The Alexander Material by Ramon Stevens

Issue No. 7

Find other issues here.

Ask a question here.

Q: Since we cannot force another person to agree to do something, what happens with probable realities? That is, if Joe contemplates torturing William, let's say, is William compelled to experience all the various probable realities of being tortured? And if not, what happens then? How does Joe experience them without William? Does Joe “hallucinate” a William to experience the many probable realities in which he is tortured? I hope this question makes sense. (B.G.)
A: To use a more common example, how many men have entertained sexual fantasies about unattainable women—centerfold models, actresses, singers, even women in one's circle of work and friendship who are married or otherwise not interested/available? Are these women's probable selves ”compelled” to experience the probable realities of fulfilling that sexual desire?

Probabilities lie along a spectrum of potential, with varying “thickness” or ”density” depending on how likely a probability is to manifest, and whether it is being pulled toward manifestation by the parties involved. Any time a potential event is “theorized” or ”fantasized” by one person (that fantasy involving one or more others), if the probability of that event manifesting is so remote as to be virtually impossible, and especially if the individual being fantasized about does not even know the daydreamer, then the fantasy remains just that: a fantasy, a pleasant distraction. One cannot “force” another to experience the probabilities of an event simply by fantasizing their involvement.

Look at it from the point of view of the other, who has his/her own package of probabilities through which he/she swims, and which lie along the spectrum of potential. Some distant, unknown person involving him/her in a fantasy does not rise to the degree of potential where the probability would be “added” to his/her life store of probabilities. There needs to be more, more physicalized “stuff” which binds them, before a mutual probability could be forged.

Q: Do animals enjoy sex as much as humans do? Please go beyond ”yes” or “no” in your answer! (R.L.)
A: Yes and no. No animal is as obsessed with sex as human beings, nor has invented so many positions and variations, nor such variability in its expression, nor its constant, round-the-clock, 24/365 enjoyment.

As a general rule, the lower an animal sits on the animal family tree, the more ”automatic” its reproductive life is. Reptiles answer the instinct to mate, and may feel “fulfillment” when the exchange is complete, but no real lust or pleasure is involved. Among mammals, especially those in the horse, canine, elephant, monkey and ape families, and where a long-standing relationship is involved, something approaching ”love” can be embedded within the act of mating.

Females in estrus can feel a swelling, an expansion, a receptivity, and especially with a long‑term partner, take immense fulfillment from coupling. For the male the act is more narrow and directed, has fewer implications, and fulfillment means orgasm. Both genders “enjoy” the sex, for their own reasons.

You may recall our writing elsewhere that for humankind, sexuality is not so much about reproduction as it is the release of ego, the plunge into oceanic wholeness, the restoration of unitary consciousness. Because the need for this “reminder” of one's true nature is constant, so is the practice of sexuality.

Q: In order to advance my spiritual growth to that of a psychic medium is it necessary to abstain from sexual stimulation? I have had much success in the past but I am unsure if that was because of my temporary abstinence or my acceptance of my sexuality (gay man). (J.)
A: First, while we encourage you on your journey, we would question whether one can “grow” into becoming a psychic medium. That is, when you pursue your spiritual journey, it is best not to have a specific “outcome” in mind. What your life looks like as you grow toward enlightenment may be entirely different from another's. Best to remain flexible and open and simply let the process unfold.

When you consider the most evolved individuals on the planet—monks meditating in caves, in deserts, in monasteries—one quality they have in common is celibacy. Buddha's life story indicates he was married with a child, and left his family to become enlightened. Jesus is reported never to have married. Many of the great philosophers never married. The overall effect, then, is to see sexuality as incompatible with spiritual development.

In truth, the greater problem these celibates avoided was the complications of romance and marriage. Romance is nowhere easy, makes great demands on time, and pulls one's focus constantly back down to earth, to the difficulties of melding two disparate souls into one. Children, of course, are the death of freedom and tranquility. Those individuals—and they are relatively rare—whose purpose on earth is spiritual growth above all else, had best avoid romance entirely.

