Eighth talk with Rita – 12-15-2014

Monday, December 15, 2014

F: 7:40 a.m., Okay, Rita, I’m ready if you are ready. I will bear in mind that anything you describe can be looked at more than one way, which will mean it may look entirely different without the thing itself changing. I will plug in Charles’ questions.

[Charles had written: “You see, I would be curious to know what Rita experienced. Did she review her life? Did she go back and “relive” any moments experiencing them from the perspective of others involved? Is there time? What does she do? Where is she? What about reincarnation? Is she thinking about it? Who or what comes back?]

R: These questions, notice, all are from the point of view of Rita the individual. As you say, seen from other points, the same answers will look like contradictions.

F: I suspect my saying that was planted. Not sure if it was “my” thought, though of course I agree with it. However –

R: “What Rita experienced.” While still in the body, I was in a coma for the final few days, using my embodiment as a stable reference while I explored options – so, when I dropped the body, I was not disoriented or shocked – I passed over consciously.

Now, listen to that language. I “passed over” – and there is that spatial analogy again. You know, “moving” from the physical to the non-physical. “Moving” across the “veil.” It’s all right to use the language, if you can remember that it is sequential, partial, and metaphorical. I’ll go into the implications of those conditions for receiving undistorted information some other time.

Since I “passed over” consciously, my experience was more than tranquil. It was seamless. One minute I was waiting for my body to release, the next moment it was gone (so to speak), but that transition did not in my case involve a transference of self-identification from one side to the other.

F: I think you are saying, in your case you were already identifying with your timeless aspects, so you didn’t have to jump from identifying with your time-bound aspect to your timeless aspect. You had already crossed the river Styx, but you remembered.

R: That’s one way to put it. But let us say merely that I did not need to reorient myself; not about “where” I was; not about who and what I was (am).

So, that is what I experienced. “Did she review her life?” From the viewpoint of a newly conscious, or newly arrived (however you want to put it) soul, it is a life review. But if you are already conscious, you don’t need to do that. Or rather, you don’t experience it that way.

Descriptions of the life-review process are usually sequential, usually from the point of view of the time-and-space-bound soul, so it can come out looking like you read a book or watch a movie or get a course of instruction. A better way to put it would be, merely, that as soon as I was free of the body, I was free of restrictions on my consciousness, and then I knew.

I didn’t have to learn, you see, I knew. I always had known, but the part of me in time and space was somewhat insulated from that knowledge, and with time I will try to describe why – the shorthand reason is that conscious minds in time and space can hold only so much at a time (not speaking of brain capacity, here).

So – see it how you please. No I didn’t go through a life review process in the sense of a tutorial. Yes I received the understanding that would result from a life review process, merely by regaining access. Another thread to follow up on at another time: how we build in meaning as we go along, in the same way and as part of the same process as we shape ourselves by choosing.

F: Which reminds me that I want to ask about the various versions of various realities and how that fits in.

R: In time. You have noted the question Remember it another time and it will be a fruitful topic of discussion.

As to reliving moments, the answer is included in the previous answer. Access to these moments is there; a sequential visit or series of visits is not necessary.

Let me clarify that. Someone retuning [to the physical] could easily describe what they had experienced as access to information they had never had, from viewpoints outside their own – as if seeing a movie, or reliving with wider understanding and perception. But I would say, again, those perceptions and understandings were intrinsic to the moment, to the situation, and it is only when viewed from outside time and space sequence that they appear to change. Sometime we should talk about the Akashic record.

F: I can see I’ll have to start a list of topics of opportunity, and I will do so.

R: Good. That will let me continue in a straight line even though I know that all these branches would elucidate and clarify.

F: But in sequential description you can’t go in several directions at once.

R: Precisely. That’s what “the guys” meant when they said the physical is the needle that determines which part of the non-physical record would be played. That is relative to life in time and space, of course.

F: So, in your answer to Charles, as you describe your experience would the same experience be described differently by someone who only gradually woke up to the new life?

R: To the new conditions of life, you mean. Such a one would have different experience depending entirely on who and what he or she was. The higher the level of self-development, the easier and clearer the readjustment. But this is a much more complicated question than you realize, and this doesn’t answer it. Add it to your list.

Charles’ next questions move us off into deeper waters, which is good. With deeper questions – and your riding herd on my answers – we will have a chance of staying focused so that our translation of multi-dimensional reality into 3D terms may make some sense. But be aware, it isn’t ever going to make strict logical sense, because its essence (which does not conform to 3D rules) is always going to have to be intuited by the listener. It is the old story, what can’t be said, can’t be said. It isn’t from lack of willingness or skill but from lack of ability to bring more dimensions into representation in fewer. It can be done, in the way that perspective can seem to represent three dimensions in a drawing of two, but perspective only works if the experiencer has already seen three dimensions. That is, if the viewer can translate the two-dimensional representation back into three – and that can only be done by intuition, not by sensory apparatus.

F: I think you mean, can only be done by imaginative faculties rather than logical operations.

R: That will do also. However you look at it, the important thing to remember is the presence – the necessary presence – of translation, and translation could be described as the process of deliberate distortion for the sake of creating a useful analogy.

F: I think we have time to begin [that next question]. It has been 50 minutes. I am on my eighth [journal] page and I used to be able to get ten before my energy flagged. So – “is there time?”

R: Is there time. A literal answer would be, “yes,” but what good would that do anybody? So, we’ll go into it, knowing that Charles has a more sophisticated understanding but knowing too that this may be read by others at many different levels of understanding, experience, and theoretical knowledge (that is, reading).

A multi-layered answer:

Time exists, in the sense of a separation of states. But as said previously, time itself as opposed to time intermingled with various vaguely perceived or unperceived or misperceived aspects of higher dimensions, is not the same thing.

Remember and apply if you can – there is no “here” and “there”; “this side” and “the other side.” Reality is whole and undivided. Remembering this will help you fight the mental temptation to create fantasies of life “over there.” Logic and emotion both, but in different forms, will try to build defensible models. If you but remember that “this world” is “that world,” that “this side” is “the other side,” you will see that you are not dealing with two realms with different rules, so much as different perceptions depending on the state of being of the perceiver. As a rule, dropping the body marks a significant shift in perception. Therefore it appears as an all-but-absolute boundary between two realms. If you can remember that it is not two realms but one, things will gradually clarify.

I feel like I am beating this to death, and I’m sure some people will agree, but it is one thing to intellectually assent, and a very different thing to get it. Some time pondering, free-associating, daydreaming about the ramifications if there is only one world, rather than two, will help seat the concept.

We aren’t quite finished with “is there time” but your hour is up and you are getting tired.

F: And here we are toward the bottom of page ten. As Nero Wolfe would say, “satisfactory.” Thanks, Rita, and I look forward to more.

Leave a Reply

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