In the mater of perception, we deal with people every day in different circumstances.  Some deal honestly, some do not.  In the case of the perception of - as an example - a person asks for assistance by begging for money.  Someone is feeling generous, gives the individual money thinking this person is downtrodden and needs help when in reality this person has really told a lie in order to gain money with no work.  The perception of the one person is that they did a good deed for someone.  The perception of the other is he’s taken a fool.  Both perceptions are right.  What is the energy exchange between the two?
 

EQ:  They are both getting exactly what they wanted.  It is a perfectly honest energy exchange.  The entity that is giving is giving because he needs the feeling of having given, dost thou understand?  There is a joy in this.  There is a joy in this, and this other entity is offering the first entity the opportunity to feel that joy.  What a blessing.  Does it mater that he then receives the gift of thinking, "I’m one up"?  No.  Because this entity does not know that, and even if he did, they are both getting what they want.  There is nothing wrong with that.  There is nothing but wondrous good gifts when both people get what they want.  Is this not so?  It is only afterward that somebody says, "Hey look!  He’s driving off in that Rolls Royce."  Then thy perception changes and thee think, "I’m an idiot," and thee forget all about the good feeling thee had initially.  And we would say, then thee have screwed up thy perception.  Go back to the original feeling.  Did thee give this money because thee had an expectation that this entity do something specific with it?  If so, then don’t give it.  If thee gave it because thee wanted to give, then who cares if it pays for the oil change on a Mercedes or a bottle of wine, a pack of cigarettes or a McDonalds hamburger.  Thee were getting the joy of giving.  If thee had strings attached, then thee are the one that is faulty.  Dost thou understand?

What are the other person’s consequences?

EQ:  There are no consequences.

Why is he allowed to indulge in his good feeling?  He was dishonest.

EQ:  Oh, but was he dishonest?  Did he ever say to thee, "I am really, really, really destitute"?  He says, perhaps, homeless.  Right?

Hungry.

EQ:  Ok.  Are thee hungry?

Yes.

EQ:  The reality is thee are getting the gift of being able to give.  It should be irrelevant to thee whether this entity deserves the gift.  It is the joy of the vehicle occasionally to give away money to people who do not need it, because those are the ones who find it hardest to take.  And thus she gets a better benefit because she has no expectations of what they should do with it, dost thou understand?  It is thy fault if thee have expectations of anything.  When thee tell someone that thee love them, thee expect that back, do thee not?  And thee feel ripped off when thee do not get it.  Is this love?

No.

EQ:  It is not.  In many ways it is very selfish, for we would say do not say this thing if thee have expectation.  If thee feel true love, it matters not if it is returned.  It is a feeling within thy self.  It is not a chain to obligate another, is it?

Some think so.

EQ:  Yes, some think so.  And this is why the world is so sad.  For it is a series of entities wanting to possess another, and thus both parties get let down.  Because when thee have an expectation that another be anything other than what they are, this is not love.

How does the source view that person?

EQ:  The Source makes no judgement, ever.  Ever!  The Source sees everything as perfect.

So if you kill somebody, that’s perfect?

EQ:  Dost thou know what plan was made between those two souls before they came in?

No.

EQ:  So who are thee to judge whether it is perfect or imperfect?  Let us say, let us play this scenario.  Let us say an entity rode into thy village and raped thee and tied thee up and, before thy very eyes, skinned thy infant daughter alive.  Ok.  Dost thou all see this scenario?  Those two souls become united on the other side and make a deal that in the next existence, thee mother would have the opportunity to do away with the perpetrator as the way to relinquish all pain associated with that event.  Is the not a beauteous gift?

That’s hard to digest.

EQ:  Yes, it is.  But the Source has no problem with that, because the Source sees all entities from the purest light, from absolute love.  Within absolute love, there are no qualifications.  None.  None.  The only beings that judge are us.  We judge others and then, when we die, we judge ourselves.  The Source allows thee to learn whatever way thee choose.  Through pain or through joy, it is irrelevant.  For the Source knows that, in the end, there is only pure love.

So that’s why it’s better to try to forgive…

EQ:  No.  No, no, no.  Absolutely not.  It is not better to try to do anything.

Just to do.

EQ:  It is better to make an effort to relinquish the anger, resentment and pain that comes with something and try - no, sorry - and see the reality of the situation.  This means stepping outside of thy expectation and attempting to see the origin of the situation, dost thou understand?  Thee can never know what creates another and what they are working out.  Thee can not know this.  It is not up to thee to believe thee do.

Would it also be true - that how we see something in our past, a negative opinion, we’ve judged something and say something is bad, if we approve of something and say, "This is so great." this would be an opposite way to judge something too…

EQ:  Yes, exactly.

…and if the Source is loving and allowing, then the Source has no…

EQ:…good or bad judgement.

…yes, and that’s why nothing is allowed by God to happen, good or bad.  Is that accurate?

EQ:  That’s it.  That is absolutely accurate.  Let us use an example here too.  To certain religions, bombing the World Trade Center was a wondrous act.  To many people that was, was it not?

Yes.

EQ:  To others this was abject terror.  Who are thee to judge the pain of an entity that would commit suicide to perpetrate this act if thee had not lived the life that drove him to this?  Was this a good or bad act?  It was neither.  It was neither.  It was an act.  Whether it was good or bad depended upon which side thee were on.  And every side believes they had the Source on their side.  And the reality is the Source just loves.  We work out the particulars; the Source just loves and accepts.  So if we can be more of who we really are, then all the rest will stop.