As to sexuality itself, the answer again is yes and no. Orgasm has different physiological and energetic effects for men and women. For men, because ejaculation means the expulsion of a bodily fluid, that “loss” means a temporary imbalance in the body, a general diminution of psychic energy, and can even “blow a hole” in the energy fields around the body. On the other hand, because the male body is built and primed for sexual experience and release, to never know orgasm, to block the regular flow of fluids and energies, can have deleterious long‑term consequences.

The best guideline, then, is to follow your instincts and desires, and not to establish or accept artificial rules regarding your sexual life. If you know that you will be participating in an event demanding the highest psychic sensitivity—working with a client or participating in a workshop—refrain from sex for 3 or more days before. With time, you will learn the proper balance for yourself.

Q: Practically all channeled texts (your books included) encourage us to discover truth for ourselves. Hence, truth is subjective and is to be found within each individual's inner nature. As each person is part of God, then who can tell another person (also God) what is right or wrong, true or false? Instead, we are to become aware of our individual inner Higher Self or God nature. When this is accomplished, we can begin then to manipulate our views of reality by changing our beliefs , visualization, repetition of sentences, etc., creating thus the reality of our life accordingly. Is that scheme all right?

Well, the point is that something like the ultimate objective truth is missing here. This absence of objective truth opposes to human nature of most people who need something firm, objective to base their lives upon. Furthermore, you may fall in delusion. I've heard of a man who pretends to be filthy rich, courted by many ladies, gifted musician...He persuaded many people about his truth and probably he himself believes in his “perfect life story.” In fact, he is unemployed, indebted, untalented outsider. Why in such cases doesn't life follow our beliefs? (R.G.)

A: Yes, there is an ultimate objective truth and here it is: human beings, filtering experience through human brains, cannot perceive ultimate objective truth! Consider the simple facts that there is no color in nature; that the sun never really rises and sets; that rainbows do not exist; that the apparently stable Earth is spinning through space at a downright astronomical rate. Consider, then, that your senses and brain perceive all of these phenomena “wrong,” and you begin to appreciate how impossible it would be for you to clear away all the neuronal impediments to perceiving clear, absolute truth.

This is why we and other teachers encourage each student to pursue his or her own truth: better to forge your own cosmology than to simply accept one handed to you in whole cloth. With each generation, the frequency underlying the species bumps a notch or two higher, which means you can perceive and comprehend more “truth,” needing less mythical wrapping. As people share and exchange their cosmologies, the “communal” cosmology is refined, improved, carries more truth and less myth.

If one could become rich and talented simply by deluding oneself and others to that effect, half the world would be millionaire artistes! Please see Conscious Life for a more comprehensive discussion.

Q: Greetings from the petri dish. As you observe us, do you also observe alternate probable earths as well? Presumably some of them are doing “better” or “worse” than we are. Can you address the question of critical turning points in “our” history where personalities or events made key differences in probable outcomes...and perhaps give us some sense of what one or two (or five or six) divergent probabilities actually experienced? (K.Y.)
A: The truth is that probable earths are about all we perceive. Our host is experiencing life on one probable earth, and through his awareness of the flow of events in that domain, we perceive the path “your” earth is taking. At our level, where discrete events and even entire epochs appear more or less as tonal blurs, we depend on his life experience and awareness of global events to communicate more effectively with you.

We have written elsewhere of the probable earths of which your experienced earth is one subset; and, of course, there are infinite variations (not merely five or six) playing out in their disparate spheres. There are earths where human beings have evolved to share a Supermind, breaking down the walls of discrete brains and thoughts; and others where fear and demagoguery drove the earth over the brink of nuclear and ecological catastrophe. You're riding somewhere in the middle, with nuclear weapons proliferating to more and more countries, though none has been used in war for 60+ years, and an unchecked course toward ecological disaster.

