This old conversation with Bob Monroe, recorded 11 years after he made his transition, is very appropriate for the day, which marks 20 years since he engaged in his ultimate and irreversible out-of-body on March 17, 1995. (Appropriate, too, since I am typing this at the Monroe Institute, before today’s session of the Professional Division.) I said at the time, in 100 years there won’t be an educated person on the face of the earth who doesn’t know his name.
Sunday April 2, 2006
F: 9:10 a.m. Bob – if you are available – why did you sign people’s books with formulas, and what do they mean, and how were people supposed to figure them out? Were they embedded rotes? Or what?
RAM: Hello, Frank. Took you long enough to figure out how to contact me, didn’t it?
F: [Big smile on my face.] Well, you were queued behind Mr. Lincoln and Carl Jung, after all.
RAM: Yes, I understand. [Said gravely, as if taking me seriously.] You should begin by understanding my position. People were giving me their power – you should certainly know what I’m talking about! [referring to my own attitude toward Bob while he was alive] – and thereby they were absolutely negating my achievement, you see. In fact you will see, and already are seeing. When you tell people “you can do this yourself” and they insist on asking you because you can do it better – you see?
F: Yes indeed. I become a crutch that weakens them instead of a help that strengthens them.
RAM: Exactly. So they present me with a book to sign. What shall I do? For some with whom I have a close personal relationship, I can write a personal message. But if it is someone who has just bought a book after doing a program, what should I do? If I sign “Best wishes, Bob Monroe,” they go away glad for my signature but perhaps a little disappointed not to have something to show others, something to make them feel special. But if I say “I’ll never forget the deep impact you have made on my life,” it’s ridiculous, you see. So how do I give an impersonal inscription that does not hurt their feelings or leave them feeling a little bit empty?
If I say “See you in 12,” or “see you in 21,” or “turn left at 15,” I accomplish two things. I give them something personal – it really is personal, for I follow guidance in choosing what to suggest – yet I do not inflate my importance or theirs. And, you see, the most important part, I encourage them to keep using what they just learned. “see you in 12” – well, they can’t do that if they don’t practice going to 12 every so often. Plus, it has mysterious overtones, as if something special is going on behind the scenes, and this is exactly true. It implies that they can be part of these goings on – and that is true too. So a simple inscription sometimes may help them along the way.
But for others, “see you in 12” or whatever has lost value, and it is “best wishes, Bob Monroe” all over again. So for them, formulas. Stockton said to the best of his knowledge no one ever figured out one of the formulas. He didn’t think to ask – how many people ever put any effort into it, for it was the effort I intended to foster.
F: If I copy one down from Catapult [the biography Bob is referring to, by journalist and author Bayard Stockton] can you tell me what it means?
RAM: Well, if we don’t try we’ll never know, will we?
F: Okay – picking at random, let’s try #4 (Page 305 in Catapult)
6N + L (R2 + 5) = STC
T + 2 p
Now, you were such a trickster, it wouldn’t surprise me a bit to learn that you made it up at random just to keep people moving.
RAM: Not quite right. More like I was talking to myself right in front of them knowing it would be years if ever before they heard me.
In the first place, he wrote the formula wrong. “STC” is the other side of the equation, the result, of course, not part of the numerator. So it is
6N + L (R2 + 5) = STC
T + 2 p
F: Well I guess that’s pretty obvious – once you point it out! So –
RAM: Standard Temporal Consciousness is the product. STC
It is the results of dividing the numerator by the denominator as in standard math.
6N – six levels of nature, plus
L = the level of consciousness represented by (R2 + 5) – or, your receptivity (ego times total self) plus five senses,
Time plus two times possibility.
In other words, your normal TSI consciousness is created by the interaction of your inner consciousness integration level plus your senses and sense data, as expressed in a given time, on two sides of the veil.
As mathematics it is meaningless, but I never meant it as math.
F: Six levels of nature?
RAM: Count ‘em. Mineral, vegetable, animal, human, elemental, energetic (like lightning, not the forces that created the lightning). By human I mean the TSI components of human, of course.
F: Well, that’s fascinating! Another?
RAM: Go ahead.
F: #3, p. 305
4L + N2 (S+3) = MVC
T + 6p
RAM: You went looking for equivalents from the other formula. Wrong way to look at it. It isn’t mathematics, and it isn’t meant to be consistent. Each message is a self-contained shorthand expressing what I was feeling at the moment. You might say “what I was receiving from the other side at the moment” but you’re seeing how inadequate and misleading that formulation is.
All right, MVC. Not Most Valuable Consciousness, though that isn’t a bad thought.
Multi-Valued Consciousness (MVC)
4L (4th-chakra love) plus
N2 (nature on both sides of the veil, working together), times
(S+3) or sensory data plus three extra inputs – intuition, other-life feed, and guidance,
T (the time you are living in), plus
6p or six times personality, or, the limiting factors on your psychic life: attention, emotion, responsibilities, dispersals, capacity, and interaction.
Again, I did not intend for these formulas to communicate on a conscious level to the person I wrote them to – I was talking to myself, as much as anything.
F: Thanks for all this. It gave me a workout. (If I don’t get anything, maybe I’m making this all up!) Very interesting. Good thing it can’t be verified, or I never would have gotten it!
RAM: You’ll find that this is just one more limiting belief. No reason you can’t get through that one any more than all the others.
F: No, I guess not. I’ll come bother you again when I get my energy gathered again. Meanwhile I’ll show this and we’ll see if we get feedback. Thanks – and good talking to you again after al this time.
RAM: Time? What is time? I don’t know that I understand that concept.
F: [Big smile] 10 a.m.