How the spiritual community becomes so fragmented

I always find your messages really wise.Thank you.

Great message, Will. Different belief systems and preconceived ideas has fed division in the conscious community, and everyone follows the versions of events they want to believe the most. Personally, I backed off of channeled messages for a while (channeling and advocating them) so I could take some time to figure out what I really wanted out of this evolution.

I've been drawn back to writing about channeled messages and advocating them myself, but with a bit of a twist from how I perceived them before. Now, I look for the channelings out there that contain the most helpful information about our spiritual evolution, our guides, and the higher dimensions.

I'm not as interested in what different channels are saying about things like the Malaysian flight, and like you, I notice the difference between reports. I too think it comes down to what the respective channels and their followers want to believe is true, and one has to be careful when channeling because their mind and their belief systems can absolutely paint the communication.

As a matter of fact, this is why I've chosen to write about discernment lately. Clearly, it's important, especially in regards to channels.

Much Love! :)

1. My first response was that what we mostly argue over is inconsequential anyway, much like the creation vs. science argument within the mainstream. Does it really matter how the earth was created? Not at the moment. Let's instead focus on saving the earth together instead dividing ourselves over our beliefs of who created it. But, before you nod in agreement, consider that this means climate change is an argument worth having. Which leads me to my second point.

2. Not all conflict is bad. Some conflict is constructive, and some, destructive; we must discern between them. In the spiritual community, we tend to be averse to conflict - I don't think this is a good thing as it undermines unity. Yes, I said it. Avoidance, often masked as "live and let live" and "it's all perception" is sometimes a hindrance, not a help. We should apply more nuance to what conflict means and embrace the right kinds of friction. I'd call proper friction to be conflict with a healthy relationship with the ego (see this post for further explanation: http://soundofheart.org/galacticfreepress/content/ego-and-reflections ). It is good to challenge ourselves and to invite challenge from others. Nobody gets to the top of their game, be it in sports or spiritual actualization, without challenge. Unity is never going to be reached until we aim for our best selves, collectively. We should be setting the example for the mainstream, yes?

To someone that argues the earth is flat, we can leave them to their internal dramas. It doesn't matter, the earth is here. To someone that is spreading hate, racism, violence, etc. We better not be silent, it is not the time to say "live and let live." You hurt the cause of unity this way and you help the person who is inflicting pain onto others, rather than offering supporting energy to the person that is hurt by targeted violence. Choosing battles is what it comes down to.

What one person channels vs. what another channels .. probably not worth arguing over. The plane is down regardless. What kind of structures we should create in the new world.... that is worth discussion. Personally, I think some mediums are a progressing their work, furthermore, they are not necessarily going to be at the top of their game at every turn. It isn't really my place to judge, I simply take what resonates and leave the rest. The fearful stuff about evil aliens vs. good aliens and the New World Order... not my scene. They are spreading fear. Though, I do challenge those notions from time to time. Discernment, as was mentioned previously by a commenter, is key. The world of information is a buffet. A smorgasbord, of sorts. There's no need to eat all that is offered. 

3. Conformity is neither harmony, nor unity. Most of us realize that unity doesn't necessarily mean we all must be in agreement about everything. But.. again, nor does it mean to be in perfect harmony 24 hours of the day for 365 days of the year.  For example, I think our tendency to avoid conflict has barred us from entering the next phase of creating what the new earth will look like. It seems to me that many of the blogs and posts on Facebook and such are repeating the same things over and over, which is good. Great, actually. But, at some point we are going to get too stagnant and I think we should be getting a move on soon. Unless we are all going to be, effectively, living in a little room with virtual reality glasses on, we are going to be living on a singular planet. There is going to be a need for consensus. Now, how we reach consensus is really the rub. I am partial to the old ways of the indigenous peoples of the planet, namely the Native Americans. I'm also very intrigued by the methods brought forth in The Fifth Sacred Thing by Starhawk. The "government" in this work of fiction has a tribal feel to it. Starhawk has also done some work on this very subject. See this link. 

http://www.starhawk.org/activism/trainer-resources/consensus.html

Anyway, in a nutshell:  Unity is more than a simple lack of conflict. Is a battle worth choosing? Usually not. If it is, how do we go about addressing it in a positive way? In addition to the reasons named, I'd add that we are fragmented because we have forgotten the nuances of conflict.  Just my two cents. 

Love, Light, and Blessings to One and ALL,

Rebecca