Channel: A.S.

My dearest brothers and sisters,

This is Hakann speaking. I greet you in peace and love.

Very high consciousness beings aren’t judgemental.

Then again, it’s easy for a very high consciousness being to be non-judgemental, because likely they are in a very comfortable position and their well-being isn’t threatened.

Technically Earth humans also aren’t being threatened, not really, because fundamentally you are reincarnating souls. The person you commonly identify as is just your current vehicle.

But then again, I understand that it feels like you’re that person, like you’re that vehicle that you experience the world through. And that person is vulnerable, and there are threats out there to that person.

If a person feels threatened, or feels not good enough, or feels underloved, or doesn’t get their needs met, then it’s natural that he or she will start to form judgements against other people.

It’s very hard to not be judgemental, so long as you remain in a context where you feel threatened, or not good enough, or underloved, or where you don’t get your needs met.

Obviously, keep doing your spiritual practice, and that does help a bit.

Still, in the meantime, I would like to communicate to you that it’s better to be consciously judgemental (while understanding that it’s a distortion on your end and trying to minimize it and act as fairly as possible) than to be unconsciously judgemental. And for most people on Earth, those are the only two options right now.

Why is that better? Well, if you are consciously judgemental, while understanding that being judgemental isn’t justified from a high perspective, then you can keep it mostly in check, and make an effort to be as reasonable as possible to the people you feel judgement against.

Whereas a person who is unconsciously judgemental can easily inflict a whole lot more harm and unfairness upon the people they’re judgemental against.

Plus, unconscious judgements can stick around for a long time.

Also, it’s incredibly jarring for people to talk with someone who is clearly judgemental against them, but who claims that they’re not judgemental at all. It’s basically gaslighting.

Sure, it’s never fun to talk to someone who is judgemental against you, but if someone is just honest about that and says they understand they shouldn’t be judgemental and that the distortion is on their end, then at least there’s no gaslighting element involved.

It’s also better for you personally to be conscious about your judgments (and recognize that it’s distortion on your end), because it keeps your ego in check, and it stops you from doing as much damage as unconsciously judgemental people can do.

Sure you can suppress your judgements, but that just makes you unconsciously judgemental.

People may also lose respect very quickly for someone who pretends to love everyone and to be unbiased, but who then later shows clear bias. Now it’s fine to have biases, but then be authentic about that.

If you think you don’t have judgements: it’s technically possible that you’re one of the very few people who genuinely don’t. But do you really not have any judgements against any of the following groups:

people from the other gender
people from the other political side
people who have the opposite opinion about Trump than you do
preachy vegans
people who eat nearly exclusively meat (carnivore diet)
us galactics for not intervening quickly enough
sleepers / normies
people who believe everything the tv says
people who don’t introspect and don’t do self-development work
people who are wrong, and also preachy and zealous and judgemental and unwilling to listen
illegal immigrants
racists
the dark controllers
people who cheat in relationships
abusers
child rapists

Note that being judgemental against so-called evil people is still being judgemental. It’s still your ego feeding itself by elevating itself above other people.

High consciousness beings aren’t sitting there being judgemental against so-called evil people. Sure they might take practical action to stop them from doing harm, but they aren’t judgemental against them.

From a high perspective, being monstrously evil is just as valid a choice as doing volunteer work to help out orphan children. Now I’m not saying that society shouldn’t stop people from doing monstrously evil acts, but I am saying that from a high perspective it’s a distortion to be judgemental against evil people.

So, most likely you are judgemental against at least some groups.

And look, it’s okay. Pretty much everyone is judgemental. You’re good enough, and you are fully worthy of love, even if you’re judgemental.

But it is better to be consciously judgemental (and recognize it’s a distortion on your end and work to act as fairly as possible) than it is to be unconsciously judgemental.

And probably, for now, those are your only two options.

As a general principle: if you suppress so-called bad thoughts or emotions, then they’ll still linger in your subconscious and affect your behavior.

It’s best to not suppress those things and make a conscious effort to act as well as you can, while doing spiritual practice to elevate your state of consciousness so that one day those things are truly gone.

Okay, so we’ve shared the theory. Let’s look at an example.

Let’s consider Anne, who thinks that a lot of men are bad people, while only a few women are bad people.

This judgement is unconscious, so if you asked Anne, she would say the more politically correct and socially acceptable statement: “I don’t think that, I think men and women are equal.” But in reality, she unconsciously has the judgement that a lot of men and only a few women are bad people.

Now some people might argue: “that’s not judgemental, that’s just simply true.” Well, if you start talking about this entire group of people having a lot of bad people, while that other group of people doesn’t, then you’re no longer just providing objective descriptors of reality. Instead you have entered into the realm of judgements.

Labeling people as “bad” is a judgement, not a nuanced description of reality.

Sure, it would be objective to say that most violent crime is committed by men. Or other statements in the vein of: this group statistically does this particular thing more often than that group. However, note that the tone and energy in those kinds of statements are much different than the tone and energy in Anne’s original statement.

And also, someone who is just trying to accurately describe reality would say that yes, men commit more violent crimes in general, however women probably commit more domestic abuse than men do (for sources on this, see “Hakann: It’s not normal how men are being treated”).

Furthermore, a problem with the “lots of men are bad people, the vast majority of women are good people” position is that it means that one of two things must be true. Either men are just inherently worse than women, which is a horribly sexist and untrue position to take. Or men are acting badly because they’re mistreated by society, and then the obvious solution is to help men rather than judge them.

