2007-10-28 Sondjah’s Instructions CDT #2
1. October 28, 2007 (unrecorded) Taken from the Journal.
This session provided familiarization with Sondjah.
2. November 4, 2007 (unrecorded) Taken from the Journal.
Discussion came to “the sustainability of the individual.”
3. November 11, 2007 (unrecorded) Taken from the Journal.
Discussion centered around healthcare services.
4. November 18, 2007 (unrecorded) Taken from the Journal.
Healthcare issue continues, but w/more specifics.
5. December 8, 2007 (unrecorded) Taken from the Journal.
[Sondjah] suggested that when the time was right, and those who are
interested, to attempt a beginning in one of these sub-fields of healthcare.
…Giving you this question, I will not assist you further, but require you to devise questions and we will have a dialog shortly. It will be a stretch for this one to be in and out of a TR situation/condition, but we will strive to work with him to make it easier for him to do this. Now you may choose your groups and strive to answer the question. You may take as long as you want before you call a time out, and want to ask questions of me for clarification or for explanation. You may want to go for some time on your own before doing that; you simply know that there are very few rules concerning this. This is as developmental for us as it is for you. We are learning as you go along. Thank you…. …I didn’t realize I was headed to the 23rd Century, but I am.
[Sondjah had mentioned the ‘sustainable society as being in the 23rd century to give students a perspective of a future, sustainable society to work toward in their discussions.] .
... SONDJAH: So my friends, you have had a new experience, have you not? I appreciate your struggle, working with this topic. You are beginning to see the many layers of a marriage; how it relates to family; how it relates to community; and you are beginning to get a glimmer of how you develop that into a sustainable society and civilization. You are quite correct that this is a multi-dimensional project. You are not linear creatures yourselves; you are multi-dimensional in your whole being. You must discover how to live in a multi-dimensional society through your multi-dimensional social institutions that are sustainable. This truly is no easy task, but yet it is not as complex and daunting as it appears—it will only take decades, and centuries, perhaps. ….
7. Excised from “12-17-07 EvergreenCCDT#2 (Transcript)
… SONDJAH: My friends, this is Sondjah. Welcome and good evening. It is a pleasure to be here with you once again. Last time, I gave you a two-part question, and the question was this: “What is a sustainable marriage?” “How would you design one, and how does marriage contribute to a sustainable society and civilization?” Whereupon, you broke into two groups of three each, ….
… Remember, we are concerned about devising social institutions and social relationships that are sustainable, meaning ones that you know the parameters of their existence, and when you come to the end of them, when you engage a new one, and so on. ….
…. Sheralyn: Yes, I think I do. I have another question, if I may ask? (Please.) Then I’m assuming that if we are looking into a sustainable marriage, that marriage is part of our evolvement into this New Era.
SONDJAH: Yes, it is. Marriage is a relationship. You can devise it, you can invent it, you can define it, you can limit it, you can expand it however you wish. I will tell you this, though, and this is the only clue I will give you concerning this subject, is that marriage is a contractual relationship, which fosters the care taking of children. Outside of that, it can be anything you want to design. We wish that your civilizations and societies be sustainable, which requires a contractual marriage relationship that has as its primary concern the procreation and socialization of the children that it produces, until their maturation. (Thank you.)
SONDJAH: The concern of the Creator, the First Source and Center, is with the individual. Out of billions of inhabited worlds, and trillions of sentient, soul-filled individuals, the Creator’s concern is always with his relationship with the individual. And it is always with the individual that we begin. Our concern for society, for civilization is secondary and tertiary. Our primary concern is always with the individual and this is where we start.
And from the individuals, develop families, communities, states, regions, nations, and a world. Always it begins with the individual. The quality of an individual life dictates the quality of the civilization that will come into existence. And how well civilization prospers, then it prospers the individual. But always, it is the individual that is central to all our schemes, to Christ Michael’s schemes, to the Correcting Time, and to the work of Monjoronson and this program of co-creative teams. This is where we begin. ….
