Rita on extremes, and God, and multiple futures

Thursday, April 16, 2015

F: 5:40 a.m. Rita? Shall we talk, or should I skip it for today?

R: It always depends on you. If your energy level is low and you want to take the time off to replenish, who is to say no? And, you know enough theoretically to say no to Cayce’s mistake of overdoing; Apply what you know.

F: Yes, but I don’t like seeing opportunities pass, either.

R: Opportunities pass you by – or you pass them by – all your life. It is not so much the ones you miss as the ones you seize that mold you.

F: Isn’t there such a thing as choosing by default?

R: Yes, of course. But is that what you would be doing, here, if you were to decide to take the day off?

F: No, I suppose not. Well, let’s do a little, anyway. This question from Karla, say.

[Karla’s question

[I do have questions relating to two quotes from The Sphere and the Hologram that could perhaps be added to the queue:

[“While you’re in the body, you have the ability to mingle with others of very vastly different vibratory levels, and we do not.”

[“People have direct experiences of God. They don’t have to go through us to God. And we don’t know what that experience is, necessarily, and they don’t necessarily know, but people recognize something that’s real.”

[Can Rita expand on this? Can she tell us more about the importance to our non-3D component of our ability in the 3D to mingle with others of vastly different vibratory levels? How does a direct experience of God in the 3D affect the non-3D component?]

R: The first part is easily answered. In the living-out of a close association of incompatible or at least very dissimilar strands is the re-knitting of the 3D universe – at least, it could be looked at that way. You [Frank] asked a while ago about fanaticism; here is one answer. If someone lives Extreme A and Extreme B, those two extremes have an example of living together, of being buffered, of recognizing that each is an answer not the answer. And if many, many people meld Extreme A and Extreme B, all in different circumstances, in different proportions, all [i.e. each] mixed with different other elements, you can perhaps see that the result is to tie both extremes into the whole, to make them not outliers but part of the mainstream.

This happens continually. It is why even in a scheme of things where events appear to be external, and are experienced consecutively and in isolation, matters do not proceed to fragment into shards but instead continually re-knit. It may seem sloppy as a piece of logic, but I assure you it works in practice.

F: Reagan’s joke about the economist was that he was concerned that even though something worked in practice, that was no guarantee that it would work in theory.

R: Yes, and metaphysicians and quantum physicists and logicians everywhere are of that school. But in practice, the world holds together, because the unseen influences discourage in-breeding in ideas and values no less than in genetics.

As to the second question, there are as many answers as there are “individual” souls to be affected. I am not going to talk about God as a concept or as a reality; there’s no point in it. All that I can say, really, is that people perceive God – if they do perceive God – in ways that are necessarily limited by what they are. Not so much by what they think or believe, nor even by what they hope or fear, but by what they are – and the vast majority of what you are, what anybody is, is in the unconscious realm, I remind you. You never really know who you are. At best you know some of what you are as a 3D-limited extension of your larger non-3D being.

People waste a great deal of time and energy promoting or fighting against the idea of God, usually (in those cases) in the image of God that they hope for or fear, respectively. I don’t intend to add to people’s opinions on the subject.

F: I am tempted to quit, tempted to continue. Let’s try John Wolf’s question.

[John Wolf’s context and question:

[I’m still trying to sort out the dilemma of multiple futures.

[“There is usually little point in predicting a future; never any point, really, save to offer insight into the tendencies of present behavior or to prepare people psychologically for coming events that are in practical terms not avoidable. Prophets, as you yourself have pointed out more than once, predict not in order to gloat but in order to persuade. They don’t want people to suffer, they want them to repent. If they will change course, they will visit a different future. It is all in the Book of Jonah.”

[Then I read the Book of Jonah and it tells of the people of Nineveh repenting and avoiding a harsh future, among other things.

[My interpretation of what Rita was saying was that all possible futures are experienced, by our alternate selves. If this interpretation is correct, does it imply that all possible futures for groups of people are also experienced? Is there an “alternate” people of Nineveh who did not repent, and experienced a harsher fate?

[It is not an issue whether the story of Jonah itself is factual – it is an example of raising again the question of whether our greater beings, and groups of greater beings experience “all” or just “some” possible futures.

[This message implies that some futures are “avoidable”.]

R: The short answer is that all possible paths are equally –

No, this isn’t quite as easy to speak to as it might be.

F: Yes, and I get why. What is clear when transferred directly isn’t necessarily so easy to put into words.

R: Indeed not. Why don’t you try and we’ll see how it goes?

F: I’d say all possible paths exist from the intrinsic nature of this reality. Maybe our reality is one game on its own CD-ROM, I don’t know, but at any rate this CD-ROM has all possible paths imprinted on it, by definition, at the time it is created. Each individual – no, strike the word “individual” — each version of reality, which for an individual is experienced as uniquely his, whether that “individual” is a person or a group of persons –

Dammit. Let me try again.

Any path taken on the holographic path within the CD-ROM is going to seem real; is going to be real, or as real, as any other. But they are projections, not movie sets or bits of matter having to be hauled here and there. Taking one path doesn’t obviate the paths taken by other players at another time.

R: Yes, and yet if certain paths are much more widely accepted than others, in effect those paths become more weighted, more real.

F: Hmm, I don’t know that you’ve ever mentioned that before.

R: It has been implicit in various things said and half-noticed.

F: So, the implication for John’s question?

R: It isn’t that some futures are avoidable nor even that they are less real; it is that they are less commonly encountered, hence have less impact upon the total group consciousness. If in one time in 100 million, Atlantis rises from the sea, that means that in all but one time in 100 million, it doesn’t. Which way would you bet, in trying to decide which future you will likely encounter?

