MICCIAH CHANNEL: JULIE WINTER
Produced by Jon Child
Transcript of Program 158, 1991 [automated CC]
Some of Julie’s early work in channel from 1990 & 1986 where Micciah discusses:
• Intimacy within the illusion of time: union with the physical is a doorway to union with Spirit. View Section
• Men’s and women’s needs for intimacy: shaped mostly by different sets of group belief about what needs are allowable. Transformation “occurs through heartfulness.” Feelings must be gone through, “chewed,” to transform “poison into nectar.” View Section
• The relationship of the nuclear family and the planetary family: “The grand purpose (of the nuclear family) was to explore as a group the potentials for intimacy.” This has often resulted in distortions in both individual and group psyche. It has encouraged separateness and alienation from other people. View Section
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.
Julie: The program that you are about to see is made up of a number of different class sessions.
Micciah: We greet you all, dear friends. And we are most happy to be with you ... in the midst of the blessing, [telephone rings] and the bells, and the growling-machine aspects of this evening.
Even though you live in the multidimensional reality, in the eternal Now of time; even though all time, at one level, is simultaneous; still, when you are in the physical experience, then each moment potentially reveals itself ... as celebratory, as ecstasy.
When you come into the physical dimension, you enter into an agreement about the precious nature and the illusion of time. The physical world, with its shifting sun-sky and moon-sky; its seasons, of one kind or another; its appearance of blooming and then withering and becoming ghostly in the body — all of this intimacy with time is a product of your incarnate status in this dimension.
Physical life itself brings with it the components of intimacy, closeness, and separation ... at every level, from the natural closeness that you ideally feel with your own body and its rhythms and processes and intuitions, the closeness with the body of the earth and its rhythms and karma and unfolding and breath — your relationship to body, your relationship to earth, your relationship to other physical beings through the vehicle of touch, which is particular to this realm, particular to time. Intimacy, and all the intimacy of the physical world, sings to you of the larger intimacy with divinity and timelessness.
You plunge through the waves of consciousness, riding their intelligence and their magnificence, in intimacy of time — and through it to intimacy with the One, and timelessness. (Or — all-time-fulnessss.)
And included in this dance are all your fears of loss, of death (more so in the teachings of Western culture because of your beliefs about death and its finality), your fears of abandonment by your body, as in illness; abandonment by your friends, your lovers, your tribe. All of this is worked through, through the vehicle of physical birth and the challenges that it poses to you.
The doorway — a doorway — to union with Spirit is union with the physical, and with the emotional, through surrender and trust.
So, let us have your questions!
Lucy G.: Okay, I’ll go first. Micciah — men and women seem to have different needs about intimacy, and have different styles of communication. Could you comment on that difference; and are there ways to change that?
Micciah: The war! ... (Speaking of belief systems. You have been speaking of belief systems!) The war between the sexes is, ah — a major player in your belief system. And it has been enacted in every way, from ways that are amusing to ways that are sadistic and horribly cruel to all concerned.
What is the teaching, then, of coming into, ah — what seems to be a dualistic realm, and then having, in terms of human creatures, the further duality of your biological, sexual bodies, and all that that seems to imply?
First, we say to you: men and women are not very different, except in the way that they have been taught. Yes, there are obvious biological differences, hormonal differences; sometimes differences in physical strength, although even that is, um — amplified out of the way you believe, and train your bodies.
But there have long been beliefs about men’s roles and their being, and women’s roles and their being; and the beliefs have changed. If you go back far enough in historical time, there was a time when matrilocal cultures presided, and then that moved into another kind of duality; and you can trace the historical roots. And men, in group believing, took up the warrior positions, and women were thrown from their power. And all of that, through thousands of years of suffering and cruelty, has emerged in what you call, in a contemporary sense, a “difference in needs.” In intimacy.
Well! First of all! Whether you are male or whether you are female, you have access, through the great layer of all knowledge, to the history of the species, to the history of mythic maleness and mythic femaleness. And then you attune yourself, as an organism, through the teaching of your culture, more to one, more to the other. So women attune overtly to the long history of being female, and men to the long history of being male. And it produces, out of your believing, different acceptable groups of needs.
Men, as small ones, are taught in a very deliberate, systematic way what they are allowed to do and to need; and women are taught in a very deliberate and systematic way what they are allowed to do and need — it has changed a bit over the last thirty or forty years. A bit — not as much as you think. It’s going to change more.
