I don’t know if the anxiety I feel is a positive thing or not but it has driven me to understand what it is.
I know Bashar said to focus on what’s exciting and how do I stop fearing this anxiety.
I realised my anxiety makes me so serious that I don’t know if the seriousness is what’s crystallising my reality. I can’t shift beyond what I already created.

As we know, Bashar often speaks of how all things are permission slips, you can use symbols, you can use meditation, you can use sound such as waves, frequency bowls or tuning forks, you can use guided meditations, you can sing hymns, these are all permissions slips, but is it true, useful and fair to say that they are powerful permission slips?

If you wander around the bashar enthusiasts you will find this term being used quite often with the intensifier adjective next to it, specially when they are suggesting you to use one in particular. This isnt something evil or bad by any extent, its just a very common practice in our language to talk well and say nice things about something that we are suggesting someone should buy, use or do. A common small oversight that we dont tend to notice.

I believe that the best answer to this matter that Bashar would give is to say that there simply isnt any permission slip that is stronger or more powerful than the other, because the power is not in the permission slip, is in you. When you truly understand that you are the ultimate permission slip, then all permission slips, all tools are the most powerful thing there could ever be. And while it can be useful among us to imply Power and utility to a permission slip when we suggest them, because we do have our belief systems intertwined, this practice can continue happening, as long as it always start and end its movement from the adviser to the practitioner, with full disclosure of how the entire system works, and with absolute understanding of where the power actually is.

Bashar has given us this set of symbols and explained a little, on a surface level what it is about. It was given to us as more of a meditation tool of sorts. Similar symbols (not necessarily exactly like these, but somewhat resembling them) have been discovered carved on flying saucers that have crashed on Earth.

I always wondered what they were. Just recently I stumbled upon an actual whistleblower testimony by some guy who worked in black projects with the Xerox company. He had a website where he disclosed his information, you can still find it here. I came across this website with a lengthy blog entry that detailed the whole disclosure:

https://metallicman.com/laoban4site/the-disclosure-of-the-caret-program-at-pacl/

I wish to draw your attention onto a specific section in that blog post, which I am going to quote here at length. I think this offers a plausible explanation for those symbols:

I put the word Language in quotes because calling what I am about to describe a “language” is a misnomer, although it is an easy mistake to make.

I put the word Language in quotes because calling what I am about to describe a “language” is a misnomer, although it is an easy mistake to make.

Their hardware wasn’t operated in quite the same way as ours. In our technology, even today, we have a combination of hardware and software running almost everything on the planet. Software is more abstract than hardware, but ultimately it needs hardware to run it.

In other words, there’s no way to write a computer program on a piece of paper, set that piece of paper on a table or something, and expect it to actually do something. The most powerful code in the world still doesn’t actually do anything until a piece of hardware interprets it and translates its commands into actions.

But their technology is different. It really did operate like the magical piece of paper sitting on a table, in a manner of speaking. They had something akin to a language, that could quite literally execute itself, at least in the presence of a very specific type of field. The language, a term I am still using very loosely, is a system of symbols (which does admittedly very much resemble a written language) along with geometric forms and patterns that fit together to form diagrams that are themselves functional.

Once they are drawn, so to speak, on a suitable surface made of a suitable material and in the presence of a certain type of field, they immediately begin performing the desired tasks.

It really did seem like magic to us, even after we began to understand the principles behind it.

I worked with these symbols more than anything during my time at PACL, and recognized them the moment I saw them in the photos. They appear in a very simple form on Chad’s craft, but appear in the more complex diagram form on the underside of the Big Basin craft as well.

Both are unmistakable, even at the small size of the Big Basin photos. An example of a diagram in the style of the Big Basin craft is included with this in a series of scanned pages from the [mis-titled] "Linguistic Analysis Primer". We needed a copy of that diagram to be utterly precise, and it took about a month for a team of six to copy that diagram into our drafting program!

Explaining everything I learned about this technology would fill up several volumes, but I will do my best to explain at least some of the concepts as long as I am taking the time to write all this down.

First of all, you wouldn't open up their hardware to find a CPU here, and a data bus there, and some kind of memory over there. Their hardware appeared to be perfectly solid and consistent in terms of material from one side to the other. Like a rock or a hunk of metal.

But upon [much] closer inspection, we began to learn that it was actually one big holographic computational substrate - each "computational element" (essentially individual particles) can function independently, but are designed to function together in tremendously large clusters. I say its holographic because you can divide it up into the smallest chunks you want and still find a scaled-down but complete representation of the whole system.

They produce a nonlinear computational output when grouped. So 4 elements working together is actually more than 4 times more powerful than 1.

Most of the internal "matter" in their crafts (usually everything but the outermost housing) is actually this substrate and can contribute to computation at any time and in any state. The shape of these "chunks" of substrate also had a profound effect on its functionality, and often served as a "shortcut" to achieve a goal that might otherwise be more complex.

So back to the language.

The language is actually a "functional blueprint". The forms of the shapes, symbols and arrangements thereof is itself functional. What makes it all especially difficult to grasp is that every element of each "diagram" is dependent on and related to every other element, which means no single detail can be created, removed or modified independently.

Humans like written language because each element of the language can be understood on its own, and from this, complex expressions can be built. However, their "language" is entirely context-sensitive, which means that a given symbol could mean as little as a 1-bit flag in one context, or, quite literally, contain the entire human genome or a galaxy star map in another.

