Rita on who and what can save the world

Sunday March 8, 2015

F: 4:45 a.m. EDT. Miss Rita, shall we tackle Bob’s questions?

R: Yes, then perhaps yours, if we have time and you focus your generalized question so that we may find a specific angle of approach, for of course it is a huge subject.

F: Very well, here are Bob’s.

[Bob Friedman’s questions: “My first question to Rita is how do we make that connectivity more apparent, and what are the best ways to chip away at the prevailing paradigm so that our modern `Gods,’ i.e., the scientists, begin to see that connection and use it before we make the planet uninhabitable? If the scientists agree, then I think the rest of the great unwashed will eventually follow. Second question: will our ET friends help, or will they just sit by and let free will be the prime directive, even it means we are busy killing our planet?”]

R: The short answer – and the long explanation that follows a short answer – is that it is the division into science or religion or art or what we might call contemporary observation that is the problem, not any of them in itself.

F: They are trying to describe reality as if the others had nothing to contribute.

R: Well –

F: Hmm, long pause. What’s up?

R: Two things. I paused to consider, and then you went day-dreaming.

F: Okay, well, I’m back. Are you ready to resume or do you need more organizational time?

R: The thing is, I could answer Bob’s question as posed, or I could answer a deeper question

F: Can’t you do both?

R: Perhaps, and perhaps that is the most practical way. Let’s see.

All right, the short answer is that science as presently constituted cannot aid in the establishment or augmentation of individual or social realization of connection. But this is not exactly because of the prevailing materialist belief that blinkers investigation and results in misinterpretation of data. And even if science, as constituted, did come to the conclusion that the human experience inevitably requires acknowledgement of the higher dimensions, and connection with all other parts of reality, it wouldn’t necessarily change society or any large number of members of society, any more than changing the perception and reality of any number of individual scientists would necessarily change the structure of the “scientific” worldview in general. So the task is not to persuade scientists but to persuade the culture, which will result in changing science, which will result in changing the various present and future scientists.

F: Pretty much the reverse of the process as it is understood. Science supposedly progresses funeral by funeral, as older practitioners and their entrenched beliefs die off and are replaced by younger representatives who have come up hearing new ideas.

R: Yes, that’s the theory, but in practice a culture imposes itself on individuals more than the other way around.

F: So, then, your expanded response to Bob?

R: The civilization he, and you, were born into was already significantly different from the one I was born into in 1920. The world your and his children were born into was different from yours, in turn. This is always somewhat true, but in our time we were and are part of the changing of the guard into a new civilization comprising a new order of humans. That is why change often seems catastrophic, and it often seems that everything is breaking down and the end is near. The end of what was, is near; is in fact in process. But that doesn’t mean the end of life on Earth, even human life. It may mean a Hairbreadth Harry dance on the edge, it is true.

F: I hear you saying that Bob’s question implicitly assumes a greater continuity between the institutions we are used to and whatever follows than is going to happen.

R: Yes, but that needs looking at. Society must change. The individuals comprising society must change. The new relationships, the implied structure within which society and individuals comprising society will exist, needs to come into being.

Don’t you suppose the overseers of reality know that?

Don’t you suppose that the intelligences that maintain the complicated ecology of mind / body / spirit / soul / individual-community / community of individual-communities / thought-form-manifestation, etc., know that?

Do you suppose you are orphans in the universe and it is all up to you and your choices what will happen?

F: Emerson said don’t trust children with edge tools; God don’t trust humans with more power than they have learned to use wisely.

R: True except in so far as the process of learning involves making mistakes. The loving parent tries to assure that the child’s mistakes will have only limited consequences until the child’s experience brings greater wisdom and skill. Do you suppose humanity has no loving parents silently assisting it?

