5 Comments

New article form "The We"

https://blog.thewetalks.com/p/we-are-born

Expand full comment

Welcome The We.

Warm welcome in the hot cauldron of inspiration and co-creation, right in the time of shift of Human nature that we are in Love with.

Expand full comment

Really interesting. Thank you!

Expand full comment

(Continuation to the comment i already made below)

In answer to my own Q that i posed below, as to why "The We" only now -- could it be accurate to assume that it is like a new soul aspect coming in which has the full knowledge of the entire "The We" ? So maybe it isn't a swap out of the Inelia identity with another soul aspect, but rather more like an enhancement of the Inelia identity, which would make sense since you write "In 2016, The We and I, with Larry’s help, worked on integrating a joined level of awareness. In other words, although I am distinctly separate from The We, as Inelia, I can and have conscious awareness of when they are at the forefront of my experience".

Although i haven't read her books for a number of years, i think what Jane Roberts wrote (especially her early material) could help in conveying how this could work in earthly terms (just a suggestion).

Expand full comment

Dear Inelia

i'm wondering if you could you please explain how this new awareness that you have of "The We" fits in with what you were saying earlier (post 2009 to before the advent of "The We") ? You had been saying (in the early post 2009 timeframe) that you came to Earth in response to a call from the human collective, and took the place of a soul who was tired and had already left the physical form (foetus) and you were born together with a Body Elemental who you made an agreement with, of "let's do it."

You said that you had never been incarnated before and also that you never had any existence whatsoever, but that you came "directly from Source." In your Bill Ryan interview (done in 2009 i believe) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmlGTDBdO88 you describe several experiences where Source asks you do do something, i.e. to go and sit on a bench in some place at a certain time, and that when you do go there, a woman you don't know comes and sits besides you. You don't talk with each other, but as Bill paraphrases -- you become a lens for Source to look through, and maybe something like energy comes through to the Earth Plane and does some adjustment to the woman who is sitting by you -- but you may or may never know of what happened afterwards in the life of the other person Source asked you to be near.

Then in 2009 you were asked by Source to "go public" and this led to contacting Bill Ryan and you assumed the mission of raising the frequency of the planet -- which at some point you knew was going to end in May/June 2017, and you said to your WWMN group, that after that, you wouldn't exist again anywhere. But you apparently were able to circumvent the ending you had foreseen, which was maybe to be a car crash (?) and a few years later you started your current teaching mission, which was like your previous mission from Source, but was now one that you personally directed.

i have appreciated your work and continue to follow your very unique perspectives on some topics, however i hope you realize that your revelation now that there is (and has always been to some extent) -- The We -- seems a bit unexpected in regards to the history you disclosed earlier.

i wonder if you might consider accounting for (and from) "The We" in regards to this already perviously established history ? How is it that you never mentioned "The We" all this time before ? i know you always maintain that you are very unique and that it is not channeling etc., but if there is and always was "The We," has your earlier statement that you had never existed ever before and that you only came into existence half an hour before physical birth in this life, now been revised ? Is it possible that "The We" has always existed, even though "Inelia" only appeared in this life ?

i don't want to sound mundane, but isn't this what most of us experience when we incarnate in a new lifetime -- that we acquire a new personality each time, but that there still is our "soul" or "Soul Matrix" behind all that throughout all our individual lifetimes ? So in our case, as most humans, our "singular identity" would be the personality in this lifetime, and then through spiritual development, if we go through it -- we would become aware of a greater "singular identity," that being our Soul Matrix (usually at the same time becoming conscious of some of our past lives that we have incarnated as, as well as maybe future ones). But since your Soul Matrix aspects have never been incarnated (except now as the "Inelia" identity), your Soul Matrix maybe remains still pretty individuated, whereas for us, we first need to let go of the imprint of having had a number of physical identifications, before we can hold a sense of awareness and identity at the soul level ?

So where does "Source" stand now in regards to "The We" ? i've often wondered if in your case, since you hadn't incarnated before and begun the development process of a series of physical existences whereby conscious identity would be drawn down into physicality -- if then Source was your soul (like our soul) ? So if this might be accurate, would you say "The We" is your Soul Matrix, that represents all of your (some say only 12) soul aspects that incarnate in physical form ?

Or is it more like a "group soul" that "The Nine" or "The Adonai" have/are, and that in this case, the singularity "Inelia" could even be swapped with another soul aspect within the same physical body in the same lifetime ? However since none of your soul aspects have incarnated before, it might involve a different process and there might be more of a learning curve involved ? Of course these are all just speculations on my part, based on some knowledge i have acquired in this lifetime, but i can see stuff going on around me now as i write this -- implying some kind of an acknowledgement -- whether it's agreement or disagreement or neutrality, i'm not sure.

Expand full comment