Sat Mar 23, 2024 11:33 pm by globalturbo
Steve Beckow: What’s the Difference between a Saint and an Ascended Master?
Mar 22
Posted by Wes Annac
Written by Steve Beckow
I’ve
been asked to explain what the difference is between an “ascended
master” and a “saint.” Whenever one attempts a task like the this, it’s
necessary to make a few riders.
I can’t explain what the absolute difference is because of the nature
of words. Words are symbols upon which human beings freely and
arbitrarily bestow meaning. What is a “saint” to a Hindu may vary from
what is a “saint” to a Catholic.
And there’s no sense telling the one that they can’t use the meaning
they prefer. One cannot legislate a meaning. Human beings will think
what they please.
So we cannot prevent there being different meanings to a word like “saint.”
It isn’t even possible to say what all Catholics might consider to be
a saint because one cannot force Catholics to think one way and not
another. So I can only really say what I consider to be the difference.
For me, the distinguishing feature of “ascended masters” is that
they’ve passed beyond dualistic thinking to unitive thinking. They could
not have done so without leading a life that is redolent with the
divine qualities.
One cannot rape and pillage and be an ascended master, as far as I
know. But if one loves and has compassion and is kind and generous, I
think one places oneself on a road that leads to unitive consciousness.
Whatever the case, an ascended master at a minimum recognizes the
unity of life, the oneness of it, the fact that we are all One. I
cannot say “we are all one” and have it mean anything to me but an
ascended master can.
To say that a person has unitive consciousness is to locate the
vibrational frequency of that person’s being at a level higher than
would situate them in the Third or Fourth Dimensions, both of which see a
person retain dualistic consciousness, the awareness of separation,
difference, a lack of unity.
The Fourth Dimension on the other side of life is the Astral Plane,
the plane of desires. One can exist on the Astral Plane and still have
dualistic consciousness. But one cannot exist on the Fifth Dimension,
which is commonly called the Mental Plane, and not have unitive
consciousness.
So the demarcation line between us and an ascended master is at least entry into the Fifth-Dimensional frequency.
A lot of the ascended masters we know, I believe, are situated on
planes much, much higher than the Fifth Dimension. It isn’t discussed
much but Kuthumi, St. Germaine, Dhjwal Khul and others, I think, have
their native consciousness on a plane more elevated than the Fifth.
Nevertheless access into the Fifth is for us what is meant at a minimum
by “ascension.”
What a “saint” is depends on which religion is calling a person that.
I recall that Catholics have discrete requirements for a person
becoming a saint.
The colloquial use of the term usually denotes an enlightened person
who demonstrates a reliable level of exemplary behavior; that is,
behavior that reliably reflects the divine qualities. I think of St.
Francis, St. Clare, St. John of the Cross, or St. Theresa as being good
examples.
Eliminating those people who are canonized to satisfy an agenda of
pacifying a nation by giving them a saint, those who are genuinely
saintly reflect in their words and deeds the divine qualities and are
usually found to have experienced a level of enlightenment most often
found to be at least what Hindus call savikalpa samadhi or cosmic
consciousness. Savikalpa occurs when the kundalini reaches the brow or
sixth chakra.
A person is not an ascended master until they experience a level of
consciousness much beyond that, called by Hindus sahaja nirvikalpa
samadhi. Sahaja occurs when the kundalini reaches past the crown or
seventh chakra (Brahmajnana, kevalya nirvikalpa samadhi) and returns to
the spiritual heart or hridayam. That attainment results in a permanent
heart opening and a return to our natural (sahaja) state of being.
So one can be a saint, colloquially speaking, and not be an ascended
master. But most of the foremost of saints are usually found to be both,
like the saints I named above, for instance.
Therefore to be saintly is simply to manifest the divine qualities in
one’s words and deeds but to be ascended is to have entered at least
the Fifth Dimension. Having entered the Fifth Dimension one cannot help
but be saintly but I can conceive of saints who may not be ascended.
Therefore I would say that all ascended masters would be considered
saintly but not all saints would be considered ascended masters.
To the best of my knowledge, that’s the difference between a “saint” and an “ascended master.”