F: Hmm. I get that you are saying it is not by ET’s that we are to be protected from ourselves, but from the other side – and given that we have superseded the idea of “this side v. other side,” I guess that means, from the higher dimensions, which means, from our own greater selves. The larger being perhaps, or perhaps some combination of our awareness that is free from 3D limitations

R: Yes, and be careful – not you in particular, Frank, but anybody – not to silently or inadvertently substitute the word God for the Larger Being. In my discussions I shall always reserve the word God – in the rare occasions where I shall use it – to the ultimate creator of the reality in which we find ourselves. I won’t mention God much because, after all, how much do we need to concern ourselves with ultimates? And if we are of a mind to, how far ae we likely to get? So – be on guard against a tendency to make this “nothing but” disguised theology.

My point, and it is an important point, raised by these questions, is that the way forward is precisely the way that may seem most irresponsible, because it addresses causes and not apparent causes, and employs real forces as opposed to pretend forces. Work on yourselves, one individual at a time, no matter what else you concern yourself with, and you will be doing what you can. Omit to work on yourself and nothing else that you do will matter much, and may in fact hinder.

Do you see why?

F: I’m willing to hear it spelled out.

R: Increasing your connection to your non-3D self – interacting more freely, accepting guidance more routinely, expressing your own preferences more clearly – affects the non-3D world which is where the pattern is laid down for the 3D world you recognize. Trying to effect changes in the 3D directly is more challenging, because for one thing you are attempting to overcome already-manifested effects, and for another, you in 3D don’t know and cannot know which levers to pull.

It is well to recognize your values and act as best you can, to manifest them in the world, but how do you do that? By preaching to others? By serving as example? By organizing like-minded individuals? Nothing wrong with any of these approaches, but consider how limited they are, in that they attempt to reverse already-manifested realities, as opposed to concentrating on contributing what you can to the non-3D consensus of what should come next in the world.

F: Wait a minute! That’s a huge change, casually plopped in the stream like a boulder. First you say, we are being supervised and perhaps somewhat protected by the forces of the higher dimensions, now you say it’s still up to us.

R: That’s right.

F: You don’t see some tiny contradiction there? I’m smiling, but I’m serious too.

R: Of course I see the contradiction, and it is typical of your civilization at this point in its development and change to see it as a contradiction. But from another point of view, it is not a contradiction, and it is to that point of view that you will need to come.

F: Statements like that one have me looking at the clock, and I’m not sure if I’m hoping we’re out of time so I can get out of this, or hoping we have time enough for you to bring it all together. Or both.

R: I said that science as presently constituted cannot bring a culture to the reality it needs to address. This is because science and religion and art and personal exploration are still describing different realities. Only when they again see the same reality will they be able to work together and assist each other in the way that binocular vision adds depth perception.

I said, don’t go looking to other 3D beings – and what else are ETs, but 3D beings, however different their connection to their non-3D dimensions may be than yours?

I said, don’t expect to change society by working on the 3D level rather than at the level from which 3D reality manifests.

And I said, human activity is being supervised protectively by forces which are non-3D and are nonetheless still integrally connected to human existence.

Doesn’t all this give you what you need to know?

F: It sounds to me like Emerson, declining to move to Brook Farm despite its attraction to him because, as he put it, he couldn’t see the point in raising his siege of a hen-coop and marching off to a pretended siege of Babylon.

R: Do you suppose he knew something?

F: It’s just possible that he did.  Thanks, Rita. We do appreciate all this. Seems to me we’ve come a long way since December.

R: Yes, long enough for a pause pretty soon, but not just yet.

F: Well, either way, it’ll be all right with me. Thanks again.

11 thoughts on “Rita on who and what can save the world

  1. R: Increasing your connection to your non-3D self – interacting more freely, accepting guidance more routinely, expressing your own preferences more clearly – affects the non-3D world which is where the pattern is laid down for the 3D world you recognize. Trying to effect changes in the 3D directly is more challenging, because for one thing you are attempting to overcome already-manifested effects, and for another, you in 3D don’t know and cannot know which levers to pull.

    Im sorry, I don’t know how to ‘bold’ the bits I want to say “YES!” to, but it’s most of this, anyway. Thanks, Rita. That’s what I’ve been wondering about, big time. And thanks, Bob, for asking that question.

