Someone asked me to write a message into his notebook. I hardly knew him, but the image of someone with the back against the wall came to mind. So I asked Melkiades to help me, and my fingers wrote: "If you've got your back against the wall, ask your Higher Self for advice. Listen. Then turn around and go through the wall."

Before you pounce on me, yes yes yes, you can go through the wall, nearly always. In this blog I'll show you how.

They went through the wall

Let's start here. Did you see Greg Braden's "She-is-healed" video1? Watch it if you can.

tumour1.jpg
 tumour2.jpg
 tumour3.jpg

It shows a scene from a Bejing volunteer medical clinic2 where a woman had a large bladder tumour, shown on a split ultrasound screen. The left part of the screen showed the tumour in its initial stage, and the right part displayed it in its current state.

Around the bed were three trained mental practitioners. Together they chanted a Chinese word which means "she is already healed", again and again. And wouldn't you believe it, over some three minutes, the tumour practically disappeared, right in front of our eyes.

Let this sink in. The healers didn't say, "woman, please be healed". Nor did they ask any divinity to make the tumour disappear. No one asked anything. No, they simply said, in unison, "The facts are different. The tumour is already gone." We assume that the patient integrated this belief and transmitted it to her entire body. Within a few moments, the woman's tumour had no choice but to disappear. Three healers chanting in unison and sharing a profound conviction with the patient were more powerful in determining "reality" than the tumour itself.

In tune with the chanters and the patient's profound convictions, the patient's body "turned and went through the wall". On the other side of the wall, the continued existence of the tumour ceased to make any sense. And if the patient maintains the same belief structure in the future, there is an excellent chance that the tumour will not reappear3.

Whole societies can go through the wall

Let's take another example of "going through the wall".

A few years ago, we had the horrible Fukishima disaster. The radiation has spread over northern Japan and all of the United States and Canada. In front of every mountain range with a west flank, the east-flowing jet streams have provoked more radiation fallout. In many areas, the radiation levels have risen well over "normal" danger levels, and as a fairly inevitable consequence, cancer rates will increase dramatically in these areas during the coming years. Our society has the back against the wall.

For a few weeks after the accident, the whole world was saying, "What are they gonna do? What are they gonna do?" and no one seemed to be able to do anything. The reaction in Japan was hesitant and sluggish, international support was weak, and subsequent reports on safety measures on atom reactors in Europe and the U.S. showed long lists of deficiencies. But no one was able to do very much.

Windmill.jpgThen, much to everyone's surprise, Germany announced one morning that they would simply stop and get out of atomic power production. I have no idea how the decision was made, but Germany's powerful wind and solar industry as well as the green coalition partners may have played an important role. With the increased internal pressure to produce electricity by alternate means, this new government strategy would support the alternate fuel industry, which in turn would favour German exports. And with the voters largely on their side, the Merkel government turned this unfortunate event into an advantage. They went through a wall -- which in fact had barely been there beforehand.

On the other side of the wall, there was no more need for atomic power. Even though the transition will not be as easy as a stroll in the park, coming developments have been made much easier by this collective decision. The German society -- and subsequently Switzerland, who also decided to get out of atomic power -- have just negotiated a sharp turn in economic prioritization.

The monster we are up against

All of us are unhappy about some aspect in our lives, aspects that are asking for a change. What's more, our societies are running headlong into a series of ecological disasters that cry out for change. Again and again, as societies or as individuals, we find that we cannot continue in a certain direction and that we must, somehow, find another solution.

No one likes change. But when things get to an intolerable state, we'd better take the measure of the monster that we're up against. We'd better get to know how a major change can be negotiated as efficiently as possible.

When you trace back any intolerable situation to its origins, it generally comes down to some habits based on a wrong interpretation of the facts. The habits get us into an intolerable "pickle", long before the actual facts impose themselves. Long before an intolerable state becomes factually unsupportable, there are numerous signs that we're headed towards the wall.