For in designing a sustainable civilization at this point, no one is right; no one has the perfect idea—we do not either, and we are here to explore that with you. I will give you the assignment, which you will engage next time, and these are the assignments. You can choose which ones you wish to work on. You may choose to work on one or two; we would hope that you not try to engage all of them, unless you do so in a very cursory, outlined manner, rather than in detail. You are invited to work on one with your fellow teammates, if you wish, in detail and that too is a matter of choice.
Here are the propositions:
1) Design a family relationship. This may include “marriage” or it may not. In any case, where children are involved, you should think in terms of a contractual relationship, where there is an agreed upon obligation to raise the children into the future and to their maturity. Do you understand this part so far? (Yes.)
2) There may come a “marriage” that exists between a co-creative couple, meaning a young couple, which bears no children. You may wish to design a relationship for them.
3) You may wish to design a “marriage” or relationship in a couple’s relationship, after children are born, and mature, and have left the nest.
4) You may wish to design a “marriage” relationship or companion relationship, between two mature individuals, who are in their 50’s and above. What would this look like?
5) And you may wish to again, devise or design a “marriage” relationship for those who are past retirement—70 and above.
So you see, “marriage” is in quotes, it is an agreed upon relationship between two individuals, who wish to engage the future together. You may define what that future means. What are the limits of termination? How early can they terminate; how late can they terminate; for what reasons would they terminate the relationship? These are truly important questions to answer.
Again, at the beginning of each of these different relationships, engage them with this question: What is the intention of this relationship, with the intention that there are obligations. In the case of a procreation couple, the obligations are imminent; they are paramount, they are of the acme of importance for the maintenance of society. These things must as well be engaged in this very complex relationship. You do not have to answer all parameters, problems, situations, or developments for any one of these relationships. You must simply begin by stating the intention for the relationship, for coming together.
5) Now, you obviously must have in mind that not everyone wants to be in a relationship—this is true. None-the-less, individuals are in perennial relationship with their community, whatever that may be, and they are always in relationship with society. What are the intentions of single-hood?
SONDJAH: That is your choice; we have no recommendation. We feel, however, that in the larger group, you will simply share your opinions, which may fertilize the other teams. Productivity will come from committed teams of individuals who will work on one idea until they have something on paper, which is something they can be proud of and which will accomplish the goals they have set out to accomplish. (Thank you.)
#8 Excised from “12-28-07 EvergreenCCDT#3 (Transcript)
Now, for tonight’s message. We have given you—and I can say “we” as I work with a Teaching Council, those who assist me in writing the lesson plans that we give you—we have prepared you with several questions from last time: Do you remember them? (Yes.) You were given several distinct relationship paradigms, and we wanted you to think about these different relationships. And for those who were not here last time, you were to think about the procreative couple: What would this family look like? You may want to add onto that: What would their marriage look like? What would their relationship contract look like? Now, when you talk about marriage, you have sentiments about that. When we talk about marriage, we do not think of these relationships with sentiment; we think of these relationships as contractual, with intentions for joining together. There are outcomes that you both desire, and there are things that you want to work against, so that your relationship continues.
Remember that we also gave you an assignment of examining the childless couple, who also are young and could be procreative if they wish to, or perhaps there are medical or physical reasons not to. It is a matter of choice, coming together to have no children. What would their relationship look like? What kinds of agreements would they make? What would be the intention for the relationship? Remember, that we specifically told you very pointedly, that you must come up with an understanding of the intention for each of these relationships, and there are no limits to that. We did not set any parameters on that, and we will not, for [in] this you are the humans; you are the people who live with these relationships. You must generate the parameters and intentions for existing and living and growing, within these relationships.
Therefore, your task was to choose a sub-Team in which you would like to work. I will let this one come to awareness and each of you raise your hand and begin buddying up with 1, 2 or 3 people, who have like interests. /////