Michael on Agreements

January 17, 2000

Q. A fellow King and I have only four past lives together and we are not in the same Entity. We also have no Agreements, although astrologically we appear to have strong agreements. Through Michael we have discovered that most of the people in our lives have strong past connections with us both. How are the interconnections like these planned between lives, and how is it possible that he and I have shared so few lives and so many fragments?

A. We have occasionally described "chain-of-command" links, where fragments do not make contact with one another but often have contact at one or two removes, so that while actual associations are few, the linked associations are many. This is not unfamiliar to Kings, who, if they learn to delegate, can have associations at as many as three removes. Those between you would have relationships with one or both fragments, and that would make for increased number of Associations in common without the direct Association itself.

February 7, 2000

[Continuation of the last session's question about astrological compatibility vs. Agreements.]

A. When strong compulsions are not the choice for a relationship, it is not uncommon to use astrological compatibility as a means to focus energy; often such energy is more adaptable, which may be more consistent with the intentions of the fragments involved. Let us also point out that when an Agreement is sharply defined, it tends to limit the ways in which the fragments can experience and validate it, and given the exigencies of the physical plane, this can prove as much a hindrance as a help to those involved. When astrological compatibility is present, it provides a realm of commonality that can, should the fragment so choose, be used as a kind of energetic wave to support the relationships in many forms. Let us also remark that when Agreements are stringent in nature, their conclusion is often marked by separation, which is less often the case with astrological compatibilities.

September 21, 1998

Q. Comments on how we go about recognizing Agreements with other people and lining ourselves up to be in contact with them to fulfill the Agreements, please. For example, I had an Agreement with a student in a recent class but we had never met prior to the class. How did he know to sign up for it?

A. Generally speaking, there is more than one "opportunity" to engage the Vectors. For example, the fragment in question may have attended other classes taught by you, or availed himself of other forms of contact including a "fan letter".*Where Agreements are present and Vectors are engaged, they tend to create a "window of opportunity" in which the fragments are more or less in a position to "trip over" one another. Recognition is of course a matter of choice, as is validation. However, the effect of Vectors does tend to "impel" fragments to responses that would not ordinarily be the case. That does not mean all such responses are a matter of Vectors. We did not say that nor did we mean to imply it. However, when Vectors are engaged, the inclination to "look deeper" tends to be stronger, as does susceptibility to the presence of others. While all is chosen, when Vectors are involved and Chief Feature is not "overriding", choice seems "easier" than under ordinary circumstances, which is of course part of the recognition factor.

* [If it hadn't been this class, it might have been another one or he might have shown up at a booksigning or found some other way.]

March 18, 1985

Q. In July of 1979 my sister Rae was nearly killed in an automobile accident. Is choice really at work in a situation like this?

A. In this instance, yes, but of course not all such instances. The Essence perceived the opportunity to accomplish one of the tasks for the life. It need not to have been an automobile accident - a fall from the roof would have done as well - but for this fragment, some major intrusive physical trauma was indeed part of the Life Plan, by which lessons might be brought to bear, and we would think that this recognition was most successful.

Q. What were the lessons learned? Did they have something to do with an appreciation for life?

A. That is a large part of it, yes, but in the immediate past this fragment ordered men into battle and in an irresponsible fashion, and was more interested in "la gloire" than in the lives at risk. We would think that this is no longer the case.

Q. Was there an Agreement with the driver of the phantom car that forced her into the path of the truck that hit her? Could an Agreement work in such a fashion?

A. Naturally, and yes it did.

Q. What did the phantom driver learn from his or her part of the Agreement?

A. Guilt is not part of what Essence experiences, but responsibility for action is very much a part of Essence recognition, so that this experience was intended to make this fragment aware of the ramifications of his actions.

April 1, 1985

Q. When we were driving to the hospital to see my sister after learning she had been in a near-fatal car accident, I was sending her white light and I suddenly got a message from somewhere telling me that she was going to be all right. Where did this information come from, and how do I know if it's good information?

A. [If it is cold, calculated (not fear-based), empirical type of information, that is when you know it's good information. Plugging into your Entity not on the physical plane can give access to a nice library of good information. This is access to what is often perceived as guardian angels. It is easier to get there in times of stress. It is Good Work to get in touch when you aren't under stress. This information comes to you more often than you recognize or credit it.]*

* [The questioner says that the channel got this answer away from the board, direct for the most part.]