For example, we were told during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s that atomic power would be the cheapest and most effective solution for solving our energy needs. Five decades later, we know that this was a incomplete interpretation of the facts. Three major factors were not taken into account, first, the considerable difficulty of maintaining a trouble-free burn process and of containing radiation over long periods of time in large power plants (even with earthquakes and tsunamis), second, the enormous difficulty and cost of disposing of radiation materials, and third the incredibly high cost of disposing of a reactor once it had served its life time. Once all the extra costs are taken into account, what had seemed a cheap and effective solution at first has turned out to be an expensive nightmare. We manoeuvred ourselves into an intolerable situation, because an erroneous calculation was made and was sold to us. We're now labouring with habits created under the erroneous assumptions, and we have to find our way out, as best as possible.

How long have we known this? For at least thirty years. At the beginning of the 1980s, we already had enough facts in hand to correct the first assumptions, but by that time, we were already committed to the construction of many more power plants. Habit and commercial convenience had taken over, and it seemed impossible to stop the train.

So what's the wall? Nothing but a wrong interpretation of the facts maintained by habit and commercial interests long after recognizing the error. In other words, the wall is nothing more than a set of beliefs. Going through the wall is "nothing more than changing a set of beliefs".

Changing beliefs

I put "nothing more than changing a set of beliefs" into quotation marks because it is in fact a very hard thing to do.

First, we must admit the error and second we must change the habits -- as rapidly and as smoothly as possible. This rubs everyone the wrong way, but when the time has come, that's the way it is. At the same time, our 5D capacities simplify making the necessary changes.

Admit the error. The first difficulty is to admit the error. Many people, politicians first among them, feel that they never make any errors -- all errors are someone else's fault. That's simply stupid. All of us make errors, and how we deal with them is a measure of our maturity.

Let's take a common error: you've missed your exit on the express-way. What do you do? Are you so angry that you miss the next exit as well? Will you carry your anger or your hard-headed persistence into the next thing you do and upset the rest of your day?

The mature way of dealing with this common error is to calm the spirits so that you can quickly determine the next possible route. Sometimes the navigation system will do that for you. Of course the loss of time and fuel is upsetting, but the most important thing is the overall goal. You want to get to your destination rapidly and with the least amount of effort. The mature thing is to accept the fact that you've made a minor error, and to consider that other things are much more important to you than the detour.

You can take this even one step further. You can ask why you made the error. Were you simply inattentive? Was there some other landmark that disoriented you? This can be useful for the next time you get to the same place, so you can seek out relevant landmarks for your exit.

In other words, relax, don't get into a fit and let your intelligence guide you. Upset emotions or fat-headed persistence will not get you any further. And stop pretending that you incorporate some divine wisdom. You and I are simple humans that stumble through life and do the best we can with our interpretation of reality. We make errors and if we're smart about it, we learn from them.

Errors are necessary. In fact, errors are even necessary because they are part of our creative ability. How did Bach, Mozart or Beethoven come up with their incredible range of melodies? By experimentation. Some of it was better and some of it less. Not all of Bach's melodies are a total hit, and we can tell how the composers experimented by examining some of the original partitions and by comparing similar passages.

So to sum up, let's develop a mature attitude towards errors. We make errors, either by consciously working with trial and error, or because of inattention or insufficient competence. If we made an error, we remain cool and think of alternatives.

Some errors have become bad habits

This gets us into the tough part. Changing a bad habit is much more difficult because one must replace one complete set of belief structures by another complete set. Furthermore, some false beliefs may have powerful commercial support, or may now be part of our self definition, and will thus become particularly difficult to eradicate. Frequently we don't wish to accept the full range of changes that are required for a transition to a new state.

I'll illustrate this with an example that all of us are now well aware of, world-wide: overweight and obese conditions4.

By now, the factors contributing to obesity are well known. At the physical end, there is the list of all the wrong things we eat: too much sugar, too many refined foods, too many animal products, insufficient fresh vegetables and fruits, too many non-natural conservation agents and too many pesticides.5

As another physical factor we add "lack of physical exercise". A slim body enjoys movement, and an overweight or obese body resists it.

Among the psychological factors, let's just name the most obvious: stress and frustration. Under conditions of stress, we don't dedicate the time to getting those fresh foods from the store, and in conditions of frustration, particularly long-term accumulated frustration, we defend our psychological selves by a continuous reinforcement of our physical shell. One operates like a slave: the body continuously signals a "hungry" condition, and persons with long-term accumulated frustration simply cannot resist and ferociously defend their right to be fed far more than is physically necessary.