Personalities can make a difference, but almost always, if they wield power and influence, they are tapped into the consciousness and probabilities of the time, which direct their choices. In other words, a visionary determined to bring about world peace, or a demagogue committed to reducing the Middle East to radioactive rubble, would both find themselves checked by the forces around them: they simply cannot act beyond the reach of the range of probabilities reflecting the communal consciousness of the race in that period. There is a reason that nuclear weapons were invented only in an age when their horrors would be recognized and restrained—had they been invented in earlier, less evolved times, you might not be reading these words!

Q: Would it be correct to say that every time a potential “victim” puts out the telepathic request to be “harmed”—he is also always offering others the only chance they have to consciously choose NOT to harm someone? And therefore, is offering this choice to others always, in part, one of the reasons behind the telepathic request? In short, if no one “requested” to be harmed, how would humans practice acting in harmony with their compassion? (B.G.)
A: This is a rather dour view of humankind—that people act from altruism and compassion only to deny a request for abuse! To answer your first question: no, if someone broadcasts a strong probability of suffering harm, it will attract only those predisposed to do harm to others. Healthier people, if they sensed the request for abuse at all, would steer clear; their starkly disparate fields and life purposes would be “repelled” by such an individual.

Compassion is far more than merely the means of denying a request for abuse; it is the vehicle through which you express your common humanity; or your oneness with broader creation.

Q: Alexander, in your response to my first question, which appears in issue number 4, you expressed the desire to learn more about the theoretical and experiential aspects of Spirit Release work. What you described in your response was exactly that which I experience when I encounter earthbound human spirits. With a little help, these earthbound spirits may be encouraged to transition and leave the Earth plane.

My previous question, however, concerned nonhuman entities; in particular, the subset of the class of Light beings known as Angels who have acquired darkness. These dark Angels are the ones that I label as Fallen Angels. During the course of my work, I have aided three of these beings in shedding their darkness and becoming the full Light beings that they once were. They might not exist on the astral plane. Perhaps this is why you did not include them in your response? Can you perceive these beings on whatever level that they may exist?

You also mention fragmentation in your previous response. When we, as Spirit Release practitioners, deal with cases of soul fragmentation, we have discovered that the soul fragments often end up in the possession of the Fallen Angels. Is this how you perceive the reality of soul fragments as they exist outside of the human being's energy body? If not, what is your model of what happens with a soul fragment as it exists? (R.G.)

A: We are not able to follow you into the realm of nonhuman entities who bear ill intent toward human beings. In our model, there is no way any such beings, should they exist, could impose themselves on human beings, even those open to such influences. Remember, each probable planet rides on a specific frequency matrix which filters in and filters out those entities and experiences aligned with that frequency. A body of consciousness which had never manifested in human or other animate form would have no “link,” no “point of entry” into the earth system. This is for your protection on numerous levels, among them ensuring that only events and beings consonant with the tone and frequency of a planet can manifest; imagine the chaos if any entity, any being on any probable earth, could suddenly pop in for a visit.

Further, we cannot conceive of what is meant by Fallen Angels, nonincarnated beings “going to the dark side.” Please be aware of the extent to which media, myth, religion, and belief influence you, for apart from recently crossed astral souls still bearing some negativity toward individuals on earth, we cannot conceive of other bodies of entities seeking to inject negativity into the earth system. The human race generates enough on its own, being one of its more finely honed talents!

Q: Why can't or don't humans choose to reincarnate as various animals? Or do they? (B.G.)
A: It depends on what level of entity you look at. A higher self sending offshoots into the earth system will “specialize” in one species or another. Consider also that each “individual” experiencing life on a given probable earth has probable brethren in their probable dimensions—and a human being in one probability would not be a giraffe in another, but only a human being. Now, at a higher level of spiritual entity, above the level of higher selves and beyond direct involvement in the earth system, it may suit the entity's purpose to absorb soul‑fragments of human and animal lifetimes, the better to “round out” its store of earthly experience. But this does not involve reincarnation as you commonly know it.

