Santa Muerte: One to One

channeled by dreamwalker | dreamwalkerdiaries.blogspot.com
"sm" = "Santa Muerte"

sm> Transfiguration is the understanding of give and take. You asked for money, and so you experienced different forms of that money through the principle of give and take. The money was given, but it was also taken, and you notice that it all balanced out, even though the sums may seem completely unrelated.

>I did notice that everything balanced out. It seems somewhat inequitable from my point of view, or at least not necessarily balancing out in the way I would want it...

sm> haha a bruised ego, but not much of one, for you understand that this is part of the larger process.

>I do. The story of Robin Hood taking from the rich and giving to the poor has a higher lesson, I feel.

sm> transfiguration, the principle of give and take. Or to put it another way, the law of conservation of energy. Energy cannot be destroyed, it can only be changed to another form. So if everything is energy, then everything can be manipulated in similar ways.

>It would appear that there is some imbalance in this principle, for if one person is collecting a vast amount of money, and taking that money away from others... does that mean that the "energy" of the money is simply being stored into one large location?

sm> It is much like the flow of water. So take a bucket of water, and pour the water into another bucket. One bucket is full, and the other is empty. Apply this to money. Your intent was to benefit others, so others benefit at your expense. The same is true across the planet. It's not that people are necessarily more or less successful than others, it's that so many others have the intent of helping others, that this intent/ energy has to go somewhere. At the moment, it's all collecting at the "top of the food chain", in the bank accounts of a few very wealthy people.

>But what you're suggesting is collective greed across the planet, is it not?

sm> Is it greed or is it need?

>I'm honestly not sure. It's a fine line.

sm> remember that abundance is the ability to do what you need to do when you need to do it. Energy flowing FROM one place TO another. It is without question that the energy has to come from somewhere. And your planet currently has huge stores of this energy, built up through decades, centuries, of people believing they must focus their intent (their energy) on giving to others and helping others. If everyone does this, the energy has nowhere else to go but up and out.

>God helps those who help themselves... but doesn't this lead to a fairly selfish society? Everyone for themselves, nobody there to look out for those who can't look out for themselves?

sm> this is not about the ability to care for ourselves, it is that your energy is your energy, not someone else's. If you give that energy, you should know where it is going. Look around you, and you will indeed see an imblance between intent and reality.

>I can't say I see any greedy people around me, although the community I am in is fairly fractured. There is very little sense of community... everyone is watching out for themselves.

sm> but the intent is helping others

>I do not necessarily understand this... a few neighbors keep completely to themselves, yet I don't think they are any better or worse off than I am...

sm> around you, yes... look further afield....

>million dollar mansions?

sm> where you are is where the energy flows "from", where the mansions are is where the energy flows "to"

>but I would say that their lives and intent aren't all that much different from mine... our residences are just different shapes.

sm> and so the money continues to flow, in a pattern very similar to a river. If you visualize the river, you see it start with many small branches. These branches collect into larger but a smaller number of branches, and so on, until you get to a single large river. There might be just as many large rivers on the planet as there are billionaires.

>So it is not that energy all of a sudden goes from small to large, it has to flow from one place to another.

sm> indeed. And a "flood" might be a good example/template of someone who wins the lottery. Eventually that person will find himself back swimming in the smaller river, if that's where he started. If that person were to simply shift how he spends his energy/intent, he might find himself swimming in the larger river.

>I have tried to adjust my energy but that doesn't seem to have any effect.

sm> Your intent is still to help others rather than yourself. It makes you feel good to do, this is true, but you have also seen that their true intent may be to harvest your energy away from you. It makes them feel good to receive your energy, so it is not something they would discontinue.

>If I block up the river....

sm> you are still only working with that much energy.

> and so I would need to collect that energy from somewhere else? How does that work?

sm> you can ask me for it. It is actually quite abundant, and you have been learning how to receive energy, but let's look at how you're spending it. And do not think in terms of money, the money is just a representation of energy, that's all it is.

>So you're saying I need to "contract" my energy further?

sm> no, I'm saying at this point you need to pay attention to where that energy is going. That is all.

>Well, I guess I receive it, and then I use it, hopefully for the most beneficial outcome of others, or for myself. Can you give me more energy to work with?

sm> Try visualizing more incoming energy... what would that look like?

>A larger column? A heavier column of energy?

sm> How about all around you from many different sources?

>harder to visualize... but I guess I can think of multiple sources, without harming others...

sm> do not be afraid of harming others. They do not come to harm because of you, they come to harm because of themselves.

>okay then... everyone for himself...

sm> more correctly, everyone for one. What you say assumes separation.

>okay, all for one and one for all?

sm> No, just one for one. One to one. This is balancing the equation.

>1:1?

sm> exactly. You see, it is your assumption that you are responsible for someone else's wellbeing, when in fact the responsibility is theirs alone. You can however rest assured that the responsibility also lies with their guides, but they must learn to accept this help, as you are doing now. It is letting us do our job just as much as we let you do yours.

>No more sending energy?

sm> you can if you wish, that is your choice, but know that this is represented as money, energy flows like water in a river valley.

>I will pay more attention to how energy flows, as you request.

sm> thank you Troy, and thank you for connecting.