Produced by Jon Child

Transcript of Program 151, 1991  [automated CC]

Some of Julie’s early work in channel from 1990 where Micciah discusses:
Dialogue among the realms. All creatures participate, all are multidimensional. Each culture has its own official reality. Accountability: tied up with right and wrong. We don’t say: “I am accountable for my enemies.” View Section
Grieving: a constellation of many emotions. Its expression subject to cultural custom, often rigid. Individuals’ natural patterns of grieving differ. To support someone’s grieving, explore it with them; attend to their rhythms and needs. View Section

[The original tape has some minor tracking issues toward the end]

   Micciah: We greet you all, dear friends.

   Julie: My Name is Julie Winter, and this program is called Micciah Channel.
   And what you are going to see is me, going into an altered state of consciousness, a non-ordinary state of awareness. And what I believe happens when I am in that state is that I enter an expanded geography of the self, and that there is an overlap between what I know (my intelligence, my awareness, my experience) and something that is larger than my ordinary awareness. It may indeed be that it is all part of my awareness and that would be fine. What’s produced is a personality that is a product of this overlapping, and the personality is called Micciah.
   My voice is going to change and it is my own voice. The variations in speech have to do with my being in an altered state.
   The program is created from my classes. My students bring questions in. We encourage you to ask questions, to ask questions about channeling, about my channeling, whatever. And use your discernment in evaluating the information that comes through.


   Micciah: We greet you all, dear friends. And we are most pleased to be in this circle in the continuing dialogue between the dimensions, between the realms.
   This dialogue has existed as long as, ah — anything has existed. And it is accomplished in different ways, according to the group’s understanding, at different times, in different cultures. And the dialogue amongst the realms is accomplished ... with all the creatures participating. Not just two-legged creatures; not just human creatures! All of the creatures, and all of the elements of the planet — the trees and the rocks, and the oceans and the rivers. Everything that exists, exists multidimensionally. So there is always a streaming of consciousness through the skeins of various realities.
   And depending on how you focus yourself, how you attune yourself, you are more or less able to be aware ... of the movement. You really decide, at a consensus level, about the official reality. Each culture decides in its own way. Some cultures are quite similar; some are quite different. You know, you have an official reality. Now, in this time of expanded media coverage — including unprecedented possibility of media coverage — you, ah — have an official reality that, ah — shimmies very quickly as there are NEWSBREAKS! As there are — BREAKTHROUGHS! As there are, ah — changes. The reality is updated [snapping fingers] daily. This is ... a very particular way to live — at one level very stressful, demanding enormous faith and flexibility.
   The official reality. You have an official reality about nature, about the human body, about sex, about relationship, about money. You are all in the questioning of the official reality — which brings us to the question of accountability.
   A-ccountability: who is accountable for what? Who is responsible — who is responsible for all of thisss? And accountability is an interesting term, yes? It is used in bookkeeping. Your accounts: you tally up. And in numbers, or in arithmetic, there is the implication that the sheet will balance out, yes? A good bookkeeper must make all the pennies match. “Where did that penny go?” You must account for it.
   Therefore, in some ways (although we know this one likes the word “accountability”), the question of accountability has a shadow implication that pulls in the question of right and wrong.
   The official reality always has a right way and a wrong way; and depending on the overall compassion and flexibility of the reality, you are more or less free to experiment with right and wrong. In some realities, you are, ah — you will be stoned to death if you make a certain set of experiments — seemingly harmless experiments. In others there is much more latitude.
   The question of right and wrong is very dramatic, very potent. There is, ah — a very dense aspect of the group belief — planetary belief — that equates right-ness with worth. With worth. You are all — all! — the children of Spirit; you are manifestations of the Queen of Heaven, of the Earth Mother; of the Wise Grandfathers; of the vast One. When you lose contact with that reality as a vibrant, breathing reality, then consciousness sculpts itself in such a way that you are always trying to prove your worth. And if you could just — get it right! Where is the handbook that goes with your reality?
   Then finally you would have the relief! [brief sigh] of knowing you are all right. You are worth something. You have worth.
   And whole nations are willing, sometimes even eager, to offer up their children to the cause of a righteous war. “Our nation, our national entity, is right!”
   So, accountability and being right ... get connected. To some extent. Because they exist together in a limited frame of reference. If it must all come out even, then you must be fighting the war for reasons that are right. That you can balance it all out at the end! “I am right because of this stack of reasons, and they are wrong because of this stack of reasons.”
   You can’t get out of the dilemma in that way. You must go beyond the dimensions of the dilemma to explore genuine accountability. You can’t solve it from within it; you can just push the pieces around. And some of them could be pushed around in a way that would be more harmonious — mm — but it won’t resolve anything.
   Hmm ... now, in the depths of one’s rigid belief in rightness, there is no genuine sense of personal — larger, personal accountability. Mm — what do we mean by that? Then we will stop and do your questions.
   Hmm. “I am accountable for my allegiance to my nation. I am accountable for my allegiance to this stack of reasons why I am right.” But that sense of, ah — that as a spiritual accountability does not stretch to say, “I am accountable for my enemies!” (Meaning, I am accountable for making them enemies.) “No — what? Of course, I’m not! The hostility comes from over there! ’Over there’ has nothing to do with me!” You see — there  is the fallacy. That is what you come to in a narrower frame of reality. “Over there” has everything to do with you! There is no “over there”! This is “over there” and “over here”; and “over there.” And “over there.”
   And rightness, in the sense we are using it, always wants to locate itself on a side. Do you see? Yes, you do.
   All right. What are the questions?

