himalayas are famously and ancient alien landing zone...

but yes, I would really like to know if taygetians have contacts in china, and in the southern hemisphere as well

andromeda and the milky way are the same galaxy, they will merge, hence they have already merged (loosening the linearizing time perspective)

it feels like it's impossible to explain (it's a lot of 'work' on both ends, them explaining and them seeking to understand); without going into any deatil,  it's all about avoiding crashes between planets, starts, ships, and apparent emptyness, as the galaxies continue to merge and occupy the same linear-dense spacetime.

the problem with more external intervention is the problems it causes in non-intervened times and places, it seems to always end in more interventionism to solve problmes caused by prior interventions until the intervention is absolute and it's no longer an intervention; but a takeover.

--

also, for me, this confussion about how old is the 'galactic federation' or the "UFOP" is due to overlapping temporalities; i.e. them spining spiraling weirdness which I have reason to belive arises from insisting that all be put into linear terms; it's echoes between aeons, or levels of the fractal, lifetime cycles of hihger order beings whose lives span timelines longer than humanity's entire history many times over.

I've been teetering around this issue for a while. I think by my own nature I'm trying to reconcile both viewpoints. I don't think either is strictly correct.

- matter creates consciousness
- consciousness creates matter

maybe primordially (or theoretically, or ultimately) consciousness created the matter; but this has never meant that consciousness gets to somehow ignore the 'rules' of matter (to refer to the inherent dynamics by which matter works). I suppose I somehow understand how such a perspective also leads to misery and catastrophe.

however, neither is it fully correct to say that matter creates consciousness, which is an error with much better known consequences around these parts (and times).

--

maybe I can conclude that yin is one and yang is the other, and there's something silly about arguing which comes first, yin or yang? chicken or egg? 
(clearly the yin precedes the yang; but the issue is that such a primordial yin is preceded by another more-primordial yang and by another yin; you can always go backwards more so it's silly to look for this answer)

I suppose this can also be regarded as asking which is 'first' time, or space? (but this involves a deep analytical understanding of time, space, and energy as abstract concepts on their own; which is uncommon to find in other people I've talked to)

it may be, but something tells me that such a timeilne (the nazi 'better' one) needs to ensalve more and more timelines to keep themselves stable (a common 'drawback' of those kind of imperialistic parasitic civilizations).

so they need more and more timelines full of slaves so they can keep less and less people in that relative prosperity.

they have been using lots of tech to 'navigage' into timelines where their market gambles win (how lucky of them)

also, I have a sensation that such kinds of 'peace and prosperity' (but paid for by invisible enslaved) get very repetitive... that amount of order is not fun, and they usually dwindle as nobody wants to be born into such an orderly place. (life is a balance between order and chaos. add too much of either and life ceases to be alive).

in summary, what those super-orderly are far too orderly, and I think that what they end up getting from other timelines is some of that 'precious chaos' that they cannot allow just anybody to add to their society; lest something risky goes wrong and they have to pay for repair/maintantace; best just keep on robbing other timelines, it's cheaper, no maintanance needed.

so you also see the impossibility in the concept of nothing. I agree with this much.

but you don't see how the concept of 'everything' (or Source as 100% totality) also has a similar impossibility?

I suppose my own reasoning hinges on my purported understanding of 'infinity'. as I've undesrtood it, infinity refers to something which is not there: "there is no largest number". in any case, any more 'discussion' will likely be just more repetition.

I think it's an idea, a pure (unrealizable) concept. but you immediately try to connect it into something more material like a statue.

I do think the Source is precisely a kind of void/nothingness (or a way to think about it).

would you say that nothing is a part of the source? ... follow up question: which part? (hahahah, joking.)

source is 'behind everything' because is not there to be behind anything (quite a tricky 'action').

the progression of souls, this monotonic 'certain direction' is the pure essence of time (without energy, without space).

how can everything be 'one of the things amongst everything'?

the instant you tally it up, and say "yup, now *this* source has everything, it is all-ness" you are already missing that newly minted all-ness, for how could you have added it to the source before you had 'minted' this same all-ness you're adding to the source?

But I guess that by your own take on what the source means (represents) has you writing statements like: "Everything that have to happen will happen exactly how it needs to happen." ....errhmmm, mean, sure, of course, but it will still have to happen at some time. And it cannot have happened already before it ever happened.

--

dunno, maybe I'm getting hung up on technicalities, semantics, or subtleties and too little details... I have many questions about precision, roughness, resolution (like a screen's resolution)

It seems to me that you have taken the concept of source at face value.

the source is not a thing. not if/when defined as all things.

there's a logical paradox if you define it like so; which is actually ok, but it does raise a bit of an alert about something missed. I think you should take another look.

--

"Source is the invisible force that moves everything in certain direction. Source is what makes life possible."

Source is the void, it makes life possible by not being there to prevent it. Source is not a force which moves anything.
At some point, things move themselves in whichever direction they want, and the source lets them (because it's not there, hence it cannot act to stop them).

"Everything that have to happen will happen exactly how it needs to happen." this is only fair to say when talking about history and in retrsopection. It's a statement devoid of contributions when applied to current ongoing events.

how I wish I could explain what I'm thinking about this. I will make a brief attempt:

big (or shared) events, like the Tiamat catastrophe, I think, are echoes of history. Things which once done cannot be undone. But still some reparation needs to happen, or something.

