2008-01-28-Co-Creative Design Team

Session

Opening

SONDJAH: This is Sondjah; let us continue. As we proceed farther and farther into the lessons, you will find that we are leaving a history, that there are issues which we have left behind, but once again in the future, we will resurrect the main succinct points and we will fulfill them. We will flesh them out and complete them, and these will be our findings—your findings and our findings—for this is a co-creative effort as you recall, and so these are “our” findings—you possess them, we possess them—they are “ours.” Therefore, we have a mutual sharing of this activity and are the results of our combined efforts.

I am very pleased and congratulate the two individuals who have gone through the history of our work together, to glean the nuggets, the instructions, the parameters, the requirements that we will eventually satisfy. These are very simple, very straightforward when you see them as a whole, for the instructions are very brief usually, and so each lesson can be made very tight and very succinct. We will be using these records that you are making, and one of those are right here today. [This is Daniel: He is talking about you, Sheralyn and Hilarie.] This is Sondjah: So we are pleased to have this at hand. You will be as pleased equally in the near future, as you see these historical stones along the way that we must mark our progress.

Lesson

Tonight we are going to revisit an issue, which we have not satisfied. Several lessons ago we talked about the intentions of 6 relationship paradigms. You were assigned the work of deliberating and deciding and formulating a design for an intentional relationship. What would be the intention for each one of these 6 relationship paradigms? So far, 2 relationships have been worked upon, and this is a good beginning.

Tonight we will go back to the foundation of all sustainability — we will be talking about values. What are the values of human relationships? You would not need to divide into sub-teams tonight if you did not want to, as we are quite small in number. These values underlie each fundamental relationship, each of these paradigms of relationships. You are to work on this, this evening. You may, if you wish, proceed ahead towards beliefs. Remember, we had the 4 layers to each relationship, and that is the values, the beliefs, the intentions and then the actions/activities that people carry out to fulfill a relationship. So tonight, I ask you to settle into your team or your sub-teams and work on the values of each relationship.

I will give you a clue, however, that the values that you decide upon are almost all fundamental to all human relationships, so with that, you have an insight about the differences—and the lack of them—if there are any. You may find that there are differences in values in different relationships, but we suggest that you think in terms of universals. Are there any preliminary questions before you go to your sub-teams, or decide to work as a whole team? (Pause.) Hearing none, I ask you now to proceed to your task and work in your team or sub-teams. I will not decide this for you, as this is something you will become acquainted with in each session that we have, each time we meet. Until later, I bid you good night.

• [Later.]

SONDJAH: This is Sondjah. It is very good to see you struggle with these issues, struggling with values, to find which are core and which are in orbit around those core values. You have done a good service for yourselves, to inquire, to wonder and to debate these issues, these values of a sustainable society, of a growing society, a progressive society.

Before I get to your questions, I will make this further assignment to you: This begins a new aspect, a new chapter for you and the work that you will do in your sub-teams and in this larger team. I and the Teaching Council that I work with have devised this element for you, which is very simple, and that is to discover the core values that sustain human society. I would ask that when you return to your homes, inquire on the Internet or in your libraries and encyclopedias, or in your religious studies. Many ideas have come forward tonight, which are successful and would lead you to right ends? What we are doing by asking you to do this, and to assign you this work outside of the team is to get you acquainted with the basic function of the team outside of our meetings. That is to do fundamental social research, which is core to the success of the Design Teams. Why invent the wheel, when it has already been invented?

You have hundreds of years of thoughtful scientists, philosophers, theologians and enlightened individuals who have spoken to you already about the values that sustain society and the values that sustain relationships. We would ask you to do this research. I will also give you a clue, you will probably find far less than a dozen core values that sustain relationships, society, and civilization. Our work is limited to an individual’s relationships: relationships between your self and another person or several persons in a family or a community. We are not talking about societal values—that is a different issue. Those become politicized and “religiousized” and can spin you out of orbit and out of control, and your time would be unproductive. Think in terms of relationships of the individual. This will help keep you on focus. Do you understand?

You may have discerned too that we have now become engaged with each other for almost a dozen lessons. [Note: The beginning five sessions were not recorded or transcribed.] The first few were exploratory, where you could go far a field and ask any question you wanted to, about almost any subject. And then we began to explore with you, the Co-creative Design Team process, where you were given assignments to go into your sub-teams and discuss the issues and try to come to some agreement, some findings of yours that you could bring back to the team.

We have talked about the various levels of relationship paradigm, from the values, to the beliefs, to the intentions and then to the actions and behaviors of individuals in these relationships. We assigned to you the work of working on an intention for one of the relationship paradigms, and you discussed and worked on this for at least 2 sessions. We have brought you back down to the very “core,” the very “heart” foundation of all human relationships, and that has to do with values. It is from here, my friends, that we will continue to build the larger and larger aspects of relationships, until we have fully explored all the relationship paradigms and have written all the values, all the beliefs, intentions and behaviors that sustain each relationship paradigm. This is what we have done, this is where we are, and this is where we are going. Is that clear? (Yes.) Thank you.

