One of the things that has cropped up in a few of the extraterrestrial (ET) contact books I've read of late is the notion of a "soul agreement": an agreement made before incarnating, possibly at one's Higher Self level, to do or experience certain things.
Now, some of those may not be pleasant, but looking at the harm being described in those books (especially by those dealing with the psychological trauma associated with suppression / repression / dissociation), I have a few thoughts I'd like to get down.
These are not all fully formed.
- Arrogance towards a lifeform that may be - not just perceived: may be - less evolved is the sort of spiritual error reflected in this physical world in carnism and similar attitudes: attitudes which lead to taking sentient life (ironic, when so many of these books stress that one must not take life to have contact - or contact with the more advanced ETs), animal experiments, and the general environmental devastation that is putting life on Earth at risk.
If we here on this planet can be aware of that error, how can more evolved societies not be?
If those societies do not have proper respect, and think we can be used for medical monitoring without consent (which has been done here [e.g., this], and nowadays would lead to those involved being disbarred, sacked and charged), breeding, or other traumatic or at lest disrespectful actions, they are LESS evolved than us. - That raises a point I and others have touched on previously (e.g., here): some ETs are not good.
And on that point, anyone who has a militaristic or physical power focus is completely UNABLE to tell the difference - in fact, some of the events described are actually performed by earth people.
It is the approaches of the CE 5 movement that will be of effective aid in dealing with such matters. - Next, bedside manner.
Some of the behaviour described sounds like it comes from 1950s or earlier vets - or some doctors. Any vet treating animals that way would be either charged or out of business very quickly, and even doctors are trying to improve their bedside manner (with success, in many cases).
We have known about the importance of not doing harm for millennia: BPM ETs would also know that. - There are psychological aspects to examine here as well.
Some of what may be being described could be how the minds of the contactees are interpreting what they saw - I'm not referring to "screening memories", where a false memory is deliberately (and unethically) - implanted. People deal with traumatic events in a number of ways, and one can be to think they saw something they didn't.
There was an episode in the TV series MASH where some of the lead characters are stuck on a bus at night and at risk of being found by the North Korean/Chinese troops. In response to calling on everyone to keep quiet, one of the South Koreans being transported on the bus, a mother with a young child, effectively suffocates her baby to keep it quiet. The character telling the story through flashbacks in a counselling session had changed his memory of this terrible event to a woman strangling a chicken. (It went for 11 seasons - 256 episodes, so I'm not going to try to find that particular episode.)
It is conceivable that the events were conducted ethically and respectfully, and that it is the psychological shock of those undergoing an experience which shatters their worldview (although that does NOT apply to sex without consent or breeding - again, we here on this world know how damaging that is) that is the cause of the harm or the psychological perception expressed in 1950s terms ("I fell like ... like ... an animal at a 1950s vet"), which raises the valid point that the delay in open contact is to prepare the people of this planet - many of whom are spiritually backward - to be able to experience that contact without going insane, becoming morbid, or starting a war or three. - There is also the issue of learning to consider.
There is such a thing as negative learning, but in the overwhelming majority of cases (especially for spiritual matters), learning in a positive, constructive way is more effective.
Is some of the commentary about "soul agreements" a way of rationalising something unpleasant into something positive?
If so, it is in good company, as most of us do that is many circumstances - especially paid work.
I have no particular conclusion from this: I am writing this because I explore ideas best by writing about them.
Is this is of value to someone else ... bonus.