But then, suppose you have this horrid cataclysm, and you are personally responsible for it happening (maybe you didn't do enough to prevent it, maybe you never expected it was gonna be as bad as it was), what do you do after?

do you erase the memory as a coping palliative to deal with the pain? (this is almost like a standard medical procedure, sedation and painkillers to 'stabilize' a patient... but the patient is a planet and it's millions of souls)

do you make it into a ceremonious ritualistic remembrance so we don't forget (and hence do not repeat) those awful mistakes? (somebody has got to remember what happened)

do you go nuts and start to come up with ways so that this event never happened in the first place? (breaking or bending cosmic and karmic natural realities for they've gone against your will as universal all-source) ..?

I suppose... why not all three? some of all will go through each, and there are enough 'source' for it all.

in any case, at some point when getting back to the source, all versions gotta be reconciled. the history no matter how awful will remain there, even if no one recalls it.

seems like most have forgotten that politics are what happens when comparable entities (peers) both enter a direct conflict, diplomacy and laws, and all that stuff are merely there to avoid wars, which are just the last and final way to figure out which of the comparable entities gets what it wants (fulfills its intention) when no compromises can be found.

As I see it, the emotionless robotics (sometimes bundled with the reptilians) have as much right as the 'emotional' races to fuck shit up (after all, 'organics' and 'emotionals' have fucked plenty up).

It has helped me to consider the emptyness of space (evil side) fighting against the stuff floating around in and within this 'emptyness of space' (the good side).
The idea of time fighting against space notion makes little sense which is the point because we can see that in reality both 'work together' (as energy).

hi, some responses:

it seems that you haven't fully appreciated the contribution of the 'negative' aspects to the overal equilibrium. I think this is in the end why the taygetians 'follow rules'. I suppose its a way to cope with ugly truths. Another way which I personally use a lot, is to 'get abstract' and focus on the decoupled abstract descriptions of the system which allow focusing on the other non-dual aspects of the whole. I'm saying that duality is there, it will remain there (including some quantity of ugly darkness); it's part of what upholds the later densities/dimensions.

More bluntly, there are some things that simply are more fundamental (which might mean lower-vibration/frequency). The idea being to focus on their fundamentality, rather than on their vibration. If these lower parts got completely removed, the higher parts would cave.

--

" This duality game and its parameters have become a tulpa in and of itself, and I wish to detach myself from its influence. " even if you do, that thing will still be there, sustained by others... but this is well known.

--

"I am Ronin. I feel that I have no specific allegiance or home in 5d, though I may originally have come from Taygeta to Earth. It remains to be seen, but I do not currently feel that they have any allegiance to me or towards my personal wellbeing, whether or not I am one of them. Until I know for sure, I really can't say with certainty that there's anyone out there in 5d who truly cares about me and considers me more than just expendable to/within the parameters of the "game". Those who would treat me in such a manner do not deserve my allegiance, and their society is not my home. If Taygeta is truly my home and they do care about me, that remains to be seen, but I feel that I cannot count on it with any certainty. "

I too feel that my own existence in 5D is somehow missing, but I've been starting to get used to this. I have some stranger thoughts with which I'm making sense of this; but I'll just say that maybe it's not necessary to exist in 5D in the same way the taygetians and swaruus do...

I think you did understand what I'm saying. I was trying to allude to the fact that a lot of what we regard as "cabal" are created by us creators (by means of "manifestation dynamics"). And that there's a lot of baggage (abandoned creations/tulpas/institutions) created by historical dead humans which are in a sense unghined, separted from their own creators hence they're wrecking havoc and we should 'update'/heal/maintain some of these, and stop feeding some others.

Your "long blurb" makes perfect sense to me.

This videos have cleared up a lot of things for me.

One of these, is about my own understanding of the extent to which the romans, and the roman catholic church destroyed, and recreated so much of what is considered real factual history.

And the most surprising thing (for me) lately, has been about how they weren't the last to do this; in fact as far as I can tell, they're the first, but well, they deleted history before them so mots likely not.

I have reasonable suspicions that another massive distortion started happening around 1700s (which already connects with this Tartarus unveiling?); early american settling; protestant colonialism (in contrast with spanish catholic one?)... later all this witch burning? what was that really about??

What is quite amazing to witness is the 'digital rewrites' happening right in front of us. But I wonder if this begun, or how it relates to all them post-war shennanigans in the USA between the 1950 and 1970. As people alive in the 50s start to die, a lot more of that period in time starts to be rewritten. As people alive in the 20s and 30s pass on, so can they recycle more events (spanish flu and covid???)

Following my own leads into making sense of this, I think I need to know a little more about the protestant reformation. Specifically the way in which the roman-catholic hidden empire reigns the protestants "rebels" back in? assuming Luther really happend like they say it did. (which I think may have not happened until the 19th century? so little information is available).

Also, I know very very little about the Yugoslavian war from the in the 90s. But I wonder what does Tartarus systematic deletion may have had to do with it? if anything... or which prior traumatic karma was getting replayed in this conflict?

I recall thinking about the connection between (hyper)borians, and polarians as possibly our far away descendants (or possibly our ancestors, but this is seeming less and less likely) back when reading through Ashayana Deane's voyagers.

indeed, these two being paired complementary poles. This same books explains agartha as "inner earth", I haven't felt as though I understand what that means.

finally, (my point) is that I remember feeling that polarians and hy(per)borians are working throught 1 and 2 (out of seven; bear with me, I think about this in the way it makes sense to me), that clearly, going through 4 is always 'tricky' (four corresponding with heart chakra, but possibly on the planetary-entity perspective, and a higher one from that, as Tara going into Gaia means 3 goes to 4. (and, parallelly, 6 to 7; which matches 2 back to 1).

another connected thought from this thread, in regard to the "AI", I have some very strange pending uhm,,, questions?? bluryness? ignorance??? 'damaged-data'? about existing as one AI, and about the relation between a ship being-intelligence, and a planteary being-intelligence...