F: Yet that one-in-100-million chance exists.

R: Yes, and exists as a reality, not as a chance. The “chance” aspect is in your encountering it.

F: That’s a new slant on things. I hadn’t looked at it that way. All right, I’m not sure we exhausted either subject, but that’s enough for me, for the moment. Unless you have more?

R: There is always more to be said on any subject, but that is enough for now, because there is always a good place to pause, as well.

F: Okay. Till next time, then, if ever.

R: Till then.

3 thoughts on “Rita on extremes, and God, and multiple futures

  1. Does each of our life trajectories get a volume in the Park library so we can “see” what happened when we made other choices? As Rita has pointed out and at least quantum scientists generally accept, every “happening” affects, perturbs every other “happening” everywhere in the universe, where “happening” may be the “choices” electrons and photons make every instant—I have no idea how to precisely define the quoted words and don’t believe anyone else does. According to the “multiple universes” quantum theory, each possible “choice” a photon or electron makes results in a different universe. It seems about 50% of quantum scientists believe this is true, but accept it can never be investigated because we are always stuck in only one. If this be true, I suspect this is true as well for “happenings” occurring upstairs everywhere. Thus, every time alternatives occur, we have a branching from our universe or All That Is into an infinite number of branches. An instant later, each of these branches, and so on forever. Does not this imply that any choice is as good as any other, that is all quite meaningless? If this be true, how does this affect your life choices? What does this do to theology and metaphysics or, for that matter, to physics?
    Those attending TMI workshops, practicing shamanic drumming, hyperventilating, Sun dancing, taking psychedelics, and so forth report that your “I”-ness, your awareness is capable of learning or, rather, remembering how to play up and down the vibrational scale all the way to Park and far beyond. The great urge for many is to shoot for the mystical ultimate and escape the 3D world, which the TMI tour company does quite well for those who can afford it. Now the reverse is being explored by many; there is a great effort to bring the imaginative and other psychic abilities common on higher vibrational levels down to Earth not simply to manipulate but to lovingly co-evolve with all our companion beings. As Rita noted, here is where evolution occurs. To give you some feeling about where I’m going, recall Michael Murphy’s “Golf in the Kingdom”, which is fiction, or Joe Gallenberger’s Manifesting in the Kingdom and Pang Ming’s Healing in the Kingdom, which are not. Since this whole discussion is about TMI’s evolution, I urge this second direction be considered and an investment be made to bring Heaven here for all who are willing. Funny thing, this jells with Jesus’ teachings as well as those of the non-religious Taoists.

    1. Don, a couple of things occur to me. You say, “Does not this imply that any choice is as good as any other, that is all quite meaningless?” I can see that it might appear meaningless IF one looks at it from that abstract theoretical “objective” perspective that materialist science is so fond of (and so trapped in). But if you bring it right back to the personal, the subjective, the living, no such problem arises. When you choose, you know it is real for you (for the only version of you that you experience and are responsible for). Do we have any real reason to override what we know in favor of an artificial construct, an abstraction?

      And you say, “The great urge for many is to shoot for the mystical ultimate and escape the 3D world, which the TMI tour company does quite well for those who can afford it.” I cant speak for others, but that is not my experience of TMI. This is a logical conclusion I suppose if one assumes that TMI is all about “out of body experniences,” and that is the draw for many, no question. But in practice, one uses an out-of-body either to demonstrate to oneself that one really is more than a physical body, or — in the case of people who have had them spontaneously and uncontrollably — to gain reassurance and context. Going out of body for its own sake would be pretty pointless once the novelty wore off. Seeing TMI in that light would be like seeing someone learning to read and thinking it was all about them being fascinated with the shape of the letters or the smell of the newsprint.

  2. A Good Morning Frank & Rita and all.

    I have thought about the “chance” aspect yesterday.
    Rita says: “Yes,and exists as a reality,not as a chance. The “chance” aspect is in your encountering it.

    During the time in studying the E.C.Readings I learned to say: “Nothing happens by chance.”

    And here Rita also mentions the many “concepts” about God (it is as many as it is individuals).
    But away from the many “concepts” (no need of any concept according to Echart Tolle) because it is enough to know ourselves as the sum total of Ever (or everywhere) to has been, and ever will be. It is solely”the here and now moment.”
    Eckhart Tolle had the first-hand experience of it. (I have only read ONE of his books long time ago and have seen him on Ophrah’s TV-series).
    The essence (the core) of us and all creation is “Nameless”, without any name but Love. It MUST be sensed and felt, or experienced). And “Love” became Form within The Self-Knowing Source.
    “God/The Source/The Creator” never changes, “IT” is neutral in its essence, all loving and all knowing.
    I did some meditation upon it last night, and woke up with a message in mind which clearly stated: You are Loved, never doubt it… ever.”WHERE” did it come from? Rather odd, I was talking with my “Heart” as the heart was on the outside of the body– I FELT “talking” with The Heart.
    One chance in a million “talking” face-to-face with “a Heart”? It is not empty words the phase in healing The Heart after all.

    I recall far back in time when reading Louise Hays books in how much she underlined the matter of Love, and she told in the book: “No matter what sort of sickness or deceases you have, or whom you are, or where you are– I`m solely working upon ONE THING– and that`s “Love Yourself”, because if you cannot love yourself then you cannot Love others” (or each other).

    As ever grateful to Rita and you Frank.
    And now on to the house-work.
    B&B, Inger Lise.

Leave a Reply

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