A Discussion of cords

[Thursday, April 26, 2007]

8:30 a.m. I can see that making a regular practice of clearing cords is necessary for me — and I should have done it long ago. So many things I have never been able to say. And, it occurs to me, maybe this goes all the way back to childhood. Cording, I mean. Gentleman?

You are creating a metaphor in a way, because psychic cords are only a metaphor, and it is as well for you to remember it. Easy to adopt a widely used description without thinking what the underlying reality may be. “Cord” is a useful shorthand, but even a moment’s reflection should remind you that it is a metaphor and can only be a metaphor — and therefore by necessity is only a rough and ready description. We don’t — to paraphrase “The Magnificent Seven” — deal in manila, friends.

Nice to see that you spend your time watching westerns. I wondered what you did with your spare time.

We smile too. But that is a diversion we may take up at some other time. Let’s finish about cords. You may find it productive to change the metaphor; there is no reason you can’t continue to use it, and no harm done provided that you remember that it is a metaphor. So — state your understanding of what people mean by cording.

We connect to each other psychically, and knowingly or unknowingly we “cord” each other — we leave cords attaching to others, and they do to us, that confuses our energy and perhaps allows one illegitimate influence over another.

A good enough description to be going on with. So let’s change the analogy.

You — that is, the whole you, not just whatever part of you you are identifying with at the moment — range up and down the scale of vibrations. (Yes, this is a metaphor, an analogy, too: how else can we talk?) You have, it seems to you, “higher” impulses and “lower” impulses, “more expanded” and “less expanded” states, different “moods” that might be seen as different clusters of your overall being expressing.

You are a different person, to some extent, when you are with different others. You are different person reading philosophy or scripture than reading pornography or watching television or commuting to work listening to the radio with half an ear, or wandering in the woods, or enduring a boring lecture or — whatever. Different aspects of yourself are called forth by different external and internal stimuli.

Now when you are communicating with another person — whether or not consciously on either end! — you are matching vibrations somewhere. Thus we told you that anyone who ever reads a book is in direct contact with the author of the book and with everyone else who ever reads that book by way of the author. We didn’t explain — couldn’t have explained, we felt, to the you we were in contact with then.

Perhaps this little diagram [A, below] will give the idea. No two people tune in on the same thing, perhaps, because their different lives and different selves match different parts of whatever they connect to. But each matches something, or they couldn’t be attached to the book. Of course in this little sketch we oversimplified, because to try to represent the situation in all its overlap and crosscurrents would be visually taxing, probably impossible and anyway unnecessary so long as you bear in mind that it is an oversimplification, as any cartoon must be.

Well, similarly any two individuals. [B] To look at it in again oversimplified form, one connection matches certain vibrations, another matches others (some of which of course may be the same, which sets up cross connections we will not attempt to deal with at the moment). To some extent, no two people know the same third person, because to each the third person is slightly or greatly different, because different vibrations match up.

Particularly closely matched individuals [C1] share so many vibrations that it may almost be an unpleasant shock for them to realize that they have areas in which they don’t line up.

But mostly [C2] people connect only across a relatively narrow range. (Do not take this visual representation to imply that one is “higher” and the other “lower.”)

This by the way is a way of expressing what we have been calling threads, strings, ropes and cables. We have used that analogy in the context of transmission through various incarnations rather than communication between individuals in the same time space, but it would serve.

Well, suppose [D1] that two people are particularly strongly connected in a certain range. Perhaps they are in love; perhaps they are closely working together; perhaps they share common experience, or, aesthetics, or common understandings, or any combination of these things. You could consider this common shared vibration to constitute a cord linking them — [D2] and it isn’t good or bad per se, it just is. It is a fact that will be used consciously or unconsciously for good or ill or both. It may be useful (what else is telepathy?) or harmful (what else is psychic influencing?) or sometimes one and sometimes another. A mother’s vibrations and her newborn child — and, even more, her unborn child — are so close as to be functionally identical for some time. Is that a bad thing, even though unconscious?

Nothing is good or bad, save thinking makes it so. We would rephrase that and say nothing is good or bad save motive make it so.

You are too tired to continue this.

Yes, I thought so too but didn’t want to interrupt.

Another good stopping place, for this has set up the theoretical foundation.