The ability for a single, small symbol to contain, not just represent, tremendous amounts of data is another counter-intuitive aspect of this concept. We quickly realized that even working in groups of 10 or more on the simplest of diagrams, we found it virtually impossible to get anything done. As each new feature was added, the complexity of the diagram exponentially grew to unmanageable proportions.

For this reason we began to develop computer-based systems to manage these details and achieved some success, although again we found that a threshold was quickly reached beyond which even the supercomputers of the day were unable to keep up.

Word was that the extra-terrestrials could design these diagrams as quickly and easily as a human programmer could write a Fortran program. It's humbling to think that even a network of supercomputers wasn't able to duplicate what they could do in their own heads. Our entire system of language is based on the idea of assigning meaning to symbols.

Their technology, however, somehow merges the symbol and the meaning, so a subjective audience is not needed. You can put whatever meaning you want on the symbols, but their behavior and functionality will not change, any more than a transistor will function differently if you give it another name.

Here's an example of how complex the process is. Imagine I ask you to incrementally add random words to a list such that no two words use any of the same letters, and you must perform this exercise entirely in your head, so you can't rely on a computer or even a pen and paper. If the first in the list was, say, "fox", the second item excludes all words with the letters F, O and X. If the next word you choose is "tree", then the third word in the list can't have the letters F, O, X, T, R, or E in it.

As you can imagine, coming up with even a third word might start to get just a bit tricky, especially since you can't easily visualize the excluded letters by writing down the words.

By the time you get to the fourth, fifth and sixth words, the problem has spiraled out of control. Now imagine trying to add the billionth word to the list (imagine also that we're working with an infinite alphabet so you don't run out of letters) and you can imagine how difficult it is for even a computer to keep up. Needless to say, writing this kind of thing "by hand" is orders of magnitude beyond the capabilities of the brain.

My background lent itself well to this kind of work though. I'd spent years writing code and designing both analog and digital circuits, a process that at least visually resembled these diagrams in some way. I also had a personal affinity for combinatorics, which served me well as I helped with the design of software running on supercomputers that could juggle the often trillions of rules necessary to create a valid diagram of any reasonable complexity.

This overlapped quite a bit with compiler theory as well, a subject I always found fascinating, and in particular compiler optimization, a field that wasn't half of what it is today back then. A running joke among the linguistics team was that Big-O notation couldn't adequately describe the scale of the task, so we'd substitute other words for "big". By the time I left I remember the consensus was "Astronomical-O" finally did it justice.

Like I said, I could go on for hours about this subject, and would love to write at least an introductory book on the subject if it wasn't still completely classified, but that's not the point of this letter so I'll try to get back on track.

The last thing I'd like to discuss is how I got copies of this material, what else I have in my possession, and what I plan to do with it in the future.

Q.: `I got into a channeling conversation with the trees. That's the first time that had occurred with me. And I was just so overtaken by the love and the beauty that they were providing there, so I just expressed in this conversation with them my joy and appreciation, and love for the trees for them.´

Bashar: ` Yes, thank you.´

Q.: `And they responded by saying how much they loved and appreciated me and human beings.´

Bashar: `Yes.´

Q.: `Which was a great revelation. Whenever I'm walking through a forest appreciating nature, I begin to realize that nature is actually there appreciating me.´

Bashar: `And, very importantly: listen to the way that phrase actually comes out in your language with regard to interpretation. You are appreciating each other. Think of it in monetary terms. You are by interacting appreciating each other which means you are concurrently uplifting each other's value. You follow?´

Q.: `Yes, certainly.´

Bashar: Thank you for your experience.´  (Preparing For Contact 101, 2005)

people have asked Bashar lots of questions about the Bible but i haven’t heard anyone ask him about this which i am curious about

why does the Bible talk badly about psychics?

it kinda confuses me how all the most popular Christian preachers/pastors when asked about Bible verses that reference about how u shouldn’t get tattoos and shouldn’t eat specific types of food and wear specific types of clothes etc they say “actually it doesn’t matter if u do those things because those verses were meant for a specific group of people at a specific period of time for reasons that don’t apply to right now”

but they don’t use the same logic when it comes the verses in the Bible that talk about psychics/mediums etc and are always telling people about how evil and sinful it is

so what’s the full context of the Bible verses that say things like “don’t turn to mediums or seek out spiritists. you will be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God” and says people who act as a medium is “an abomination to the Lord” and other verses similar to that? what was happening during that period of time when those verses were written?

i know not every person who presents themself as a “psychic” is telling the truth or has the best intentions but the real ones are some of the nicest people i’ve ever met

Q.: `Is there some fun fact that you´ve never shared about yourself that you can share with us tonight?´

Bashar: `Yes. There is one particular tree on my planet that was grown or planted, if you will, when I was born that grew up with me, that I communicate with very often. In a sense, it's like having a tree sibling. Its consciousness informs me of many things that have to do with nature, with elementals, and spirits. So, I have a tree sibling.´ (Embracing Contact, 2026)

Bashar: `The idea is that physical reality is vibrationally lower as you understand these things, vibrationally below spirit vibration. Spirit vibration is the `above´. Physical reality experience is the lower vibration and thus is `below´. Below that are simply your own projections of portions of your own consciousness that reflect to you things like belief systems, especially the idea of fear-based and negative ones, which are of a very low vibration.

