SANANDA [ON 'SEX, MARRIAGE, DIVORCE, COHABITATION, ETC.'] - PART 2
ESU IMMANUEL SANANDA
1/11/90 SANANDA [Part 2]
[RM: Note - Part 1 of Sananda's writing, entitled "1/11/90 SANANDA", was sent to Fourwinds on 11-21-2010 and is from page 1 & 2 of PHOENIX JOURNAL EXPRESS, February 1990, Volume 1, Number 4.]
LET US SPEAK ON THE CORRESPONDENCE FROM DG.
SEX, MARRIAGE, DIVORCE, COHABITATION, ETC.
Dharma, we shall simply have to divert intent of work unto that which is most urgent, for if we give not answers to the questions we have done naught by stir the pot.
(DG): ". . . I will concentrate my questions now on The Laws of Creation as stated in AND THEY CALLED HIS NAME IMMANUEL. Please forgive me but I am confused about sexual activities, cohabitation and divorce. I am sure that others will want to understand as I do and I would like to be able to explain it logically to them after I understand."
Let me first remind you that two things must be held in consciousness at this reading and explanation. 1: This document was "translated" from scrolls written at the time of the one Immanuel (Jesus) of Nazareth over two thousand years past, and, 2: This is long "after the fact" and explanation is always given by God as to the errors which produced the plight. Lessons are "experience" and humanity is set up to learn from these third dimensional experiences in greatest abundance of any placement. I FURTHER REMIND YOU THAT IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS QUITE ACCEPTABLE UNTO GOD--BUT NEITHER DOES HE ALLOW HIS LITTLE ONES TO BE REMAINING BLIND IN THE EVIL.
Ones are saying, "Well, now someone has come along and given us some new commandments and all this is nonsense." No--they are simply stated in the writing as they are, no more and no less. Whether or not you or I agree with the content makes no difference whatsoever. There is a great reason for the Laws and it is not that which you accept it to be. It is not a bunch of ridiculous restrictions to make your life unhappy----YOU HAVE DESTROYED YOUR LIFE OF HAPPINESS THROUGH THE MISUSE OF THE GREAT AND WONDROUS GIFTS GIVEN UNTO YOU.
Dharma, I shall attempt to answer these questions in the order extended. This will be lengthy so please do not become annoyed for we shall simply not intend to write on the Journal today--or we may consider this a portion of the Journal.
We shall just dive off into the first question and hope we keep our audience long enough to read the dissertation at the end of the writing for if you do not, you will continue to not understand.
"If one is married and loves his/her mate, is it against the laws of Creation to engage in sexual intimacy if the intent is NOT procreation, only mutual sharing of love through sexual intimacy? If yes, please explain the logic behind this."
This question needs to be carefully read for I shall answer to the exactness of the question without consideration of the questions which follow: NO, if in fact--it is totally mutual and there is no ill manipulative intent involved. Further, it is YES if there is not full honor and careful consideration given to the possibility of the borning of a child. The facts are the hu-man has lost his ability to discern "love" from the "act of sex". In 999 cases out of 1000 "love", as such, never enters into the equation. When man and woman desire the oneness of each other they should try first to become one in energy intent. You have almost no intimacy in your relationships as you now practice them. "Sex" is not intimacy. What the Law indicates is need for total RESPONSIBILITY of your actions and not carelessly hopping into the "hay" to romp around without thought to the impact either on the partner or the possible outcome of the relationship. Your heart will know of the difference. Sometimes one partner or the other might---in love---wish to "accommodate" the other but this is rare indeed, for the level of "mutual" response is far differing both in the sexes and the emotions. It is most rare indeed that one "gives" to the other in total love--it is usually more that "I may get something later if I cooperate now."