   Donna: I have a question about grieving —

   Micciah: [Whisper.] Yes.

   Donna: — maybe you could touch on. Grieving, to me, seems to be a collection of emotions, rather than just a single emotion —

   Micciah: Yes, exactly.

   Donna: Maybe you could talk some about that, and how to heal the acute grief process of, say, losing someone very close to you; and the old — how to bring up and heal the old griefs that tend to get buried, since grief isn’t very popular in our culture; and how to support someone going through a grieving process.

   Micciah: [Whisper.] Yes ... yes.... [Loudly.] Grief is, ah — a constellation of feelings: loss, abandonment, rage, relief, guilt about relief; desolation, emptiness, yearning. Many, many states of being, with various points of origin, psychologically and spiritually, are collected in this word: fear. [Sic.]
   You have, ah — a cultural belief, at the moment, that it is shaming to admit your shock — to admit all these various feelings upon the psychological blow of profound loss. And yet you are supposed to grieve — to show you loved the departed, let us say, if it is about someone who has died. But you are only supposed to grieve in a very contained, acceptable way — the way of the official reality.
   You know, there are other cultures where there is wailing, where the clothing is torn (originally was really torn and now is torn symbolically), where people throw themselves on the ground and howl. Which in some ways — although it is not healthy to demand that behavior, to have the option of that wild expressivity is ultimately enlivening if it feels appropriate.
   Part of grief ... is rage. Hm. [Sigh.] A kind of elemental rage that something can be taken from you ... someone can be taken from you.
   In a culture that does not have a group belief in continuing consciousness (although most of you do), there is the additional despair involving the “finality.” Well, nothing is final, really! Energy is never gained or lost; it simply changes form.
   [Pause.] And yet — the physical body is gone. One of the delights of incarnation, one of the reasons if you will that you are drawn into this world, is to experience the ecstasy of Spirit as touch, and smell ... and beauty. It is a huge symphony ... of grace in which you engage when you enter this realm. Magnificence.
   So when the body goes, there is shock at the loss; there is also relief that you are still around, and sometimes guilt. Sometimes there is relief when there has been hatred between two people and the person dies; that really produces guilt, and a sense of having violated what is allowable and acceptable.
   And then, different people behave differently. Some people, in their grieving, if they are allowed to be in their natural pattern, close in; and in its extreme state they isolate, but in a healthy state they are people who heal by turning inward. Other people heal by reaching outward. What is right for one isn’t for the other, and most — most people are a balance, or some combination of the two. However, there is a necessary movement in all kinds of grieving, whether the grieving is about the loss of death or whether the grieving is about the loss of a beloved opportunity, or a home, or — whatever. You are always gaining and losing, at least in this dimension, in the concrete sense.
   So, ah — it is useful to pay attention to your inner needs — not to make beggars of your needs; and to follow what seems to be your rhythm of tolerating and integrating loss.
   Who are you, in your grieving? And at a group level — small group, community — it is very important to share. The ritual of funerals, although it is bizarre (it has become bizarre and debased) — the sense of ritual, sharing, acknowledging of the apparent loss that exists in the physical dimensions.
   And if you will study, in terms of death, the way in which a culture deals with its dead, you will know a lot about how they allow or discourage grieving. There is very deep feeling around this. There are cultures where the body is put out — you know, for the animals to take. In America there would be a sense of revulsion around that, whereas you find it perfectly acceptable to fix someone up with hairdressing lotion and makeup, to drain the fluids out their body, to put their jewelry on, and put them in a large, completely sealed box ... that will take up space in the earth, and out of which nothing will grow. Well, that’s interesting, isn’t it? In terms of what do you allow in your grieving.
   Studying, in any culture, the way the dead are dealt with reveals very deep patterns of belief in the culture. What do you want to have happen to your bodies when you go?
   How do you support someone’s grief? By exploring it with them. By not having to be in an idea about the proper way to grieve, the proper amount of time, the proper depth of feeling! But you do — since you are a hurry-up culture, you like people to grieve quickly. [Snapping fingers.] Quickly. “It’s been three months since So-And-So’s passing!” But it does not go so quickly.
   Even if you celebrate the person’s release or transformation into — [sigh] hm — the continued aspect of Great Life, still you have human, personal feelings that have to be addressed. There were, in earlier times, customs that involved a year of grieving, and dressing in black, and so forth. But, ah — that was all about the solemnity of loss. So that too had its rigid parameters.
   How can you support a process of grieving? By being attentive to the person’s, or your own, rhythms and needs.
   Those, ah — young ones who are dying of AIDS have taught you a lot. Have put a lot into the pool of your believing, in terms of your attitudes about death. Conscious dying. [Deep sigh.]
   We tell you, you have nothing to fear from death.


   Julie: That’s the end of this particular segment... of this particular adventure. And this channeling is meant to be a spiritual, emotional, intellectual, heartful, mindful journey that I share with another realm, that I share with my classes and that we all share with you.
   Please go over the material, evaluate it for yourself, and know what it is that you think about it.

   Julie: “This channeling is meant to be a spiritual, emotional, intellec­tual, heartful, mindful journey that I share with another realm, that I share with my classes and that we all share with you. Please go over the material, evaluate it for yourself, and know what it is that you think about it.”