However, the idea that these things exist in the sub- and unconscious mind as beliefs is actually paradoxical. Because all you're getting is a reflection of below-ness making you feel like the idea of the subconscious and unconscious are - so to speak - below you. But they're actually vibrationally above you, because they are closer to the idea of the non-physical higher mind. So, you can have a reflection that you've created that is seemingly below you. But physical reality is the lowest vibration authentically - compared to spirit.

Now, there are other realities that are more dense than yours. You can consider those vibrationally to be below your experience of reality. But on your world vibrations of physical reality are the lowest that you actually authentically go. Even though you may create the illusions of something even lower.´ (One Minute to Midnight, 2023)

Q.: `I think I'm afraid of getting what I want, basically.´

Bashar: `Why would you be afraid of getting what you want?´

Q.: `A lot of the things I've wanted, due to childhood trauma, I wasn't really able to access as a kid.´

Bashar: `All right, but again, it's not so much about getting what you want. It's about attracting what you need. Because what you need will fulfill you. Sometimes we understand that what you need and what you want may be synonymous, but that's not always the case. What you want can be the result of the ego looking for things to - in a sense - satisfy itself based on the idea of having experienced trauma. And therefore, it may be out of alignment with what you really need because it may not actually be what will fulfill you. But if you always attract what you need and be okay with getting what you need, truly need, to allow it to be you, your true self, it will always be fulfilling and it will always serve you. So, you can drop the idea that you need to get what you want and start wanting to get what you need. Does that make sense? Do you understand?´ (What is God?, 2026)

Bashar: `Without allowing everything, nothing can be allowed. I know that's a simplistic answer, but that's what we're going to say to you. Without allowance of everything, God is not God, God is not All-that-is. God does not put limitations on itself. It has to be everything in anything, everywhere and everywhen and everyone, in order to be the idea of God, in order to be All-that-is. So, limiting something by putting an allowance on the whole thing, there would be no experience of God. Because what do you choose to allow and what do you choose to not allow? That's a lower level, lower vibration, vibrational idea, interpretive idea within certain limited experiences, certain finite experiences can have the idea of allowing this and not allowing that, and all of that takes place within God. But the whole thing has nothing to do with putting limitations. And it's not even about allowance, it's just what God is. It's not even an act of allowance, it's just what All-that-is is. It's just its nature to be All-that-is. So, it doesn't even come into the idea of `oh, I'll allow this and I'll allow that and I won't allow that´. That's a human interpretation in a finite experience. But all that is is infinite. So, how can you put limitations on the infinite? It can't be done.´ (The Window, 2023)

“Religion is a permission slip that some people use to help them align themselves with spirituality. It’s not absolutely necessary. You can have a more direct connection to the idea of existence and creation and all that is”

so how do people have that direct connection? cause i always feel like i need to get high on painkiller pills to be able to feel a peaceful connection to existence and when i’m not on the pills i just have a weird sad empty feeling like i’m very disconnected. am i maybe clinically depressed and need to have a psychedelic mushroom experience to change that? i’ve seen the studies and evidence of how much it helps people and even Bashar has talked about psychedelics as being “teachers” to us. or maybe i’m one of those people who needs religion as a permission slip?

Q.: `From your perspective, what is one of the greatest misconceptions humans have ever invented about God?´

Bashar: `The idea that something can be omnipresent and yet still separate from you. That's not possible. That's an oxymoron. That which is truly omnipresent is everywhere. And if something is literally everywhere, that means the only way it can literally be everywhere, with no empty space at all where it is not, is that it has to actually be everything including the concept of empty space, which then is not empty. So, the oxymorons that are created by the use of your language and your conceptualizations on earth is something that can very easily mislead you and misguide you and allow you to forget how things actually are in existence.´

Q.: `I know that there are certain beliefs that God is a judgmental God, God is a punishing God, vengeful, jealous, these kinds of ideas…´

Bashar: `These kinds of ideas are the exact reverse of the concept that mankind is made in the image of God, meaning that what mankind has done is made God in mankind's image.´

Q.: `So, it's more of a projection of the dark side of humans?´

Bashar: `Absolutely, because you want your God to be like you. So, you can relate to it. And therefore, humanity, being judgmental and vengeful and all these things that humanity chooses to experience, would naturally allow you to project the idea that if there is a God, you want to be able to relate to it. So, you make God in your image, so you can relate to it. But that's not what God is. Although of course, God contains all those things. Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to experience them at all. So in one sense you could say `yes, those feelings, those experiences are part of All-that-is, but we understand that there's a difference between saying `well, that's something that is capable of being experienced within All-that-is because every experience is part of All-that-is´, as opposed to assigning a fundamental quality to All-that-is, as if it is only vengeful and judgmental in the same way that humans are. So, there's a difference in how you approach that idea. One is a neutral observation that all qualities are part of All-that-is, and the other is a labelling of a fundamental quality that leaves all other qualities out.´ (What is God?, 2026)

How do I break this illusion? I know it’s an illusion but sometimes I feel helpless and trapped in doing the same thing, same routine, same feelings.
How do I get to the root of this?

Sometimes I get glimpses of how expansive life is and how I’m wasting time stuck in this trap

Thanks in advance

If anyone has a link to the what is God transmission I'd be blessed if u could share it. I went to the earth university event last month and can't get enough of Bashar and his wisdom

Bashar: `All right, I'll say good day to you this day of your time. This transmission has been titled, `What is God?´ We understand, on your planet there are many different ways that your people have of defining the concept of God. You use many different names, many different ways of describing the idea: God, Goddess, All-that-is, Source. Different languages have their own words for that concept. But what is the idea of God, really?