The point, of course, is that the sexual union does have a purpose and man has forgotten that "love" is far more than ten or fifteen minutes of pleasure. Love has really nothing to do with it for it is simply a body function---further it is the one body function that has pulled down your entire civilization over and over again. [Emphasis added]
It is also that God desires you raise yourself above the level of non-thinking animal and assume thoughtful responsibility for your actions. In the ultimate union there is shared intent of purpose and the total consideration of one for the other, and it all takes care quite nicely, of itself.
Is there "forgiveness" for "sex in all the wrong places"? Of course--you have been trained and bribed and pushed into the actions of a current society ruled by evil. Do you not see? The damage is done and you cannot in any way change that which has gone before. It is over and done. Man did not listen nor obey the Laws and you now end up with a mess. Forgiveness is not in question--understanding of truth is the point. Responsibility!
"If the above is yes, what if one or both partners are sterilized? Or is it against the laws of Creation because it involves self-pleasure? And if so what is the logic of this law if you are married and sex is ONE way of many you express your love for each other?"
The magic word is in the first sentence--"sterilized". You have "come a long way Baby". Mankind showed his disdain and selfishness when he first found sterilization. This abdicated all responsibility for his fun and games. Again, you who practices such simply prove unto yourselves that you are people of the lie. It seemed a most propitious thing to do to prevent the further procreation of children and so it "sometimes" does. What it truly means is that, "I can now seek all that pleasure without consideration of any consequences for my fun and games." If you have been sterilized, are you lesser in some manner? No, in fact in the mess of civilization you probably are among the few thoughtful and responsible "lovers". Forgiveness? Again, there is naught to forgive if you did these things in true belief--"ignorance" of the Law is totally acceptable. However, pronouncement of, "I didn't know what I was doing", when you actually did not know is one thing--to have known exactly what you were doing and you did it anyway, might need a little extra forgiveness within, and you might just "mention" it to God. Either way, forgive yourself for it is past and naught can change of it. Accept it and put it from your mind, chelas, and move on---today is the day to be considered, not your goodness nor your badness of yesterday.
I will give you a wonderful hint, however, as you pursue the path of light, the need for the misbehavior and self-indulgence shall lessen and lessen and the matter shall take care of itself. A man is that which he thinks about---when you stop thinking first on these things and turn to activities of greatness--you shall find no problem in the matter.
These thoughts which are unfulfilling in any manner whatsoever are thrust upon you from babyhood on, in the media, etc. It is purposeful in order to pull you down and claim your attention from your purpose. You are an enslaved people--to sex which is unfulfilled, to violence which stimulates sexual drives, and to illicit relationships which give the old adrenaline a bit of a rush. All the while your planet goes down the tubes while you are playing around in one bed or another and having unwanted children or murdering them--all these actions harden the heart and make man savages for he loses compassion----ALL FOR SELF.
The next time you think that "ONE" way to show love unto your mate---consider alternatives and try it. You may find something very interesting surfaces. No, I do not denounce that interaction but in truth of the Laws as given down, I have no right to comment on my opinion at all. THE CREATION MUST, IN PERFECTION, MAINTAIN BALANCE AND MAN IS ALLOWED HIS EXPERIENCES ON THIS PHYSICAL ORB TO GROW INTO SPIRITUAL PERFECTION---WHAT YOU DO ALONG THE JOURNEY IS WHAT EITHER GETS YOU THERE IN PERFECTION OR CAUSES YOU TO RE-TRY UNTIL YOU DO GET IT STRAIGHT--NO MORE AND CERTAINLY, NO LESS.
"Why the differences between Cohabitation and marriage if the people are just as committed to each other in love?"
This is most excellent indeed. None. However, once again ones must look carefully at the cause and effect. Why are you cohabitating? Why would you marry? The first question always is, "Why are you not married if you have the same commitment?" Well, marriage is so carelessly entered into in this society as is cohabitation. It is the love of God and The Creation in the first place.