If Anne thinks about this consciously, she’d see that either her judgement is unjustified, or she needs to conclude that men are inherently worse than women, or she needs to conclude that men should get societal help.

However if Anne has this judgement unconsciously, then it’s entirely possible that for a long time she’ll keep being judgemental and biased against men, without acknowledging that to be consistent, her judgements mean that she has to conclude that either men are inferior or that men deserve help.

Ideally Anne (and everyone else) engages in our core practice of: “whatever arises, observe that.” She observes, and observes, and one day realizes that she has this judgement against men.

It would then be good for Anne to start being conscious about her judgement. She doesn’t necessarily need to admit it to others, but she can at least observe it, look inside and admit to herself that she’s being judgemental this way. And then rationally think about whether this judgement is actually true, and what the logical implications of it are.

Once it’s conscious, Anne might consider that it’s not rational that she’s using male crime statistics to conclude that lots of men are bad people, while not using black crime statistics to conclude that lots of blacks are bad people.

If someone wants to argue this is a bad comparison because men are in power and blacks aren’t — yes most people in power are men, however average men aren’t benefiting from that. After all, men at the top are actually rigging society to benefit women.

Observe how there’s far more money for breast cancer research than prostate cancer research. Observe how there are female-only scholarships while already more women attend university. Observe how it’s very commonplace for companies to preferentially hire women. Observe how shows and movies typically portray women positively and men negatively.

So men at the top are rigging society… in favor of women.

Hence, yes, it is illogical to use male crime statistics to conclude that men are bad, while not using black crime statistics to conclude that blacks are bad.

Because Anne has made her judgements conscious and thought them through, they’re likely already starting to weaken. Maybe Anne then has a few honest and open-hearted conversations with men, and a few years later she has stopped being judgmental against men.

She still understands that most violent crimes are committed by men and that there are some monstrous men out there. However, she now also sees that probably most domestic abusers are women, that men are discriminated against, etc. Reality is more nuanced.

And yes, women aren’t raping as much as men are, and that’s something that points in the direction of women being better people.

On the other hand, the 2025 West is a female supremacist society, as was discussed in Tunia’s female supremacism series. And it’s really not that morally virtuous that Western women live in a female supremacist society, yet for the most part aren’t speaking out against that or demonstrating against that. Male men’s rights activists often get fired from their jobs for their activism, so men can’t fix this themselves.

In part because of female supremacism, men keep killing themselves at alarming rates (rates far higher than women).

So yes, it’s fine to acknowledge the reality that most rape and violent crime is committed by men. However Anne’s previous idea that lots of men are bad people, while the vast majority of women are good people, is judgemental and untrue.

Because Anne has observed, and made her judgments conscious, and thought them through, she can dissolve them. Whereas if she hadn’t made her judgments conscious, then Anne would likely remain unconsciously judgemental against men, and not be aware of the inconsistencies of her position.

And sure, maybe Anne is just scared for her safety. And that’s valid. Everyone deserves safety. But the solution is not to become judgemental against men.

Female hostility against men doesn’t stop bad men from doing bad things — but it does cause good men to withdraw and stop protecting and providing and contributing and sometimes even being willing to date women.

After all, earlier in this message we described that interacting with someone who is judgemental against you, while not being conscious about that, feels like being gaslit. Okay, so then why would men want to date women who are unconsciously judgemental against them? Men also don’t enjoy feeling gaslit.

Because Anne has first made her judgement conscious, and then let them go, perhaps she’s then able to finally find a great relationship.

Okay, so that was one example. Let’s look at one more.

Men especially often have the idea that if only that bad group of people were dealt with — whether it’s people from the other political side, or immigrants, or people from a certain race or country — then life would be great.

If we’re talking politics: both the US left and right have some valid points and some flaws. Hence just crushing the other side isn’t a full solution. Now sure, it’s valid to vote, and yes, one side being in power is going to lead to better outcomes than the other side being in power. However, the US isn’t going to be completely fixed just because that one side is in power.

Hence, sure it’s valid to spend some time on politics, sure it’s valid to prefer one side over the other. However, you probably shouldn’t invest all your energies and hopes into trying to crush the other political side. That’s not the path towards liberation.

So if you have a massive judgement against a specific group or political side, then it may be best to make it conscious, and then reflect if your expectations and perceptions aren’t perhaps a bit skewed. Yeah sure, this political side is overall better. Yeah sure, the other political side is really wrong on this specific topic. However, there’s probably an area where the other political side actually has a point that your side is unwilling to acknowledge.

If such judgements aren’t made conscious, they can fester into hatred and into an unrealistic idea that if only that group or political side were dealt with, then all would be well. When in reality, maybe that would help a bit, but probably not as much as you imagine.

Instead, it’s a raising of consciousness that is ultimately going to solve Earth’s problems.

So, I hope that was helpful.

With all my love,

Your star brother,
Hakann

** These messages are exclusively submitted to Eraoflight.com by this writer. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to the original post

If you want to meet like-minded Earth humans, please see https://eraoflight.com/2024/06/19/hakann-local-meetings-for-those-seeking-first-contact-with-benevolent-ets/

If you want to learn about a useful healing modality, please see https://eraoflight.com/2025/01/11/hakann-onion-healing/