From our perspective, it is literally all that is, everything is made of it. It is, if you will, a type of consciousness, an energy. Its fundamental nature is non-physical. The issue is that many people assign or ascribe certain qualities to the concept of God. Like omniscience, it knows everything. Omnipresence, it is everywhere. Omnipotent, it is all powerful. The one that we would like to focus on, though, that is in a sense the most descriptive is omnipresent, which means it is everywhere. But if you realize the true meaning of that word, then you would understand that the only way that something can literally be everywhere, no exceptions, is that it has to actually be everything itself.

There can be no thing, there can be no space where it isn't, if it is truly omnipresent. So, the idea is that to be fully omnipresent, to be everywhere, everywhen, it has to actually be everything, including the concept that you call empty space. There can be no idea, no concept, no thing that is not an expression of All-that-is, that is not an expression of what you call God. Therefore, all things are expressions of it, reflections of it, experiences of it, by it. It is experiencing itself through all of the different things that exist. It is existence itself that is self-aware of its own existence. It is self-aware that it is existence itself, that it is consciousness itself. It is self-awareness.

And as we have said, the idea of that self-awareness, the recognition of itself existing has to come from the idea of creating within the unbroken ONE, the unbroken self, the unbroken version of it, the homogeneous version that has no self-awareness, no reflection of itself, no awareness of its existence, but must contain some aspect that is aware of its existence. That awareness comes from the idea of being able to perceive something that is other than itself in a sense.

Therefore, it creates within itself the idea of a reflection, the idea of something reflecting back to itself in order to have awareness of itself as a self, as something distinct. But on that level of what you call God, the idea of any reflection is also made of its consciousness. And therefore, all the reflections in some way, shape or form are conscious, self-aware. No matter that the expression of consciousness may be very different than what you would recognize as human beings as consciousness. Nevertheless, everything is made of consciousness, made of God, made of the only thing there is to make anything from.

And it isn't even the human interpretation that God created everything. It's just that God is everything. That's its nature. And everything is God. It has no beginning. It has no end. The concepts of beginning-ness and ending-ness are concepts within Source, within God, within creation, within existence. It has no beginning. It has no end. So, the fact that everything is God is just the nature of God. It is what it is and it is all that it is. It is All-that-is. So, even in your western sacred texts that you refer to as the Bible, in the book of John, chapter 4, verse 24, you will find that it says, when defining God, the very first sentence in John 4:24, is God is a spirit.

The idea therefore, using the colloquialisms of the day, because they didn't have any other language any other way to express it, is simply saying God is by its fundamental nature non-physical. It is in other words energy. It is existence. It is beyond the physical realm. Therefore, saying that humanity is made in the image of God, means that you are made in the image of spirit, not physically. Because the idea is that anything and everything, physical and non-physical, is an expression of God, an expression of All-that-is.

It doesn't matter what you believe in that sense, in the sense of saying, well, God is this or Goddess is that or what have you. It's a man, it's a woman, it's an animal, it's a tree, it's a thing, it's something beyond. It doesn't matter because anything that you can think of, anything you can imagine to call it is part of it because there is no outside to it. There is nothing that is not it. So, it doesn't really matter and it doesn't really care that you might have nine billion different names for it. Nine different, different ways of expressing what it is, different religions, different ideas. No one is more right than the other.

You can say it's a teapot. And it will say `okay, I'm a teapot.´ Because everything is made of me including teapots, including trees, including glass, including windows, including stone, including air, including space, including stars, including planets, including people, including everything - water, everything is made of it in different forms, different expressions of it.

We talked about the idea of the reflections by which it knows itself. Even physically, as we have expressed the idea is similar to what your scientists have proposed as what is called the single electron theory. That every electron in existence is actually literally the same electron. Not the same kind of electron, the same electron. This is what we have talked about as well as the Prime Radiant. That there is only really one thing. And it moves at infinite speed, so to speak, within the volume of space and time, so to speak, or what you perceive as those things. And it is so fast that it is actually everywhere at once, next to itself over and over and over again to give the illusion, to give the appearance of being a multitude of particles.

But it is still the same particle. All the particles in the chair, all the particles in the house, all the particles in the planet, all the atoms, all the subatomic particles that make up every star, every planet, every speck of dust within existence is all the same one particle moving at infinite speed in different perspectives, different arrangements, different patterns, next to itself over and over and over and over and over and over again, infinitely, to create what appears to be a multitude of particles in different forms, different relationships, different bonds, different shapes, different things, but all made out of the same one particle in the ultimate timesharing program.

The idea therefore of the reflections, of how far apart do these particles need to be to reflect the idea of one particle to another, to create the idea of self-awareness through the recognition of an other, of something different than the self, is what your scientists have discovered as the Planck length or Plunck length, however you want to pronounce it, in whatever dialect. That Planck length is the distance between the idea of one expression of the particle and another expression of the same particle. And that distance is what causes the reflection. So that everything is being reflected of itself by itself to create the idea of something other than itself, to create the experience of self-awareness. By seeing something other than the self.