Therefore, your work now is to go outside of the team, do your research at home on the Internet, make your notes, print them out—or whatever you need to do—and bring them back and share them with the larger team, or if we have a large number of individuals, then we will return to the sub-team format. I have no further instructions regarding this, tonight or for the week ahead, unless you have questions. I am also open to questions, which are unrelated to relationships, if you have them at this time. First, questions about relationships, please, and then the ones that are extraneous.

Dialogue

Sue: Sondjah, this is Sue, and I think mine is kind of a combined relationship and extraneous question: The society that a lot of us have grown up in is either you fear God or you love God. And there’s a word that sends a chill up my spine always, when people talk about “sin,” as they do things for God because they are afraid they will be given demerits or whatever God does. In developing a relationship—especially with people that really come from that basis, how does the other side look at that type of a structure, as opposed …I mean ... in other words when I would be relating to someone about God is Love, but I would be talking to someone who is in such a fearful place because of sin, can you help in the verbiage that we might be able to use, or some way that could open their eyes regarding that? Or maybe I am off base?

SONDJAH: No, you are certainly not off base. Let me discuss how we see it from this side, as you mentioned. We do not use the term “sin” in this side of the universe, the non-material realm. The word “sin” is used to guide the societies and social structure and evolution of social development in mortal realms. I would rather give you a much broader perspective, one that you can use here, as we use it in our regard, in our realm, that has to do with separation and integration. Any action, any thought, any verbiage, any discourse that causes separation, works against the good of the universe; works against the good and the union of the individual with the larger universe. This may be even internal to a mortal mind, where there is “sin,” as you would put it, and if you used it in the terms that we use it, that causes separation between the individual and their reality, their participation in their society, their families, and in their unhappy health with themselves.

Separation is any activity—even in the mindedness of an individual—that causes them to come away from and be separate from the universe, from God’s love, for example, from the affection of others, from the good working order with a group, from being a part of the team. You would not identify this as sin, and we do not identify it as sin in this realm either. How you would use the word “sin” to speak to one who is conservative in their religious base, would be an issue that you would need to work with and prepare for, before you speak with them. Any action as you have defined sin, does cause separation. It causes an illness, a boil upon the good working order of an individual in relationship with others. It is a festering wound; it is a rotten part, which must be excised in order for the individual to regain health.

“Sin,” as it has been stated in the Old Testament includes some of the most obvious prohibitions of behavior. They proscribe behaviors, but where are the prescriptive rules that gave individual direction? These are what you would look to, to combine the issue of values and sin. What are the things that people should do, to engender “oneness” with themselves, in their minds and with their fellow brothers and sisters, in their families and their communities? This is called “love,” as you say, but “love” is a general term. Few can encompass this word and know its true meaning. We hold love in a different definition than you do; we hold love as a vibration of oneness, of seeking of oneness with all others, to come together and be “one.” In love there is no separation with self, with God, or with others.

When we are truly in love with God, we are embraced in Its “wholeness,” where God embraces us, and “we” embrace God, so that we are “one” in vibration, “one” in energy and frequency with the Source. We become fully empowered, emanating vibrations of light to others; we are love itself. But until then, you must adhere to the subsets of behaviors, attitudes, thoughts and words, which support love. These would all encompass the true, wonderful values of social lubrication: compassion, mercy, forbearance, patience and so on. These are all the subsets, which cause love to come into existence. These are the practicing touchstones for social behavior that is responsible, and more than responsible, it is heartfelt at-one-ness, where you understand ahead of time, not what is expected, but what will join you with others in wholeness.

The oneness idea you have mentioned is truly good, but what leads to oneness? These are the values that you must seek. Sin, as others have said, are those behaviors that cause separation, those “no-no's,” as you have said that people must not do. Otherwise these behaviors will destroy their societies and their lives, and fail the individual to have structure in their thinking, in dealing with others individually and as a group, and in structuring their own life as moral individuals, who are ethical. How can one be of service, if one does not know how to structure their thoughts and conformance in good, productive order with others? (Thank you.)

Are there other questions before we close?

Student: Your comments have been very helpful, thank you.

Closing

SONDJAH: You are welcome. I truly strive to be of service. I was selected not because I might be pleasing, but because of what I know, and how I must relate to new individuals who have come across to the other side, into the mansion worlds. I bid you good night, and I wish you well on your assignment. Know that when you request sincerely, with clear intent, we are there with you to assist you in disclosing these values, which you seek. We will assist you in ferreting out the avenues, streets and byways of your social structures and your lines of communication to find them. They are really quite easy, and you will find them very quickly. Good night. (Good night.)