Twelfth talk – 12-27-2014

This was the last talk with Rita until January, 2015

Sunday, December 21, 2014

F: 5 a.m. Rita, your tutorial is meeting response. Charles is summarizing the points you have made already, and I have begun a file of questions people ask. Whenever we exhaust any one topic, apparently we’ll have more.

So, do we continue on “what does she do?”

R: We have hardly gotten started on that one. Let’s continue with the first set of definitions to be held in mind – who is the “I” or the “you” being considered? I provided you a hint about our consciousnesses as connectors, able to follow links to other communities of experience (which is how an individual may seem to us). But now let’s return to the part of me that more closely resembles the Rita you knew, the bundle that was born, lived, made connections, developed habits, interacted, thought, studied, daydreamed, did a million practical day-by-day things, and died. We have said that that part of me survives, and I suspect that this is what Charles, for one, expected to hear about.

F: I think I’m with you so far. You could be considered in your most expanded form – all the network that was used to fashion the nucleus of your Rita-mind and life – or in that Rita aspect considered as if separate.

R: Not quite “as if” separate. It is separate – only separation isn’t what it seems in 3D. It is a way of looking at things, not an actual barrier. Other than that caveat, though, close enough.

When you consider the unit of consciousness that knew itself as Rita, you are closer to what you used to hear as “in-process Rita,” to be distinguished from “completed Rita.”

F: I understood that to be a distinction between our consciousness at any given moment – age 35, say – and the over-all view the consciousness attained once it had gotten the complete picture.

R: Remember, the concepts we were given then – like the concepts I hope to provide now – are not designed as monuments but as bridges. They are to help you move from wherever you are at the beginning to a more sophisticated understanding.

F: Edging toward understanding A by understanding B, and vice-versa.

R: Yes. You may find it inspiring or depressing, depending upon your temperament, but there is always more to learn, always redefinition or what you had previously made yours. Always, unless and until you choose stability over growth, at which time learning ceases until you are ready to proceed once again.

F: And I’m getting the feeling that neither choice is somehow wrong.

R: Not at all. Eternal life is a marathon, not a sprint, to use one of your analogies. Different people need to take breathers at different times.

So, your previous understandings are to be refined – some of them, to the point that you may feel them being overthrown, rather than refined. But that is the way to new understanding.

F: I’m not going to worry about it.

R: No, that’s your strength.

All right, “in-process” versus “completed.” Those concepts were put into place as place-holders, you might say. They allowed us to save the phenomena without having to delve into labyrinthine complexities. But now that your base of understanding has jelled and matured, we can go back and redefine what served.

It is true that every moment – and thus every moment’s mind, consciousness, experience, awareness, state of being, interim status – continues to exist forever. That is what the Akashic Record is. It isn’t the annals of what happened year by year, though it would serve as such. It is, rather, the substance of the life of every moment. You appreciate the distinction? It isn’t merely a record; it is the actual moment. All of them, from every viewpoint (or rather – well, that’s too long a digression. Maybe another time.)

To use another of your analogies. Reality is a CD-ROM, recording all possibilities as it is created. No. Let’s start again, that has too many misleading nuances.

It is a common mistake to think that reality came into being and is created moment by moment. Rather, it came into being and is experienced moment by moment, decision by decision. Your decisions participate in the creation of the version of reality you will live. The unchosen paths exist equally as those chosen, but in the version you experience they aren’t activated, let us say. In effect, they might as well not exist. You see them not, nor experience them and their unchosen consequences.

Nonetheless, they exist, and another path through the same reality, making different choices, will experience a different reality. Different in effect, not intrinsically.

So, people’s past-life reviews show them the life they created by their choices and the effects that followed. It shows, sometimes (depending on the person’s receptivity) the life they might have created by different choices.

And now you will ask, why don’t these people also experience their extended being? The answer is, who are you talking about? If you refer to the extended being from which they were created in the first places, certainly it is no less aware than it has ever been. But if you refer to the specific mind created during that life-experience, it may or may not be aware – it depends upon the level of awareness it attained. And this is not to be taken as a “greater than” or “lesser than” comparison. It is more a matter of the composition of elements, that render the mind more aware, or less, of any particular phase of existence. After all, none of us comprehend the whole. (And I mean to use the word “comprehend” to mean “extend to” as well as “understand.”) There may be no particular advantage in Davy Crockett being a mystic, for example, or, say, Lucretia Mott.

Small side-trail. You tend to think of these laboriously created minds as if their primary purpose were to relate to 3D life. But in a way, it would be more accurate to say that 3D life is created to allow for the formation of such minds which then are available for interaction on “higher planes,” or “the other side,” or “heaven and hell.”

So, to return, if you were to contact a mind in its 3D-orientation (that is, without conscious connection to the rest of itself) you would be told of it experiencing eternal life one way; another, equally 3D-oriented but with that orientation containing an active link to the “non-physical” – such as you, such as myself, such as anyone whose life included that dimension – would report an entirely different experience. The difference is not in the reporting nor in the terrain, of course; it is in the mind doing the experiencing.

Regardless the nature and extent of the mind you contact, the answer to “what are you doing?” is going to be – relating. If I am experiencing my afterlife only from within the mind I created, and that mind has no wider, deeper connections because I did not concern myself with such matters, maybe I will report that I have been to Sunday School at my accustomed church; or perhaps I have been attending classes or teaching class, at my accustomed university; or I am having Sunday dinner with the family I grew up in, or the family I formed. You get the idea. Whatever interested that mind in its 3D lifetime will probably interest it afterward, until it is interested no longer. (Topic for another time: How do people cease to be interested? Clue: They are still connected “upstairs” as you say, and that connection still gives hints.)

And this is not mere putting-in-time. Real, constructive, work is being done by people continuing their living in different circumstances. They were fashioned – to some degree self-fashioned – to do just that, after all. Someone fascinated with mechanics doesn’t have to lose the fascination just because the limited 3D framework has been suddenly (or gradually) experienced as wider and deeper than had been thoughts. There is nothing more (or less) important about metaphysical speculation than about an appreciation of leverage and inertia and the other phenomena of 3D existence. After all, you have Hemingway going fishing in his afterlife, do you not? He knows he is creating, he creates in such a way as to allow a wide range of outcomes, and he continues to experience as if he were still in 3D, only by his choice and according to parameters he sets. And still he continues to function on other levels, as he did in life. (I might almost say, “because he did in life.”)

F: That’s going to have to do it for this morning, I’m afraid. I always feel like we barely get started and the hour is gone.

R: Righteous persistence brings reward.

F: So I’ve heard. Thanks.

One thought on “Twelfth talk – 12-27-2014

  1. So fascinating to read Rita’s explanations/descriptions adding to understanding the question, Who and what am I? It gives me answers from her perspective that flesh out my own experiences so that I get to see them thru new eyes.


Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.