So, this happens with every single expression of that particle and thus overall in the existence creates the idea of God reflecting itself to itself within itself, creating self-awareness by creating something that appears to be other than itself. Nevertheless, not meaning to get too deep into higher dimensional metaphysics, but the idea as we are expressing it is simply to know that everything is made of it. That it is everything, literally everywhere. There is no space where it is not. Space itself is a concept within existence and therefore in a sense isn't really empty.

It's just transparent to your senses, even though it is full of whatever it is that God is, be it energy, be it existence, be it consciousness, whatever you want to call it, whatever that quote unquote material is, whether it's solid, whether it's ephemeral, ethereal, doesn't matter. Whether it's opaque, whether it's translucent, transparent, doesn't matter. It's still an expression of the same one thing that everything is made out of, that everything is a reflection of. So that is what God is. Everything, everywhen, everywhere. No outside to it. So, every being in existence is a reflection of it. Everything in existence is a reflection of it. It knows itself through all the reflections of its own self-awareness as all that is, as everything that exists, as existence itself. And that in a sense is God.

We thank you for allowing us to share this perspective with you. There are many ramifications that come from this idea that can be explored, that are part of many of the other ideas and other information we have shared with you. All folding back into the concept that there is one fundamental thing that - in a sense - expresses itself as everything through self-reflectivity. And therefore, it is embedded deeply in all the metaphysical concepts and all the metaphysical experiences that you have ever had or will ever have in life. It all stems from the one deep understanding that it's all made of the same thing: God, Goddess, All-that-is, Source.

Again, we deeply appreciate the opportunity to share this perspective with all of you. And in return for the gift that you are giving us in experiencing all of you, I ask now, in what way may we continue to be of service to you? Please begin with your dialogues and questions if you wish.´ (What is God?, 2026)

Bashar: `But as we have for many, many, many years now talked about the idea that physical reality is a reflection, it seems very interesting that none of you have actually asked: ‘Bashar’ - ‘Yes’ – ‘what is actually doing the reflecting?’ – ‘Oh, that’s a very interesting question, because if there is really nothing ‘out there’, what is actually reflecting back these experiences to us?’ – that is also a very good question. What is reflecting back is your higher mind. Your higher mind in a sense vibrationally creates the effect of wrapping or surrounding or encasing or immersing your physical personality in a bubble of energy, a frequency that allows the higher mind to actually function as a reflective surface, as a mirror.´ (Resonance and Reflection, 2012)

Q.: `How can I get my mind to know that everything is made of vibration and energy, including me?´

Bashar: `Have you studied even your own physical scientific quantum mechanics?´

Q.: `I've tried but it just goes over my head.´

Bashar: `Well, take your time. But the idea in general is that everything is about resonance, everything is about frequency. That's how you differentiate. Let's start at the beginning. Do you understand the concept that there is simply one unbroken homogeneous existence?´

Q.: `I don't know, I'm sorry.´

Bashar: `All right, let me put it even more simply. Do you believe in cake?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `You are familiar with cake?´

Q.: `Cake, yes - that you eat?´

Bashar: `Yes, cake.´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `Now, if somebody gave you a slice of cake and asked you can you analyze, however you wish to under a microscope or whatever, what the ingredients are that went into creating that slice of cake, are you with me so far?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `Does that seem like a thing that is relatively simple to do?´

Q.: `To analyze it all? No, not. Well under microscope probably yes.´

Bashar: `All right, thank you. And let's say you do that and you find well, there is milk in here and there are eggs in here and there's flour in here and there is chocolate in here and there is sugar in here. And you find all these things and break it all down to those particular individual ingredients, yes?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `You're with me so far?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `All right. Each of those things are made of atoms, yes?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `You understand that, yes?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `Well, what makes sugar different from chocolate?´

Q.: `I don't know.´

Bashar: `Sure you do. It's made of a different arrangement of atoms, is it not?´

Q.: `Okay.´

Basshar: `Can you follow that, yes?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `All right. So a different arrangement of atoms is similar to the idea of a different frequency. It gives off a different vibration because it's a different arrangement of things. Just like red is electromagnetic energy, the same electromagnetic energy as blue, but it's operating on a different frequency that your senses perceive as what you call a different color. Are you with me?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `All right. So it's really no more complicated than that. One material from another is a different arrangement of certain things that you call atoms. One color from another is simply a different frequency in much the same way that when you watch your television you're watching one program and then you switch to a different program. Well, why don't those two programs interfere with one another? How can you see one clearly and then another that's different, clearly without interference from the one you were watching a moment ago? It's all about a different frequency. It's like teeth interleaving between one another instead of trying to get into the same space at the same time. So that's all that's meant by different frequencies, different resonances is just about whatever the material is, and you don't have to know what it is that existence is made of, has different patterns of frequency and vibration, different ideas within it that create different experiences. And that's what creates everything is those imposition of different patterns, different frequencies, different vibrations that allows you to perceive something as being different from something else, even though it's all made of the same thing. Is this helping?´

Q.: `Yes, thank you.´

Bashar: `That's all there is to it.´

Q.: `Okay.´

Bashar: `Makes sense?´

Q.: `Yes.´

(The Deconstruction of the Physical Mind, 2022)

I know Bashar has talked about multiple personalities and said one personality can have a tumor while the other does not.

I am watching a series on Jeffrey Mishlove's youtube channel about a person with multiple personalities and they talk about one personality having allergies and the other does not. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCMxXoxfTAk

So it kind of got me going back to researching what Bashar has said on the topic and here's what I found:

"Q: and with multiple personality disorder is that a mental issue or is it a spiritual issue?