What needs to be changed

So, to reverse overweight conditions, we need to replace a long series of established habits (abstracted from quite a number of authors, including Campbell and Campbell, 2006):

  • Prioritization of fresh vegetables and fruits, particularly of "BIO" products that have been grown without chemical fertilizers, that have not been treated with herbicides and that do not contain any non-natural conservation agents.

  • Profound changes in what we eat -- how much you eat is secondary if you eat the right combination of foods: strongly coloured vegetables and fruits, limited amounts of sugar-, starch- and root-based foods, and animal products making up not more than 5% of the daily diet.

  • Increase of physical activity to let the body return to better levels.

  • Resolution of any long-term psychological frustration that may be linked to excess food consumption.

  • Forget short-term gains and fix long-term improvements. If you took 20 years to get to where you are now, a 10-year return to desired status will be an excellent performance. According to traditional Chinese medicine, a 5-year return period would be the fastest possible recuperation time.

Is this list too long or too drastic for you?

If you're overweight or obese, you've got your back against the wall. You've now got the choice between various options:

  • Continue on the same path, and you already know where that leads.

  • Try one of the many quick fixes, watch your body loose impressive amounts of weight, only to return to previous or worse conditions a few months after you go off the diet. (I've done this several times and it is very discouraging.)

  • Get part of your stomach surgically removed or restrained. This is a last-resort approach and it has the unquestionable effect of getting your weight down permanently, but it does not free you from the negative effects of our typical fast-food diet, nor from various other physical disorders induced by stress- or frustration-induced eating. So if you're going to change diets any way, and if you also get your psychological house in order, it's questionable for all but totally out-of-balance situations that the expensive and radical surgical procedure represents such a massive advantage.

  • Implement only part of the list -- and see only part of the hoped-for effect, if any.

  • Simply lay down the law around your home that from now on you'll not only follow, but also personally integrate the full list of changes listed above. Then watch your weight come down nice and gradually over the coming months and years.

It's your choice. You're against the wall. You can turn around and pass through it, or not. It's only a set of beliefs.

Are you the boss?

We've taken the issue of obesity to illustrate a massive personal change, but the principle applies to any situation where major changes are required: a marital separation, a job change, a change of geographical location, etc.

It all comes down to the issue of how you see yourself: are you a person who likes to be led by others? Or are you the person who likes to take things into your own hands?

A 5D person naturally tends towards the second solution. You see yourself as the boss and you like to make your own decisions. Since the 5th dimension delineates the key information points as a separate dimension, you can play with all the options before you take any action. The 5th dimension clarifies one's playing field in total hypothetical clarity, because this dimension represents the level of information about the structures that we are involved in and that constitute ourselves.

This way, all the factors involved in the change become crystal-clear, and you can make your personal decisions or add your vote or market weight in the directions that seem most appropriate to you.

Melki

 

[Verification: Melkiades, are you in agreement with the text as it stands? Answer: Totally agreed. Can I put it on Internet? Answer: Totally agreed.]

1 Greg Braden's "She is healed" video: "Gregg Braden - Quantum Healing of Tumour thru the Power of Thought _ Feeling".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZpRP1FV0lE

2 Now closed due to political pressure.

3 This is an inverse application of the placebo effect, to effect healing with patients who wish to effect it through a profound change of their belief structure. These patients actively want the placebo to have a healing effect. Further explanations will be given in Section 3.

4 The standardized body-mass index (BMI) definition of "overweight" and "obese" is based upon the relationship between weight and height. It is the same for men and women. The formula is the following: BMI = weight in kg / height in m2. Example: 100 kg / (1.75 m)2 = 100 / 3.06 = 32.7. Values above 30 are called "obese" and from 25 - 29.9 are "overweight".

Obese conditions often provoke conditions that require direct medical attention, while overweight conditions represent increased health risks that generally do not require immediate medical attention. For simplicity's sake I will only use the term "obesity" here.

5 For a short and clear review, see chapter 6 in T. Colin Campbell and Thomas M. Campbell II, The China Study. 2006. Benbella Books, Texas.

Last revision January 2016

Copyright © 2012-2016 Melkiades.ch