So it produces in men an individual but also a collective stance about the right to certain needs, and in women the right to certain needs; and in order to establish intimacy you must be able to identify and be responsible for and responsive to your needs. Is this clear so far?
Micciah: [Whisper.] Yes. [Aloud.] And all of this anxiety about needing, and what you are allowed to need and what you are not allowed to need in order to become intimate, is laced through with shame and with guilt. So ... the allowable needs give rise to allowable modes of communication, yes? And different styles, in a general sense, of acceptable communication. And the two do not match! They ... miss each other, in very painful, pain-producing ways.
Women are denied their real power, their warrior-nature (although many of you have taken it back), their fortitude, their courage, their wisdom, their aging; and men are denied their tenderness, [pause] their dependency (healthy dependency), their right to explore, to intuit, to not know.
This is an oversimplification, because it is a vast question.
[Pause.] A transformation occurs through heartfulness on the part of both men and women. In order to reach genuine heartfulness (not a condition you can fake very well), a lot of feeling-material must be processed, dealt with, chewed up — transformed from poison into nectar. A lot of feelings, on both parts. And as you do this you do it not only individually but you do it for the collective body. You can’t get to the heartfulness without the emotional process. And emotional process, we know, makes a very fertile mess.
And out of heartfulness, and mercy and compassion for the human plight of the apparent other, as well as dignified regard for your own plight, you start to have the breath, to have the room! to find, ah — other ways of being, of getting out of the roles. You don’t know who men and women are because you have, none of you, ever (except in the dream world) been allowed to be who you might be were you not bound by the group believing.
So; we will stop there, because you have other questions; we could go on and on with that one.
You reconcile it through heartfulness. The simple answer is: Yes, there are different styles; and depending on the culture there are more differences. There are also other differences. You have your culture; there are other cultures. How do you resolve the differences? Through heartfulness. How do you get to the heartfulness? Through an honesty and integrity in, ah — taking the emotional material and, ah — we have the image of chewing it to derive the nourishment from it and to — through your love — make what was poisonous, nectar.
Mary Lou: I wanted to know about the purpose of nuclear family and the relationship to the planetary family. What prevents the experience of everyone knowing...
Micciah: That you are a family.
Mary Lou: Yeah.
Micciah: Nuclear, uh... Nuclear family and nuclear warfare. Nuclear organization is difficult because it puts such a strong emphasis on those parents as caretakers, as nurturers. And, uh, particularly in small families, it is easy for distortions to arise at the psychological level because of the enormous importance of that parent. And when the father has gone away to work and the child is with only its mother, her mother, his mother, the mother is so enormous. And then you have the mythology of the family... Speaking of beliefs becoming solid, like things. Broken up now a bit, but, uh, in recent history the mother was a certain way and the father was a certain way and the whole family was supposed to be a certain way. You know that didn’t work that well, because the inherent distortions and the way in which repression and manipulation was used within that system — didn’t have to be used but often was — skewed the emotional body.
The purpose, if you want to look at the grand purpose, was to explore as a group the potentials for intimacy. Real intimacy. And, uh, to dance with people in very intense and highly focused, emotionally charged situations. So it certainly provided that. And out of that grew some extraordinary alliances, and out of that grew distortions in the group psyche. When people are so magnified to each other, because it is such a little group relative to a tribe, let us say, then it is a particular challenge to penetrate through the costume, or the veil of the person’s bigness, importance, into mutual love and ordinariness, into riding the fullness of feeling that results in compassionate detachment. Bugh! That’s quite a mouthful.
But you created a false quality of the sacred around the family. And made much of blood lines, which aren’t really important at all. And that is now tearing apart, not too peacefully. Sometimes in a very sad way. It is useful for children — babies, children and adolescents — to connect themselves to other adults besides their biological families. To be touched by other hands, to smell other bodies, to know that this one is safe, that one is safe, that one is safe.
The nuclear organization tends to encourage a certain isolation and exclusivity. “This is my family.” “I am your mother.” And it has not really promoted a sense of the earth’s population as a greater family. Population including the animals and the stones and the earth itself. It has really encouraged separateness and bou... Frontiers? Boundaries but not in the useful sense.
And a lot of economics got tied into the positioning and the power in the family, beliefs about money, power, control, manipulation. And it was all magnified. It happens in tribes, too. We don’t want to romanticize a tribe. But, uh, children in tribal situations that are ... some of the time are able to find their point of trust in many faces. Not always. There were certainly wars between tribes. Same thing: “your tribe and my tribe.”
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.”