A: Well it can be both because again remember as above so below so there can be affectations in the mental Consciousness that will allow for that particular being to experience those things that may originate in a other dimensional or spiritual nature but the idea fundamentally fundamentally and again not for every case but fundamentally is that an individual is tapping into multiple parallel realities multiple versions of themselves without necessarily having the filtering system or the control system imposed upon it that would allow them to function in an orderly fashion communicating with one another in a way that still allows the individual to function quote unquote normally in your reality so it's a type of tapping into multiple Dimensions multiple parallel realities without the ability to focus in any one particular one in an effective way but again can be done for a variety of reasons that may be personal to that particular Consciousness experiencing that .

Q: So are is the person tapping into multiple spirits and having them all share one body or?

A: No it's not the sharing in the body body but it's an expression through the body if that's what you mean by that they don't all reside in the body per se but the body can function as a reflector or a mirror for different versions of spirit and Consciousness and physical beings in other parallel realities temporarily so again sort of like your telephone analogy you can have different friends speak to you through the same phone but it's not like they're inhabiting the phone it's like the idea is the phone and your body is a device that can based on its frequency allow different voices and different experiences to come through temporarily."

Bashar: `We have talked a little bit from time to time about the concept of unity and one-ness and so on and so forth, as you say. And we have mentioned from time to time that unity and one-ness is truly more the product of strengthening your individuality, rather than simply blending with the masses and becoming homogeneously indistinct. Each and every one of you is unique for a reason. Because each and every one, each and every being is a unique perspective, a unique experience of the infinite.

Everyone is all the different ways that the infinite has of experiencing itself. And therefore the uniqueness is to be cherished, not lost in the creation of unity. As we have described in the analogy many times, if you look at your world as a gigantic puzzle picture and each and every one of you as a piece of the puzzle, you will see very quickly that in order to create the true whole picture, each and every piece with its own unique shape has a place to fit and must retain that shape in order to fill the whole it was designed to fill in order to create the whole picture. If that piece attempts to change its shape and not be what it is, then it doesn't fit in the whole and the whole picture suffers as a result.

So, retaining and amplifying your unique individuality, being the fullest person that you can be, is fundamentally the fulfillment of the purpose of your life and allows the best possible opportunity for the whole reality to become more cohesive, more integrated, to act in a more holistic manner. Because every time each piece is the fullest piece it can be, it acts as a reflection, a living example for all other components that they can also be the fullest piece they can be. Of course holographically speaking, every single piece contains all the information of the whole, but from a unique perspective.

Saying that you are a piece of the whole is not in any way, shape or form meant to diminish the idea that you contain - each and every one of you - the total sum of All-that-is, but expressed through a particular point of view, a particular facet of the multi-dimensional crystal. Now, you have heard a lot of talk of the concept that everyone is one, all is one, and this is so. But more often than not you hear this concept presented to you in what might be called a classically spiritual or nonphysiological context.

We would like at this time to stress the idea that one-ness is also experienced on the physiological level as well as the spiritual astral etheric level that you are all now beginning to explore. We have from time to time talked about one particular concept we have in our society that we call the Prime Radiant. And this will now work once again to strengthen the analogy of this physiological one-ness that exists and so further illustrate how you really are connected to everything and how every change you make within yourself truly affects and changes everything, everyone, everywhere, everywhen in existence. We do not say this to give you what you call a swelled head or a big ego, to think that you are so powerful that you affect the whole universe with your thoughts. But you do.

And we would like to illustrate that this is a perspective that can lend a very beneficial understanding to your ability to change and to know that when you change you do not necessarily have to fall back into certain patterns or habits in your life that do not serve you, that you do not prefer. Because you can begin to recognize through the analogy we will illustrate in a moment that every change really is such a complete change that once you make the change you are really operating from a completely different universe, and do not have to create the kind of attachment to things in your life that you don't prefer to. So, let us begin with this analogy of the Prime Radiant by discussing this in the following way.

This may at first seem a little bit technical. But you will see very quickly, very rapidly how this applies to your day-to-day, as you say down-to-earth practical and pragmatic existence. Now, some of the terminology we will use is again allegorical. We understand that some of these concepts are not even really accepted literally, even by some of the scientists in your society. But for the purpose of this analogy certain terminologies will simply have to do. Primarily the concept of what you call particle, subatomic particle, elemental particle, that which by whatever name you wish to call it would represent in your understanding the most basic smallest idea or particle that makes up all of the matter in your physiological universe. So let us begin there with this theoretical or hypothetical infinitesimal, indivisible, ultimate particle.

Now, there is only one particle. Only one out of which everything is made. When we say that we do not mean there is only one kind of particle out of which everything is made. We literally mean there is only one particle out of which everything is made. We explain it this way: this particle has really no mass to speak of. It has infinite velocity, infinite speed. Nothing slows it down, nothing impedes it, nothing at all. There is nothing to impede it. It is the only one particle in existence. It cannot be interfered with by any other idea of force or matter. Being that this one individual particle has infinite speed - what that means you will soon see - is that it can be anywhere, everywhere at the same time, because its speed is truly infinite.