Q: What is the best way to align with our path in life, that our higher self has set out us? What practical applications can we use, to steer us away from directions that are not aligned to our highest potential? So that we can know we are “on the right path.” Something that can be used for the more mundane, or for the more larger life plans such as for example healing. (J.P.)
A: To a young person we would say: move away from home, far away from home, to a big city with the full panoply of diversions, intellectual pursuits, and spiritual diversity. Read the newspaper, especially the Arts & Leisure and Religion sections, and attend those events that elicit a “pull” when you read about them. Those experiences you feel drawn toward are those aligned with your life path, or at least consonant with it. Over time, as you gain more such experience, your life path will become clear.

To those beyond the stage of youth, we would ask whether your life situation as it now stands—romantic relationship, marriage or not, kids or not, job, location, lifestyle—yields a sense of fulfillment, of being on the right path, or whether it feels like there are gaps or holes or incompleteness in your life. If you, as a youth, followed the standard life path of school-work-marriage-kids, without giving yourself time to sample more of life, you may feel frustrated because your life path was handed you rather than forged by you.

All this said, the fact is that it is downright difficult not to be on your path, because your path is not so much a prescribed series of events as it is a tone or quality to your life. Only individuals unusually susceptible to negative influences would “fall off” their path into thickets of temptation. The most “practical” technique you can use is meditation, even once a week, to just “tune in” to yourself and your higher self, holding the thought before beginning the meditation that you are open to any correction or guidance to keep you aligned with your higher purpose. Chances are you are already there.

Q: Alexander, there is much in the media today about the Illuminati/the Brotherhood of the Snake/the New World Order and others with extraterrestrial connections that started eons ago, perhaps in Egypt. Were we seeded here by an alien race to be slaves? Does this enslavement continue to this day? Many are seeing 11:11 and waking up to the reality that our present systems are corrupt and not in sync with natural law and order. Are the Annunaki controlling things? Is our personal power for creation diminished by their presence? There have been many films like the Zeitgeist movement (which is growing globally), collective-evolution and others encouraging us to drop out from the present corrupt systems and to consciously create en masse a resource-based economy where all of the world's needs will be met (The Venus Project). I'd love to live in that utopian world. Can we possibly achieve this? (T.D.P.)
A: As regular readers know by now, we do not as a rule comment on the writings and predictions of others, especially where that material rests on fear and sensationalism. But to answer your last question, we have written for some time that the present state of the world is unsustainable and will not be sustained in its current form. There will be no choice but to return to a “resource-based economy,” meaning a largely agrarian, community-based society, with vastly reduced human numbers. If you would love to live in that world, the best way to manifest it is to change your lifestyle now, as thousands are doing, to align with the world you wish to see realized.

Q: I have a three part question about karma. In Earthly Cycles you say that karma can only occur when the intent to cause harm is followed by action causing harm. Looking at our history, during the second world war, in Auschwitz people were gassed in gas chambers. SS soldiers would drop the Zyklon B pellets inside these chambers via holes in the roof. Have those SS soldiers a karmic relationship with all those people they gassed? During that same war, when two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, did all the airmen in the two planes get a karmic debt with the people killed or only the person who pushed the button to drop the bomb? Last question, is there perhaps a limit to how many karmic relationships someone can have? Having a few thousand lives to release karma is okay, but needing half a million lives or more to release karma debts because one “offshoot” dropped an atomic bomb on a city, that sounds like a lot. (W.B.)
A: All's fair in love, war, and karma. However horrifying the results, and however many deaths accrued, soldiers acting under orders and taking actions that indirectly cause the deaths of others, accrue less “karma” than if they were bayoneting the enemy on the battlefield, face to face. Dropping pellets, dropping a bomb: these do not directly cause death—they are intermediate steps triggering an impartial force to cause death—while a bayonet rammed through the heart does. There is a “global” or “communal” karma that may accrue in such cases, which does not require the healing and balancing of a karmic debt with each individual who died; only in a general, global sense.

