Saturday, December 20, 2014
F: 7 a.m. Charles asked, “What does she do?” What can you say to that?
R: I gave you a minute to remember how blank you feel about the question, before I try to answer it. You can’t imagine. Not really. You were told [years ago, in a session with “the guys”] “we relate” and accepted it, but it did not really answer anything.
F: You have to admit, that’s pretty vague.
R: It is a complicated answer actually brilliantly compacted into two words. The reason it is difficult to explicate is the number of hidden assumptions it needs to respond to. We have started to look at them, but only started. If you try to impose (silently, unaware that you are doing it) 3D qualities to the explanation, you will only get that much more confused. But to remove those unstated assumptions, you have to be aware that they exist. That awareness is the first piece of the puzzle. Nothing can be done without accomplishing it first. Or – it can be done, but the resulting picture will be unnecessarily misleading.
What do I do? Remember what we have to keep in mind: Who is “I”? Not the apparent unit you (and I!) knew in the body, but more like a community of reaction-systems bound by a will that was formed and exercised during the lifetime, which may be said to be the real accomplishment of the lifetime. That is, the components existed separately before the incarnation. It was the controller of the newly assembled bundle that was added, and what was that controller but the will, the ring that bound them? But outside of the very specific 3D conditions of existence, the relationship changes. The various strands, though continuing to be associated, function more autonomously (because not tightly bound by one controlling consciousness in a limiting environment). The extensions in all directions –
Let’s begin that sentence again. While in the body, the community making up the individual functioned more as one individual, isolated from everybody else, than it does outside 3D, where consciousness no longer limits.
F: Let me try to rephrase that. I think I know what you want to say, and you can correct whatever I get wrong. I think you mean, all the strands always connect to their previous lives (put it that way) whether in body or not, but while in the body, they can function only in the background unless called to consciousness. Once you are outside of time-space, without having to deal with the constrictions of 3D, those strands and their extensions in many directions increase in relative strength – that is, they are more prominent in your new consciousness. [Typing this up, it occurs to me that what I said was only from the point of view of the former individual. Those strands, viewed from other points of view, may seem entirely different.]
R: That’s all right. Now let me rephrase it, not to correct – for it is a correct statement as far as it goes – but to provide triangulation. “I” being now outside the body, need not exist, as I did in 3D, with a limited intense field of consciousness. Need not, can not. Conditions do not allow it. Instead I inhabit a far wider consciousness, correspondingly less intense except under stimulation from 3D contact or other things which we cannot go into now. Therefore my self-definition is different. “I” am not the same as the Rita you knew, or no, put it this way – I as I experience myself am not the same as I experienced myself in 3D. Therefore I am aware of things I didn’t know in the body, and I react differently. Remember when you were told that what Jung called the unconscious was in many ways a definition of the guys upstairs?
F: Not specifically. I remember having had the thought.
R: Well, it would be closer to say his unconscious – be it the personal unconscious or the racial unconscious or other levels we can’t discuss here without going off-track – are more or less the strands that connect us in all directions.
So when you think you are talking to Rita, you are and you aren’t. You are, because everything you know of her is here; you aren’t because the vast bulk of the iceberg that was hidden from you in life – “past-life” connections, etc. – is actively participating.
Can you see why you were told (well, Rita was told, through your voice) that “we relate”? We relate on so many levels –
We relate to all levels of ourselves, and that can stand some explication.
Consider the levels involved. First, of course – or maybe not “of course”; perhaps you never thought of it –
Let’s put it this way. Think in terms of ever-widening spheres of influence. First is the specific bundle of strands that was “assembled” to create Rita. (And by the way I see that we didn’t have the threads and traits description quite right, mingling two different kinds of things. Later we can untangle that.) Those strands, that spent a lifetime functioning as part of a community functioning as a unit, continue to relate to one another as they did, but, as I said, under changed circumstances. They are less constrained, more equal now that there is not the inherent bias provided by a limited field of consciousness.
F: Meaning only so much could be held in mind at any given time.
R: Meaning much more than that. But let me briefly finish the sketch of spheres of influence. First, those that were the most active strands in the lifetime; then, those plus the strands that were relatively or entirely inactive during the lifetime. Then, all that plus – gradually, as fast as one can absorb it or as fast as one chooses to absorb it – wider and wider ripples, because of course every strand that had a life connects thereby to other strands with which it is in intimate unbreakable connection. And so on and so forth, for no matter how far you extend the chains, there is more beyond, and who can absorb all the connections available to creation?
Not all those strands were human. Not all were even the kind of animal life as, say, whales. Some lived in other places, for Earth is not the only field.
So, consider what an unending research project, or extended foreign travel, or pen-pal correspondence, it is to be outside of 3D’s constrictions but still aware of what they were.
F: I knew you were on extended research, which you once told me was your idea of endless fun.
R: I don’t believe I said “endless fun” in so many words – but it is!
F: I think that is as much as I can do today, but, a nice start on the subject.
R: Small bites may ultimately prove more digestible anyway. Don’t forget to compile questions and for that matter compile answers. You will possess new material only to the extent that you chew on it. Merely reading it once will not make it yours.
F: Thanks, as usual, and I look forward to a continuation.