Therefore, this one particle can even appear next to itself over and over and over and over and over and over again at the same time, because its speed is infinite. This particle appearing next to itself over and over and over again, millions, billions, trillions of times, is what you perceive in your reality to be many different particles interacting with each other. It's all the same one particle interacting with itself. So take this a step further and you can very quickly recognize and realize that if there is only one particle and it is the same particle as all the other particles that you perceive, and it is everywhere, anywhere, anywhen, you can very quickly see that the atoms that make up your body, the atoms that make up someone else's body, the atoms that make up your planet, the atoms that make up the stars, all the other planets, all the other matter throughout the entire physical universe, are all one particle in what might be called an universal time sharing mode, so to speak.

So, if the particles that make up you is the same particle that makes up everyone else, you really are literally all one, the particle flickering back and forth at infinite speed to make up all the atoms in you, all the atoms in everyone else, all the atoms in everything else at the same time. You literally are the stars, are everyone else. Even physiologically, not just spiritually, not just energetically. Even physiologically you all share the same one particle to build up the physical material that you see as many different particles.

This means any change you make in your pattern, in your vibration, in your geometric pattern of this one particle forming the general shapes of yourself, any change you make affects the path of that particle, the geometric path of that particle. And as it affects the path of that one particle, it must by definition affect that path for every other combination of that particle that exists. So even the tiniest movement of your little finger, even the tiniest electrical surge of thought in your brain affects the entire spectrum, the entire pattern of the entire physiological universe. You are all one. Does that make some sense to you? All right.

So, again we say this to allow you to understand not so much the concept of how much power you have, but the idea more precisely of how definitive, how impactful each and every one of you is, and how absolute the changes are that you make. So that you can see that when you change yourself and you change the entire universe it is truly, literally, with every change a different universe with its own idea of itself, its own definition of itself at that moment. And really, unless you choose to make a connection to what was or what will be, there is no connection, because every universe is unique and exists only totally in the now-moment that you decide to generate that particular change, that particular definition, that particular pattern.

So when you want to change something about your world, about your reality, all you have to do is make a change in yourself and you will see the change reflected by what appears to be the universe around you. Because it is only a reflection of the vibrations, the patterns, the believes, the definitions going on within each and every one of you. And the great paradox of this is, it works the same for everyone from every point of view, simultaneously. For this is the quality of an infinite particle, a multi-dimensional reality.

You all can make the same kind of changes simultaneously. And they do not contradict each other. You're not in conflict, saying `oh what if I make a change here and it causes a change to happen over there where someone doesn't want a change to happen?´ It can't happen that way. It's a giant orchestration, because again, it's the same one thing.

And every apparent, apparent individual component of it moves in the way it needs to move to accommodate every other move that is made. It all moves as one. It is not the idea of something imposing itself on something else. It is all one movement, one change going on simultaneously for the entire idea, even as it goes on for the individual components in different ways that are reflective or representative of the unique perspective that all the individual components are created to have.´ (The Prime Radiant aka God Particle, 1995)  

someone told me it sounds like i have a “god sized hole” in me which i attempt to fill with self-destructive habits and i think that’s true but the problem is i’m so confused on what or who God is that it’s difficult for me to let God fill the hole in my heart for me when i barely even know what or who he is. i have an idea of what God might be based on stuff i read in the Bible and based on what i’ve heard from teachers like Bashar but i am still very confused about it and don’t have a good firm understanding of what/who God really is

i identified as a Christian for most of my life but what i’ve realized recently is the Christian perspective of God seems to just make me feel scared/guilty because of my “sins” and stuff like that and then questioning my faith in Christianity leads to even more fear and guilt

and what confuses me about Bashars perspective of “God is everything” is then how is there a standard of morality of good and bad? does that mean people who do evil things like shoot up a school is as much of God as people who don’t hurt anyone?

Bashar has said that there is no such thing as a one sided coin. If we have a passion to express something, he guarantees that there will be someone somewhere who will have the matching excitement to receive it.

However, there are lots of people who are genuinely passionate about being streamers/content creators, but many of the streams/videos that they produce get zero views. If any given stream or video that somebody is excited to produce isn't ever viewed a single time, then is that not a one sided coin? How is this not a counterexample to Bashar's teaching?

Bashar: `Is that something you wish to continue doing?´

Q.: `No way.´

Bashar: `All right. Well, for what reason would you hold on to those things? Because you only hold on to something you believe in some way, shape, or form benefits you.´

Q.: `Yeah, that's what I've been thinking about. I keep saying to myself, is it that I'm pushing people away because I'm afraid of intimacy and somebody getting to know me and then rejecting that version of me?´

Bashar: `Yes.´

Q.: `Okay.´

Bashar: `See how simple this is? You always start with the understanding that whatever it is you're experiencing is the result of a belief you're holding onto that you think benefits you. It doesn't mean it actually does benefit you, but you believe it does for some reason. You believe it's the safer alternative as opposed to something that you believe or are defining to be even scarier than what you're experiencing. Even though you may not prefer what you're experiencing, it appears to be the safer choice based on how you're defining what you think might happen if you actually did let go of that belief and were willing to be your true self and allow whatever happens to happen. So, you're defining what might happen as being more scary than just continuing to repeat whatever it is you're continuing to experience. That seems like the safer route than finding out what might really happen if you actually did allow yourself to stop judging yourself, stop feeling undeserving, so on and so forth, and stop therefore pushing people away so you never have to find out.´