    1. Glad it helped. When i want to emphasize a word or phrase and can’t italicize or bold it, I sometimes put stars before and after it, *like this*, and people semm to get the idea.

  2. I’m reminded (yet again by Rita’s words) of the words of the Zen master Dogen:

    “Entering the water without avoiding deep-sea dragons is the courage of a fisherman. Travelling the earth without avoiding tigers is the courage of a hunter. Facing the drawn sword before you, and seeing death as just like life, is the courage of a general. What is the courage of patch-robed monks?

    “After a pause Dogen said: Spread out your bedding and sleep; set out your bowls and eat rice; exhale through your nostrils; radiate light from your eyes.”

    as translated by Rev. Taigen Leighton

  3. Thanks so much Rita. I was circuitously angling in on this, but bothered because I wasn’t an activist. In fact, all the activism I attempted was clumsy stumbling, but our culture demands; “do something.” Hey, I’m 79 and tired of beating my head against walls. My personal healing, which is prerequisite to further personal headway, is progressing marvelously, mostly from non-3D focus 12 and 15 platforms, thanks to the aid of my ever present guides, and with an amazing resonance feature. I’m now learning more about myself and more rapidly than ever before quite obviously thanks to the gang upstairs. I have indications that my experience is far from unique. Very exciting!

    1. Never too late to learn, until it’s too late. (No, Yogi didn’t say that, but he’d have been proud to have done so, i’m sure.) As far as i can tell, as long as we get it by the time we drop the body, it’s a solid accomplishment.

  4. I certainly don’t yet understand the workings of “contributing what you can to the non-3D consensus”, but I am highly encouraged that there is another path that can make a difference, because going up against the “prevailing materialistic belief” in 3D is discouraging to say the least. Is “expressing your own preferences more clearly” to our non-3D self the most effective way to do that while we still have our body?

    1. I take it to mean, the decisions we make in 3D life determine what we become, and it is the “what we become” rather than any specific action or group of actions, that affects non-3D life. Interestingly, i begin to think this is what my old friend Ed Carter meant when he said events were affected by people continually voting; i think he meant, roughly, “voting by how they lived their lives.” Bear in mind, this is me speculating, and Rita may have another opinion entirely.

  5. Rita: Trying to effect changes in 3D directly is more challenging, because for one thing you are attempting to overcome already manifested effects, and for another, you in 3D don`t know and cannot know which levers to pull.

    Rita: Nothing wrong with any of these approaches, but consider how limited they are, in that they attempt to reverse ALREADY MANIFESTED realities, as opposed to concentrating on contributing what you can to the non-3D consensus of what to come next in the world.

    I have thought about that….and to me it felt as it is to be about “the responsibility” of what “to have done”.Or what has been”created” by us BEFORE (of us dividing), coming unto the physical “forms.”
    The “forms” were Ethereal at first, not “solid”, according to the E.C.Readings. And therefore to become conscious/aware about “where of us coming from.”
    A sort of “to keep in mind” how each action of how a thought and an idea functions. Not far from what Seth says: You are creating the own reality.

    Rita is felt as right (to me) in telling of it is us who makes “the contradictions.”
    Well, it is my two cents’ worth about it, whatever it is worth that is.

    Thank you as always, it is good food for the thoughts.
    Inger Lise.

  6. “Work on yourselves, one individual at a time, no matter what else you concern yourself with, and you will be doing what you can. Omit to work on yourself and nothing else that you do will matter much, and may in fact hinder.”

    And it is a wow…much of what Bob Monroe was doing in a way though Bob did try Human Plus to also help us in 3D. I think he gave up on that however.

    This is a clear message. Perhaps we can get some exercises on applying this the co creative process in a non 3 D world that will help us but it may happen naturally as we continue with our self recreation.

    I do agree that working via old methods seems to be ever more impossible as we watch so much planetary damage and crisis after crisis manifest.

    Maybe Rita can offer ideas for how to work on this process in a non 3D set of exercises down the road?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *