Tuesday, January 27, 2015
F: 5:30 a.m. All right, Rita, I have re-read yesterday’s transcript, including the excerpts from Sphere and Hologram, and I must say that as always it is a weird feeling to know more or less what subject you are going to address, and have no idea what’s coming, yet at the same time have confidence that something is coming. I’ll paste Bob’s questions in here, along with your bookmark, and then over to you.,
[Bob Friedman’s questions, wrongly attributed yesterday to Charles Sides:
[(1) How is consciousness, which is non-physical, connected to a physical brain? Scientists have demonstrated that when certain parts of the brain are stimulated, images and words and events may appear (memories, I suppose). I have always thought that memories were part of what we physicals call consciousness, as our “awareness” can call them up (pre-Alzheimer’s of course) as part of what we call “thinking.” How can consciousness manipulate the brain to “park” those memories–through a chemical process or something else?
[(2) When “Rita” was in 3-D, she spoke and thought in English. She is communicating to us now, through Frank, in English (or does she just stimulate Frank’s language so he writes the words in English)? It’s hard for us in 3-D to imagine anything without use of whatever language we use on this planet, so how does the use of English, French, Swahili, etc., “translate” over to the non-3-D consciousness. Do you “think” and communicate in a language over there, or is there an entirely different way to communicate?]
[Rita said yesterday that she would start with this thought that she did not want to begin at the end of a session:
[Human brain tissue contains access points that allow us to access the memory, but those access points are more like local copies of the original than like independent replications. If you consider the brain tissue that connects to the memory, realize that if it were quite that simple, –]
[Rita:] Notice that I gave you a few seconds to realize that you aren’t making it up. The worry that you are making it up is, as you well know, an inhibiting factor in developing the ability to receive material. Note, I said in “developing,” not in “discovering” or in “creating” such an ability. As you also well know.
F: But maybe we never get fully beyond that worry.
Maybe you do, maybe you don’t, it is a matter of personality and experiences. But “called or not called, God will be here,” Carl Jung says.
F: Now that is weird. I heard that last sentence as loud and clear as if I had spoken it internally myself, so I wrote it even though it did not belong and I doubt if it was you, Rita, who said it. It is utterly unlike anything you would have said in 3D – even to the use of the word God, if my memory serves. So what is going on?
CGJ: You know full well what is going on, but you intend something different and so you say, “this cannot be, I refuse to acknowledge what I know.”
F: Very well. Welcome, Dr. Jung.
CGJ: This is not an either/or situation over here, you know. You have said and written for many years that separation is a quality of physical life rather than non-physical life, and yet when that quality manifests you do not expect it. You silently assume that we over here will follow the rules. But they are not our rules and this is not our game, or yours, but, shall we say, a compromise between the two, a translation between worlds.
F: I see you are using the terms that Rita has been moving us beyond – here and there, physical and non-physical, etc.
CGJ: Consider any scheme of things to be less a description than a metaphor meant to be instructive and helpful. If
F: Dammit, I have a bad habit of going wool-gathering if I let myself pause in this process.
CGJ: Not so much if you let yourself pause; more if you let yourself entertain two trains of thoughts, or if you worry over what you are receiving.
F: Can you continue where you were going when I lost the connection?
CGJ: Merely, use alternative explanatory schemes. Do not allow yourselves to be enmeshed in them. There is no advantage to changing denominations within the church, save to be more comfortable! The exchange per se does not bring you closer to the truth, although the experience of it, may.
However, I entered the discussion to do two things. One, to make you aware that this process has listeners on the non-physical side, no less than on the physical side, and two, to say something on the subject of consciousness.
F: Someone on the TMI Explorers list had suggested I ask you, I think.
CGJ: Called or not called, those you connect to by your nature, your interests, your sympathies, and your tasks will also be there. But more strongly so if we are called.
F: An example of how we are continuously more connected than we realize we are –
CGJ: Go back to the beginning of this new series of conversations and see for yourself. Rita began by saying the communication is without beginning or end, by the nature of things, regardless of whether the interaction is observed consciously, and certainly regardless of whether it is reflected upon by the 3D experiencer.
F: Well, it is an honor to connect with you. Am I mistaken in believing that where Jung is (at least, in relation to me) Robert Clarke cannot be far behind?
CGJ: That is correct, and the clustering of souls relative to any given individual might be a subject for you to explore at some point, although perhaps not now.
F: Well, I remember being told years ago that anyone who reads a book connects – not metaphorically but truly, though of course nonphysically – to the author and to everybody else who reads or did read or will read that book.
CGJ: Yes, an approximate statement of the process of clustering. You shouldn’t carry the statement too far, but it may remind you of the value in choosing good companions. However, to return to the matter in hand –
Remember, as this process continues, that any discussion of any topic may or may not resonate, may or may not prove productive of new connections, new insights, but will not produce absolute statements that may be accurately taken only one way. The key to anyone’s understanding is that each mind, each soul, is a point of view. That is, each 3D-created mind is a particular window not only on the 3D part of the world, but on everything that mind ponders. The bias incorporated into a more or less permanent habit-system (as you once heard the human mind described) is valued precisely because it is a bias; it is a particular way of seeing things, a particular slant on life. Far from such non-objective bias being seen as a detriment, it is recognized as the point of 3D experience.
But – any given viewpoint is just that – one viewpoint. Even if the viewpoint is itself an incorporation of the habit of always seeing things in many ways, that viewpoint is itself only one way of experiencing things.
F: In other words, we mustn’t expect to receive any final answers, here.
CGJ: No. And you – yourself, Frank, as transducer of energies – should rejoice that this is so, as it removes the impossible burden of the need for omniscience or, more, infallibility. And for the reader it removes the burden of deciding whether to throw over every other system of thought and follow whatever you derive. Not that anyone would do it anyway, but that they might criticize themselves for being unable to do so. They should work with this material, not be captured by it. The same words will seem to mean different things to different people at different times and in different contexts.
F: You said you came today to say something on the nature of consciousness. My hour is nearly gone – can you still get it in?
CGJ: I am smiling, my friend. I have said it already. The point I made is the point I wanted to make. And now I will let you end with Rita, only now knowing to remember that this conversation is wider on both sides of the veil – I use the older idea purposely, to reassure you that you need not confine yourselves to carefully censored language – and that your own community (that is said for anyone who ever reads this) is more extensive than you usually realize or dare realize. You are none of you isolated, no matter how it may feel. You are not orphans, nor are you stranded on desert islands.
F: Thank you. I know that such reassurance will be of great value to many people.
CGJ: But not you, eh?
F: All right. Miss Rita, anything else before we close shop for the day?
R: As you used to say, tomorrow we can resume our regularly scheduled programming.
F: Okay. Thank you for being the catalyst who started this very interesting enterprise.
R: As to who started what, that would be an interesting discussion at another time. No need for it now, however.
F: Okay. See you tomorrow, probably.