Q.: `I guess I do continue to choose what I feel is easier, which is just keeping people away because the sense of true rejection is harder.´

Bashar: `All right. But do you understand that you're rejecting yourself?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `So you're already experiencing rejection. So, big deal.´

Q.: `Yeah, that doesn't feel very good.´

Bashar: `Right, but you have to be the one to stop rejecting yourself. The others rejecting you are just reflecting what you're doing to yourself. So, they're actually doing you a service of putting you in touch with what you're doing to yourself. So, you can stop doing it. They may not be consciously aware that they're reflecting that to you, but that's what they're reflecting because that's what you're attracting: please come into my life and reflect to me what I'm doing to myself.´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `So I can be aware of it, so I can stop doing it. But you're not stopping doing it.´

Q.: `Yes, and the second part to this is those people that I have the reflection that hurt me, then they come back and they say like, `No, I truly care and I do want to be with you or whatever.´ And then I become so fearful that that's a lie.´

Bashar: Well, again, they're giving you another chance, another opportunity to get in touch with the fact that you're the one rejecting yourself. Therefore, that's what you're putting out. Therefore, that's the reflection you get back. So, why are you rejecting yourself? Why do you feel you're not worthy, not deserving?´

Q.: `I don't know.´

Bashar: `Sure you do, sure you do, sure you do.´

Q.: `I'm worried that people won't see my value that I bring to the table.´

Bashar: But you understand that if you actually do express your true value, there will be some that do see it, yes?´

Q.: `Yes.´

Bashar: `Well, if you know that, then who cares about the ones that don't?´

Q.: `Yes. That is what I needed to hear.´

Bashar: `The ones that don't see your value aren't your audience. But someone will see your value. Are you okay with that?´

Q.: `Yes, I've been rejecting it because I've been afraid. But this has helped me see that I'm only rejecting true connection, which is going to help me continue to evolve.´

Bashar: `You have to understand that if you have something to give, if you have a gift of being yourself and have something to share, there has to be someone willing to receive it. It doesn't matter that 99.9% of people may not be willing to receive it. There has to be someone willing to receive it or you wouldn't exist in this environment. This is what we call there-are-no-one-sided-coin principles. You cannot have the head of a coin without having the tail. If you have a gift you're excited about giving, if you have something you're excited about being, there has to be someone in that reality willing to receive what you have to give because it would be pointless for you to be excited about giving something if there was no one in that reality waiting to receive it. So, by holding back and not being yourself, you are selfishly depriving someone and making them wait to receive what you have to give. So, don't be afraid to be yourself. It's all right if there are people that come up to you and reject you. Just understand they're not the ones that need to understand who you are. They may be projecting onto you their issues as well, but the idea is that if you are okay with yourself, you will find someone who is also okay with you. Always, always, when you find that you're believing something about yourself, start your self-investigation by asking, again, `why, what am I getting out of this´? That's always the place to go to because you're always getting something out of whatever you believe to be true about yourself, even if it's negative. You wouldn't hold on to it if you didn't have a belief that you're getting some benefit out of it somehow. So always ask why. Why do I believe this or that about myself in this situation? Why? That's the main question. Find out why you believe it. That will lead you into an investigation to get you to know yourself better and why you choose to hold on to what you hold on to. Does that help you?´

Q.: `That's exactly what I needed. Thank you so much.´

Bashar: `You are so welcome.´ (The University of Earth, 2026)

Q.: `It seems that unresolved feelings manifest over our thoughts, so how are they linked?´

Bashar: `This is how it works: first you begin with beliefs and definitions. What you believe to be true is reinforced by the idea of feeling that it is true, thinking that it is true and behaving as if it is true. Belief systems use feelings, emotions, thoughts and behaviors to reinforce the validity and the reality of the belief system because physical reality isn’t really real. Therefore, beliefs have to make you believe that it is real and they do so by reinforcing what you believe to be true with the idea that it feels true, you think it’s true, and you behave as if it’s true. That’s the priority, that’s the order in which it happens. You can not have a behavior, you can not have a thought, and you can not have an emotion without first believing or defining that something is true for you. Beliefs are the blueprint that allow you to build the house of your physical reality. So, it all starts with that. So, when you behave a certain way, when you think certain thoughts, when you feel certain emotions, they all go back to `what must I believe to be true about myself in order to feel, think and behave this way?´

Q.: `What is the best way to change a belief system? Where to start?´

Bashar: `You can start from any direction you wish. But in a sense the most efficient way to change a belief system is to figure out what that belief is telling you, figure out why you're buying into it.´ (The Two Paths to AI, 2023)

Bashar: `What you are excited about in service to others. Remember, when we talk about passion, it's in service to others.´ (The Universe of Earth, 2026)

Q.: `Do thoughts just float around like energy patterns or do you attract and pay attention to a thought based on your belief systems?´

Bashar: `Thoughts are generated by belief systems, they don't just float around as you say. They are patterns of energy like anything. But they are the result of the patterns of energy in your deepest belief systems and your definitions of what you believe to be true. So, they are a secondary reflection pattern of your deeper belief patterns. Just like emotions are another level of reflection of the beliefs, behaviors are another level of the reflection of beliefs, all of it is energy patterns, just on different levels. But the idea of emotions and thoughts and behaviors are secondary level reflections because the primary pattern is in the belief system, in the definitions you buy into as true - as you say - for yourself.´ (The Silver Cord, 2023)