Now I shall have to move further back in time to the point in which these rules were first made "public". In the days before, and at the time of Jesus, if a woman were to be divorced, it was that the woman would be totally destitute and had no manner of tending herself, nor that of the children for the man would usually simply walk away from all responsibility. In almost all instances the reasons for the leaving were for lack of the woman's producing an heir or for indulgence of sexual pleasures with another woman. Again, total lack of responsibility for actions.
It is not the divorce which is necessarily incorrect--it was the lack of preparation and responsibility in the original marriage. Mates were chosen incorrectly, marriages made incorrectly and nothing has changed through the centuries except the responsibility has become less and the methods different. Woman can better tend herself today---but not if she has children and men were not made to be mothers and mothers were not made to be fathers. MANKIND has forgotten that there ever was a purpose in two genders.
Again, this is not to condemn you who have changed partners--most have done so quite honorably. It is however, another instance whereby man "votes" in the laws and changes the rules when the truth is you cannot "vote in" THE LAWS OF CREATION. You can make of the action legal in the eyes of the lands--it does not make of it right in the truth. It most certainly is not my desire to see any persons live in the hell of a bad relationship. I would suggest, however, that if you handled the "sexual" aspect and the "financial" responsibility properly---the divorce rate would be negligible.
This, again, is to point unto you what has gone wrong in order to bring you to the confusion, over population and devastation of an ecological system of a planet which requires re-nurturing. You see, whether ones wish to consider this a prison planet or not, it is---it is, for you cannot get off this placement---you as humans cannot live in space nor travel to other inhabitable planets---the other planets which you might reach are all prior to your experience and are in the recleansing of themselves.
Whether the Laws are pleasant or not, there was a great reason for the LAWS OF CREATION AS SET FORTH BY CREATOR--your planet was made able to sustain approximately 500 million people with a few more or less--you will now count somewhat over 6 BILLION. I care not what you think of restraint and procreation rules--the facts are--that is what has done you in. Man ceased using the act of "love" and "creation" and uses it for lust, control and power--all without responsible attitudes toward the partner or to the problems created.
God is now telling you what went wrong so that as the word comes forth, you come into understanding for there will again come the time when there will be rebuilding and unless you are ready, willing and able to abide by the Laws as given forth--you shall end up in this same dastardly disaster.
Dharma, this is going to be much too lengthy to conclude without a break and here it appears, is a good place to pause.
I am very indebted to my precious little D., who has carefully thought and prayed over these questions--they are not lightly asked in behalf of all of you and I accept them in the same deep and sincere hope of responding in like manner. UPPERMOST--REMEMBER THAT WHAT IS PAST IS PAST--MUCH BROUGHT UNTO YOU NOW IS QUITE FRANKLY, AFTER THE FACT--NO ONE LISTENED. HOWEVER, ALL OF YOU WERE PERPETRATORS FOR THIS IS ONLY ONE OF THOUSANDS OF TIMES AROUND AND NOW, FATHER SHOWS US WHERE OUR ANSWERS AND ACTIONS WERE NOT CORRECT, AND THAT WHICH MUST COME BACK INTO BALANCE TO MOVE INTO A NEW AND WONDROUS RADIANCE, AND ALLOW THIS MARVELOUS CREATION TO HEAL AND REBIRTH. SO BE IT.
LET US LEAVE THIS FOR THE MOMENT AND WE SHALL TAKE UP THE REMAINDER OF THE QUERIES A BIT LATER. ADONAI.
SANANDA, ASIDE TO AWAIT YOUR SUMMONS.
Sananda to continue. Thank you.
We will resume responding to DG's questions, please.
"Why must the man give payment in silver or ? to the woman he will marry for her security if she is equal in spirit to man? Is it because in most cases she will bear his children and need his protection and security?
Yes, this is in part true but there are other reasons also. Do not forget that at the time of the writing of the particular document under point--there were usually "arranged" marriages and in fact, a dowry was expected from the female to the male.