Q: I was wondering if an incarnated aspect of the higher self was to become spiritually aware of its self. Wouldn't it have more of a choice to choose its lessons despite the intentions of the higher self or is free will just another complex illusion? I read somewhere once that no matter how many choices there are one can only pick one; thus all other choices were comforting illusions because there was only one choice all along. I would like to hear your thoughts on this. (M.W.)
A: Presumably by “incarnated aspect of the higher self” you mean a human individual. Actually, the more spiritually aware a person becomes, the more automatically aligned he/she is with the higher self and its goals for a lifetime. There is less static, noise, and ego to clutter the channels between higher self and ego. Further, the lessons to be learned can be experienced on the “less traumatic, more benign” end of the scale since the individual enjoys clear communion with its higher self and need not experience the shocks and upsets less enlightened souls draw to themselves.

Free will exists within certain parameters. We have discussed this elsewhere. You cannot choose to be or do anything and everything in life, but given the parameters of a lifetime, the ego can make its choices. In most cases the choices don't matter to the higher self because what the ego wants and what the higher self seeks play out on different realms. Whatever the results of the ego's choices, the higher self garners its desired experience.

Q: My question has to do with glossolalia. Is this phenomenon actually a “tongue” with included information which may be “interpreted” by some as is described and practiced in some religious circles—or is it simply a personal polysyllabic interpretation of random energy encountered by the “speaker”? I've personally experienced “glossolalia” for many years as well as “automatic writing” or written “channeling” and have also delivered “messages in tongues” and “interpretation of tongues” in religious settings but I have never understood exactly what “glossolalia” is outside religious beliefs. (L.A.)
A: “Glossolalia” is not a single phenomenon, but can have a number of causes, from dissociative identity disorder (a dissociated personality “invents” its own private language as a safety measure); to social performance (the ego enjoying the attention of those listening to allegedly mystical or esoteric messages); to a repressed ego “speaking its truth” (especially in retort against its repressors) in gobbledygook inoffensive to anyone for being incomprehensible; to genuine psychics and mystics mining veins of ancient language and channeling them in relatively pure and undistorted form.

In the latter case, there is a second phenomenon whose English name we are not aware of, if there is one, which might be termed “auralia,” namely, the ability to hear, decode and interpret the river of language flowing off the tongue of a glossolaliar (another neologism?). Since both abilities, at their highest pitch of development, are exceedingly rare, so are circumstances where they find each other and can work together. Such pairs would be most useful to anthropologists and archaeologists faced with the inscrutable hatch‑marks of long‑vanished peoples.

Q: Have humans basically chosen to be physical in order to learn or realize that we create our own reality and also that in doing so we are not to harm others? (B.G.)
A: In ultimate terms—in geological time—yes. But more immediately, no. The earth frequency has not yet accelerated to the point where the majority of humankind can hold such an elevated thought. For the most part, most people are still stumbling about in the dark when it comes to understanding why they are here and what their life purpose might be beyond what the corner church might offer. As the earth rides to the crest of its accelerating frequencies, this awareness will become common knowledge.

We might reword the last part of your question, to wit: “and also that in doing so we do not harm ourselves by harming others.”

Q: Where do oil deposits really come from? The standard explanation doesn't seem to make sense—why are the deposits so vast? (R.L.)
A: We have nothing to add to the Standard Oil explanation. When you consider a warm and fecund earth, and billions of years of thriving plant and animal life, some reduced to a sticky carbon‑based liquid, the wonder is that you are not swimming in it. Indeed, liquefied plants and animals are more ubiquitous than most people realize, oozing up out of the ground in many parts of the world in less-than-commercially-viable amounts.

Q: In your book you say that we can swim freely among our multiple‑self companions using our mental tune up. You also say that the challenge of our age is the choice of “Event” of our planet's future. A happy world or a charred cinder. You explain that when we change our thoughts we are opening a “portal” through which we ride to become another multiple self. But what about the bigger parts or issues of our reality. What happens during the choosing of a future for our planet Earth? Does our mental tune up in that area also open up “portals”? (W.B.)
A: Obviously, the question of the future of the planet is not one that a single individual affects beyond contributing his/her tiny strand of consciousness to the collective. Were everyone far enough along in their spiritual development to be practicing mental tune‑ups and opening portals, your future Earth would be a more hospitable place than the one you are riding toward now.

