Last night I listened to Anu’s return – the first interview in series of six. It was for the first time in a handful of years that he spoke again. Then, Anu was speaking as the god he perceived himself to be, he wallowed in the power he perceived himself to have over his creation. This interview, his comeback, was a different approach. The most striking aspect of Anu 2012 was for me to see the likeness between himself and his creation, us humans.
Sure there are differences between humans, Anu, and the Reptilian race – for example when he talks about coming into being and birthing himself through emerging from existence as the totality of beingness. This is impossible for us to conceive of because we can hardly recall the first days of our life on earth. Also, the structural set up of the “Reptilian tradition” is unfamiliar to us, and by this I mean the code of conduct between the elder and the younger members, as well as the characteristics of the underlying belief system, which carries this structure. An example for that is the understanding of the relationship between form and being. Though for me these details are of minor consequence.
What I find significantly in alignment between Anu and his creation, the human race, is the role of power and the ignorance of questioning the nature of one’s intention. Anu made it clear that his need for power was the motivating factor for him in creating enslavement. He externalised his understanding of power just like we externalise our understanding of power. Yet, he and us fall prey to our own deception.
Let’s look at our world, we create hierarchies that carry the concept of externalised power ‘over xyz’ through to everything we are, create and consume. Hierarchical division is how we understand cohesion within our economic system, societal system and family system. In this, we have expanded by seeing all that is around us in the same way: animals, plants and earth resources are classified and utilised from this externalised position of power. Depending on where these elements find themselves in the structure of hierarchical division, they have either more or less value.
We believe, think and intent to create a position of strength for ourselves through an external application of power. Within that we accept destruction, suffering and deception as part of the tools we use to obtain power. This is no different from what Anu revealed to us in the interview, in how he enslaved beings on planet earth. Although he was questioning the Reptilian tradition, just as we are questioning through our investigations into knowledge – in both cases it is the starting point of separation and the end result is the same. Anu broke the ‘traditional’ code of conduct and employed means of destruction and suffering to forcefully claim his position of power.
Anu is god, we are god. In the interview Anu hinted to an important point in supports of the previous statement. For us, worship of an all powerful being, a god-creator, to which we can revert, escape or believe to trust in, is the ultimate abdication of responsibility as part of the whole of beingness. In this we are the lost children of beingness – lost, in the sense that we have identified with the starting point of separation, which inevitably crashes at one moment in time because beingness cannot sustain separation. Anu crashed when the portal opened. What Anu hinted to was the fact that he too, was “used” as he called it, he was put on a mission as creator of humans. Just as we have accepted our role as destructive and ill-fitted creators on and of planet earth.
When Anu spoke of lateness, or too lateness as in his case, he was referring to the second point that I want to make here in demonstrating “the missing of the obvious”: We created ourselves in the image and likeness of our god. We never questioned this god nor his intention, and this is a proven fact – we have more religions ‘operating’ on the planet today than ever before. We never question what we create and consume and the traces we leave behind. We do not look back in self-honesty. Thus, the point of ignorance is simple: We ignore our ability and capability of looking at the outcome of our actions and inactions. This is the decisive point, because we are in awareness of what we create, we reside in midst of it, yet we choose to be ignorant of it. Instead, we find ways to argue that this is the way god intended it to be, that it is human nature, or else that we need god’s help to change it.
When Anu admitted that at some point, it can be too late, that our windows of opportunity are counted, he implied that he and the others were in the position to see what they had created but had chosen to be ignorant about it. By doing so he admitted that it was up to him alone – as instance of all beingness – to either separate and destroy by going deeper into separation*, or to internalise power through self-directed actions build on self-honesty – and thus to recreate himself as the one instance of beingness he truly is – in oneness and equality.
We are in the year 2012 – it is our turn now, can we do it or will we follow in the steps of our creator, will we diminish or will we become one and equal? Whatever we choose, we choose it mutually – there is no separation!
I am ready to listen to part 2!
*(in the way he proceeded when questioning Reptilian ‘tradition’, because he questioned a belief system by creating belief in power)