have been hurt or have been confused themselves. All of these things are simultaneously true.

Often it happens that someone will discover a true and valuable and genuine perspective, and then they proclaim that only their perspective is the one true perspective, and everyone else must adopt their perspective too. When in reality, just because one perspective is true, doesn’t mean that other perspectives aren’t also true. People indeed have personal responsibility, and also it’s true that people who hurt others have been hurt themselves. Both are true.

It’s not helpful if a person comes around and proclaims for example personal responsibility to be the sole useful perspective and if that person tries to bulldoze all other perspectives. Because if someone only sees personal responsibility as the one true perspective, they can become callous and cold towards people who are struggling. Or if a person only sees “if someone acts badly, they have been hurt themselves” as the one true perspective, they can become naive and start supporting feel-good policies that are ultimately detrimental. It’s best to see both perspectives, and more besides.

For me, spirituality isn’t about finding the one true perspective and bulldozing all other perspectives. Spirituality is about being able to look at things from more and more perspectives.

For me, spirituality isn’t about finding the one, most spiritual part of yourself and suppressing anything that isn’t that. It’s not about saying that only inner work has value and that everything else is pointless. Spirituality isn’t a binary choice between either focusing 100% inwards or 100% outwards.

For me, spirituality is about observing more and more unseen parts of yourself and accepting that you have those, thereby shrinking your shadow. It’s not about pushing so-called bad things into your shadow because you refuse to accept that they are part of you, or because you refuse to accept that you have those interests or desires.

This doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t work on yourself. However, you can work on yourself from a place of love, or you can work on yourself from a place of resistance and inner judgement. Those are very different things.

So, that was the intel part of this message, plus I guess I got a bit carried away and I offered some of my thoughts about spirituality.

For the second half of this message, I would like to add something to my message from last week.

Many of you have the subconscious belief that you are not good enough or that you are worthless, unless you accomplish or have certain things. Or you have the belief that you are not doing enough, and perhaps underneath that belief is the belief that you are not inherently good enough.

Inherently, of course, you are good enough, you inherently have value, even if you don’t do anything. It’s why in spirituality we talk about your I Am presence and not your I Do presence. It’s why you’re a Being, not a Doing. I believe that “to be or not to be” is even a famous phrase on your world. A good question — and from my perspective, you are fully invited To Be. You are good enough as you are. You can just Be. You have value even if you don’t accomplish something.

Still, where does that subconscious belief come from that you’re not inherently good enough, or that you’re worthless?

Often on Earth, it’s simply been rammed into you, by society, that you’re not good enough. That happens in lots of subtle but effective ways. You believe you’re not good enough because that’s what society teaches you. That belief isn’t based on anything real, you’ve just been indoctrinated into that belief. You believe it because you’ve been taught to believe it.

And who has constructed society in such a way? Well, hostile galactics such as reptilians have had a major hand in that. Or claw — some reptilian subspecies have hands, others have claws.

Now, what kind of person repeatedly tells someone else that they are not good enough?

Well, yes, a mean or evil person. But also, a person who actually believes, deep down, that the other person is better than them.

That’s the dirty little secret. You’re constantly being told that you’re not good enough, by a society largely architected by beings who deep down believe that you’re better than they are.

It’s not just that you have more psychic potential than the reptilians do — which isn’t something that makes you inherently more valuable than a reptilian, of course. It’s more that being good-hearted and trying to live a good life, which is what most Earth humans choose, is a more difficult and braver and more fulfilling path than just being selfish, which is what most reptilians currently choose.

The reptilians are in this case right, the people of Earth are currently indeed better than them — not because of greater psychic potential, but because most reptilians keep making cruel, short-sighted, selfish choices that ultimately diminish themselves.

You’re currently better than most reptilians are because you’re choosing to be better.

So those bastards are trying to hold you down and hold your head underwater and tell you that you’re worthless — and they do so because they’re secretly terrified of you. They do so because deep down they feel inferior to you.

I know. I’ve looked into their eyes, I’ve read their mind.

Even as they were torturing me, all I saw were weak, insecure creatures, who buried their feelings of inferiority under a layer of cruelty and ego.

So, what is the appropriate reaction if you’re in an abusive relationship with someone who repeatedly tells you that you’re worthless?

It is: “F you, I am not worthless. And you will never lay a finger on me ever again.”

Well, F you reptilians. The people of Earth are not worthless. And we will make sure that there will come a time when you won’t lay a finger on them ever again.

So, can you now see that your possible belief that you’re worthless, that you’re not good enough, wasn’t ever based on anything real?

It was never real. It was all just indoctrination that was architected by beings who felt inferior to you, and they felt that way because they kept making choices that diminished themselves.

That’s it. It was never based on anything real.

You are good enough, inherently and unconditionally. And I love you.

Your star sister,

Emerelda 

https://www.youtube.com/...

 

For Era of Light

 

These channelings are exclusively submitted to EraofLight.com by the channeler. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to this original post.