Q: In your answer about dementia and brain disease you also mention food of genetic modified origin. I have two questions. You say that every life form has an energetic “blueprint” that remains in the nonphysical realm and that “pulses” to life in space‑time terms. Including of course a genetic foundation. Why do genes “work” outside their original genetic foundation or energetic blueprint? You say that everything has a consciousness and is part of larger bodies of consciousness. How does the consciousness of a life form and those larger bodies like an overlighting plant consciousness experience a “modification.” (W.B.)
A: We need not look to GMO food for examples of genetic modification. Any time two distinct species—plant or animal—breed for the first time, the result is a hybrid, a newly created biological and genetic entity. In many cases, such hybrids die in the womb as the disparate genetic heritages cannot be synthesized; the “gap” is too great between them. Even large dogs and tiny dogs cannot produce a successful litter. So there must be “just enough” of a distinction between the two genetic “packages” for them to reconcile and form a new life form.

If you have ever known genetically identical twins, you know that while they appear very similar, their behavior, interests, and life experiences may radically differ (our host knows identical twins, one homosexual, one heterosexual). This underscores the great give‑and‑take, the plasticity, between the physicalized realm and the “energetic blueprint” lying behind each individual being.

Every life form “impresses” itself upon its energetic blueprint, informing it of its genetic and biological condition; and the energetic blueprint adapts accordingly. As a gross example, if you lose an arm or leg, your DNA does not change, but your energetic blueprint must, for it stops impressing the flow of energy supporting the vanished limb. You know of “phantom limb” syndrome, where the individual suffers pain in a severed limb. In some cases, this can occur where the energetic blueprint, in making its adjustment, continues to impress “too much” energy into the region of the limb—not enough to restore its flesh and bone, but enough to create the uncomfortable tingling.

In other words, the energetic blueprint is elastic, plastic, malleable: it takes instruction from the entity it supports; it does not merely impress itself upon the entity.

The issue is complicated when we come to genetic engineering, for here humankind in its curiosity has created life forms carrying grossly disparate genetic heritages. Here the energetic blueprint will “do its best” to stretch and accommodate the genetic soup of its physicalized entity, but again, as nature shows, there can be only “so much” of a gap for an entity to enjoy a normal life. Early “experiments” in GM farm animals yielded deformed bodies and short, pain‑racked lives.

Human arrogance is no substitute for nature's wisdom, and there will come a time when the folly of manipulating the genes of plants will come home in a dramatic way. Save your heirloom seeds!

Q: I'm curious. Does the matrix of primal cells have boundaries? If so, could we ever detect the edge of them? Also, what is the purpose of all the galaxies, exploding stars, black holes, and endless space we see in our universe? (A.H.)
A: Purpose? The universe is a field of roiling, dynamic energy which you observe from your tiny perch. It is the foundation of a camouflage system—one of many—where change is a constant and the rapid and erratic flow of energy is the rule.

Since the physical universe has boundaries, the matrix of primal cells would also. If you can propose a hypothetical instrument to detect the edge of this matrix, we would be happy to review your blueprints!

Q: Do you agree that violence is never justified and that the ends never justify the means? Why would these things be true if there really is no death and deep down everything we do is agreed to by the other person? (B.G.)
A: Theoretically, yes; practically, no. As mentioned in a preceding answer, violence done to another is violence done to oneself; staining one's soul with the suffering or death of another and adding to the store of negativity which must be exorcised—in this lifetime or another—before the earth system can be released. In that sense, and with that realization, who would want to commit violence against another?

In practical terms, there are useful lessons to be drawn from obviating a greater harm by committing a lesser harm. Killing a potential terrorist before he kills hundreds of innocents—as viewed in the eyes of the mainstream—has value as an affirmation of society's value of protecting and valuing life.

Of course, metaphysicians know better; recognizing, as you mention, that all events are drawn to oneself for private reasons; that death is always chosen in its time, place, and manner; and that while the body dies, the essential self does not.

Join the conversation! Ask Alexander a question here!