Source: http://goldenageofgaia.com/2013/03/whats-the-difference-between-a-saint-and-an-ascended-master/
Thanks to: http://aquariusparadigm.com
Mar 22
Posted by Wes Annac
Written by Steve Beckow
I’vebeen asked to explain what the difference is between an “ascended
master” and a “saint.” Whenever one attempts a task like the this, it’s
necessary to make a few riders.
I can’t explain what the absolute difference is because of the nature
of words. Words are symbols upon which human beings freely and
arbitrarily bestow meaning. What is a “saint” to a Hindu may vary from
what is a “saint” to a Catholic.
And there’s no sense telling the one that they can’t use the meaning
they prefer. One cannot legislate a meaning. Human beings will think
what they please.
So we cannot prevent there being different meanings to a word like “saint.”
It isn’t even possible to say what all Catholics might consider to be
a saint because one cannot force Catholics to think one way and not
another. So I can only really say what I consider to be the difference.
For me, the distinguishing feature of “ascended masters” is that
they’ve passed beyond dualistic thinking to unitive thinking. They could
not have done so without leading a life that is redolent with the
divine qualities.
One cannot rape and pillage and be an ascended master, as far as I
know. But if one loves and has compassion and is kind and generous, I
think one places oneself on a road that leads to unitive consciousness.
Whatever the case, an ascended master at a minimum recognizes the
unity of life, the oneness of it, the fact that we are all One. I
cannot say “we are all one” and have it mean anything to me but an
ascended master can.
To say that a person has unitive consciousness is to locate the
vibrational frequency of that person’s being at a level higher than
would situate them in the Third or Fourth Dimensions, both of which see a
person retain dualistic consciousness, the awareness of separation,
difference, a lack of unity.
The Fourth Dimension on the other side of life is the Astral Plane,
the plane of desires. One can exist on the Astral Plane and still have
dualistic consciousness. But one cannot exist on the Fifth Dimension,
which is commonly called the Mental Plane, and not have unitive
consciousness.
So the demarcation line between us and an ascended master is at least entry into the Fifth-Dimensional frequency.
A lot of the ascended masters we know, I believe, are situated on
planes much, much higher than the Fifth Dimension. It isn’t discussed
much but Kuthumi, St. Germaine, Dhjwal Khul and others, I think, have
their native consciousness on a plane more elevated than the Fifth.
Nevertheless access into the Fifth is for us what is meant at a minimum
by “ascension.”
What a “saint” is depends on which religion is calling a person that.
I recall that Catholics have discrete requirements for a person
becoming a saint.
The colloquial use of the term usually denotes an enlightened person
who demonstrates a reliable level of exemplary behavior; that is,
behavior that reliably reflects the divine qualities. I think of St.
Francis, St. Clare, St. John of the Cross, or St. Theresa as being good
examples.
Eliminating those people who are canonized to satisfy an agenda of
pacifying a nation by giving them a saint, those who are genuinely
saintly reflect in their words and deeds the divine qualities and are
usually found to have experienced a level of enlightenment most often
found to be at least what Hindus call savikalpa samadhi or cosmic
consciousness. Savikalpa occurs when the kundalini reaches the brow or
sixth chakra.
A person is not an ascended master until they experience a level of
consciousness much beyond that, called by Hindus sahaja nirvikalpa
samadhi. Sahaja occurs when the kundalini reaches past the crown or
seventh chakra (Brahmajnana, kevalya nirvikalpa samadhi) and returns to
the spiritual heart or hridayam. That attainment results in a permanent
heart opening and a return to our natural (sahaja) state of being.
So one can be a saint, colloquially speaking, and not be an ascended
master. But most of the foremost of saints are usually found to be both,
like the saints I named above, for instance.
Therefore to be saintly is simply to manifest the divine qualities in
one’s words and deeds but to be ascended is to have entered at least
the Fifth Dimension. Having entered the Fifth Dimension one cannot help
but be saintly but I can conceive of saints who may not be ascended.
Therefore I would say that all ascended masters would be considered
saintly but not all saints would be considered ascended masters.
To the best of my knowledge, that’s the difference between a “saint” and an “ascended master.”
Source: http://goldenageofgaia.com/2013/03/whats-the-difference-between-a-saint-and-an-ascended-master/
Thanks to: http://aquariusparadigm.com