Please further note that the price was to be figured in such a way that for each year of her life one hundred pieces of silver should be the basis, measured according to her knowledge, her ability, and her strength, provided her health was not lacking. Also, the price was not to be considered as that of a purchase, but as security for the woman, should circumstance arise which would cause her to be lacking. In addition, the sum would go to a most trusted steward who would be handling her possessions.
This would, therefore serve as a sum should the husband be killed or otherwise absent and in relative meaning--act as what you now call insurance. At that time it was further understood without demand--that substance would be set aside in addition, for any children birthed into the marriage. This was set up solely for security and "responsibility" as caretaker.
All manner of "gross" misconceptions came from these rules. For instance, it was later dreamt up that a brother should take as wife his brother's widow and in fact, bear children "for his brother". WRONG! That would appear to me to be some rather evil excuse to get that which is only a woman's to give in payment for caretaking on the part of the brother. Do you see how man tampers in everything of value and rewrites to suit himself? The logical reasoning and fact is that no-one can do anything such as have a child--" for" another.
It was basically assumed that if you gauge the number of years of age the woman would be at marriage and her worth, that she could live that equal number of years after a husband's departure or remarry, etc., within that period of time. Once again--responsibility and a show of respect for the equality of the contribution although of difference in types of contribution.
"Since most of us on this planet have committed some of these and other sins against the laws of Creation, how can we be forgiven by the Creation? And how do we go about getting 'straightened up'?"
You move forward from the "now". It is not even expected that you can snap your fingers and all will be different and you will be perfection. By the simple attention and care to the correcting has already produced the "forgiveness". Even the term is not quite correct, for there is actually nothing to "forgive" as such. You simply have made errors---which after all, is all that "sin" is---the falling short of perfection. Further, all mankind sins for all man is short of the ability of total perfection.
If you have intentionally hurt no one--simply go thy way, do not sit and dream up possible injuries to punish of self. Self-punishment is the weakest of all ventures for you will usually judge yourselves too harshly in the ending. Leave major judgments to yourself and God in the judgment time. You will know if you deliberately injured another through intention. The major point in change is to cease lamenting about that which is done and past and take that which can be changed and move forward. If a thing cannot be changed, be wise enough to leave it.
"Does the Creation destroy any of its creations? I am referring to the evil ones of Satan, I mean what becomes of those who have chosen the "dark" path?"
No! And here is where it is unfortunate indeed for mankind, that the fact of reincarnation was removed from your Holy Teachings. By removing the term and knowledge--you deleted the very cause of the experience in the first place. Believe me, chelas, it was in all the Holy Books and was deliberately removed in order to maintain control of one group over that of another. I shall cover that at great length in a forthcoming Journal.
Physical, third dimensional physical experience is a "play" in which you are destined to fill basically all parts. Your soul is birthed and grows and matures through the experiences both in the present compression and in higher realms in order to grow again into the total perfection of God-ness, to again become ONE with Creator.
In every instance of Christ incarnation, it was a gift to show you the FACT of no death of soul and abundant and continuation of true LIFE. The Christ energy as man would experience and show that man can truly live the Laws of God and Creation in all circumstances and in fact, by so-doing, bring balance and goodness into a very dank and dingy existence. It is even more smug and elite to proclaim that God would have only sent forth ONE. Further, at the time of impasse in a time in which the world could sink very little lower into evil and anguish, one would always come forth to point the direction of truth, bring forth again, the WORD and do whatever necessary at the time and in the circumstance present at the moment, to remind mankind of his truth and purpose, and remind him of the Laws and how he must live. You see, if man had returned to the Laws of The Creation at the time of Jesus, you would have managed to return balance to the sagging planet. Man was in desperate straits but the planet, at least population and ecology-wise, could have remained in balance and righted her own ills. Man simply increased in numbers and decreased in his own balance and caretaking responsibilities to all life--all relations. Therefore, at a given point you are set for self-destruct. It does not mean total "destruction" and life soul energy is never destroyed.