top of page

We land, still in the middle, of our life lessons

I finished this book:

And this is what stuck with me:

The school system was built in order for the rich to feel more comfortable with the poor, to civilize them, so that they do not become criminals, and simply take from the rich. The same was applied to women, in that women were only encouraged to be educated so they could become good mothers and wives, to further their husbands' potential. The only career suitable for women was to become a teacher of young kids, or of women, because older girls educated among older boys resulted in girls who were willing to talk back to their teachers. The school where people went to qualify to become a teacher was called Normal School. This answers my question, as to why someone trained in Portugal or the United States would have to requalify to be able to teach in Ontario, Canada, because different places are using the school system for different things.

They did not want to involve the government in the school system, because they didn't agree with voting who should be in power, or having to deal with frequent changes of who is in power. They were able to get tax payers' dollars without handing power over to the government but, when they realized their target population (the poor) were not sending their kids school, they offered the government power over the schools, in order to make school attendance compulsory.

It was a huge mess. With attendance being the determining factor for how much funding the school got, and schools not wanting the poor in, so they would say if you're not dressed right, clean, and on time, then you're out, the doors are locked.

Catholic students were treated as if they were poor, so they created their own schooling system, and because of the way the law was written, they became entitled to government funding as well, with less government control.

However, looking up the difference between Protestant (pubic school) and Catholic, the latter seems to believe that only the pope can access god, and the rest of us can only access god through the pope, very authoritarian. Lutheran, a branch of Protestant, from my understanding, is about saying "no, the church doesn't get to excuse people from doing whatever they want to do, just because they donate money to the church".

It's a mess, when we want to avoid some of the things the government is doing through their public schools, but we also don't want our kids taught that they have no direct access to god.

At the end of the day, we all have our lessons. We can be open to them, or constricted by them. They come for us either way. Esogetics allows us to see if we have issues with our world view (left index finger) or willingness to be open minded (right index finger). We can also see where our current life experience had its roots, and how to lift these roots, so that things can flow more smoothly, and we can see, what we are meant to see.

When I look again at my kids' life work, in their gene keys, middle is working from chaos to innovation to innocence. This, in a way, is the lesson of the school promoters. They were so afraid of what they could not control, their world view was one of impending fear, either they would fall behind or the poor were going to take from them. Eventually, some of the labouring class, didn't want to do the labouring jobs, that the higher classes needed them to do, because they want something more and had the educated to go for it.

We are all playing chess on different levels of the game. I don't think it is better to be rich, and to feel you always have to protect what you have. They mention disintegration several times in this book, which Dabrowski would say were opportunities for letting go and being open to growth and understanding. The offer doesn't appear to have been taken.

I am surprised to see, the reason my eldest gives me for not wanting to go to school, was present then too: he feels more comfortable, safer, at home, compared to what is going on at school. By contrast to my last article, about the first half of this book, in the second half, they did say: that parents tended to send their kids aged 5-10yrs to school so they could work, but at age 10 many kids preferred to leave school and go to work. My father in law said this is what happened to his brother too, and he did well for himself, working his way up to create a fishing business that he then handed to his son, who recently got injured, which has inspired his daughter to go into speech rehabilitation, because of how important it is for her to be able to communicate with her father again. It's a beautiful dance, life, if you let it.

I am told that the residential schools were run by all faiths, but that the Catholics had the biggest part of the pie. From my limited understanding, the Catholics were mostly the French (maybe they landed first, to rape and pillage the indigenous, creating a heavy imprint of Catholicism in the offspring), but then later also the Irish, while the Protestants were mostly the English. While Ryerson (who this book centers around) was slandered in the news for playing a big part in the residential schools, so much so that Ryerson University was recently renamed to Toronto Metropolitan University (which to me is worse). I don't understand, something is amiss.

Yes, women, the indigenous, the poor, are hard to control, because no one is intended to be controlled. They go after the children as an attempt to control the next generation, from chaos grows innovation, but the next step is innocence, which means taking a step back to watch it unfold, instead of trying to control the outcome, few make it to the siddhis.

Even my youngest, from dominance to synergy and communion. People try dominance when they are scared. Synergy is just that things organize themselves, because there is a force behind everything, that we don't see, the puzzle is perfect.

And, interestingly, youngest has the same birth date as the founder of Esogetics, and he often works with interferences patterns (mentioned in the gene keys audio, about how to move from the shadow of dominance to the gift of synergy and the siddhi of communion) which are both conception (the vesica pisces) and something that can be used to intensify treatment at the source, the interference pattern contains all of the information, it is the hologram.

I do not fully understand many things, but I see the repeating themes. I am less interested in the cold facts everyone can agree on, and prefer to see the conversations that happen behind closed doors, to understand the life, the soul contracts, being played out. Here is a passage from this book:

This is why I didn't take to history taught in school, too much is missing, the same for many things. Life has a feel to it, without this feel, it's not for me.

The purpose of this article was to include what I have learned from reading this book, and how it's placed in my own life.

In a couple years, my eldest will decide if he wants to attend a Catholic high school, closer to home, wearing the same thing everyday, which he prefers, and I will have little control, because I'm not supposed to. My son will choose what is right for him, and I will continue to support him from home. He is here to move from complexity to simplicity, I trust that all my kids will travel their path, as I travel mine, from purposelessness to totality and immortality. No person should be immortal just because they were rich, powerful, and of a class that considered itself to be superior, or that others consider to be privileged. We are all immortal, in our multiple life journey, to grow, as much as we can, despite the things we attract, to start our game in the place we wanted it to start, so we can have the experiences we seek.

This book also shared that mothers were blamed for kids who behave poorly, but I think it's the opposite. Kids choose parents who can support them to navigate what they came to do. They will choose good parents, if they came to navigate something hard. And good parents, may also be parents who appear neglectful, because it takes great soul love to play a neglectful role, so your child can grow to be better than you in this life.

My mother hated her brother because she wanted the benefits of being a boy. He eventually took his life. None of this is easy. But it's interesting, when we allow it to be whole.

Yesterday (Canada day) I wore an every child matters tshirt amongst the majority of red, but also a minority of non participants and smaller minority of orange shirt wearers. It occurred to me that we have a choice, to participate in social conflict or not. Nothing is perfect. I used to wear red, but as I learn more, I'm not sure, and orange is my falling off point, to eventually play no part at all. Not because I don't care, but because our conflicts comes for us either way, so we can heal, we don't need not draw or create more conflict, karma, action to be taken, work, to be done.

I hope this helps?

2 views0 comments


bottom of page