We can experience ourselves as a community, every day.
One of Rita’s significant teachings is that we are a community of minds rather than a unit as we appear in our 3D body. (See for example “Communities and distinctions”, December 2014, Rita’s World).
In addition, it is thought-provoking to reread some of what Jung had to say in 2006 and TGU in September, 2015 on the subject. Those excerpts are below. These are included not for the purpose of comparing sources to determine if one is more “correct” than another, but to accept and think about their different perspectives on the same phenomena.
The excerpts of dialogue between Frank and Hemingway (EH) on Nov 21 and 25, 2015 which follow Jung and TGU below emphasize how our internal community reacts to different relationships. If other people can extract different versions of us, then it would not be a significant leap to believe that different places and different circumstances can do the same thing.
If we are open to it, we can recognize how people, places, and circumstances will bring out different aspects of our internal community of minds. The inputs from my joint mind emphasize ways that we can see ourselves differently in everyday 3D situations. These follow the Hemingway excerpts.
To apply some boundaries, this discussion on community is focussed on the nearby portions of ourselves which have their greatest presence in our day-to-day lives. That’s in contrast to our extended community, which as we’ve learned includes—everything. Also related to this issue of community is whether the external is bringing out a different internal version of us, or whether the external is a reflection of a different internal version of us. That’s a good topic to review another time.
It is my hope that this will expand and deepen our own thinking on the subject and help us to recognize different aspects of our own personal community more often. I encourage whoever reads this to share their insights on the subject.
Excerpts from Frank’s Material
Jung: Wed, April 12, 2006
…You are a compound of compounds of compounds. Thus, richness of association; thus, great diversity and resource; thus, great accommodation and adaptability. But, by the same token, great potential for confusion, hostile interaction, cross-purposes, as in any other community.
TGU: Monday September 21, 2015
Because you extend from the highest to the lowest, no matter what the scale or measurement, there is always an appropriate receptor and an appropriate stimulus. Does that need translating?
F: Maybe. Let’s try this. We are compound beings, so, in effect, different parts of us resonate to different levels of complexity or whatever, so wherever we are, at least part of us belongs and can therefore fit in.
TGU: And therefore wherever you are, parts of you do not belong do not fit in. Depending on your – mood, we might almost call it – you identify with the part that does fit in or the part that does not, and you are therefore comfortable or uncomfortable with wherever you are. When you are so moved — you move. When you are content – you pause.
Hemingway: Nov 21, 2015
EH: But that is a vital point. Not just for Hemingway but for anybody’s life. Yours, your readers, anybody. You haven’t yet absorbed all the ramifications of the fact that we were communities, in 3D, learning to function as units.
Communities are rarely unanimous about anything. And they are probably never all at the same stage of development. You should keep that in mind, in judging actions.
As a matter of fact, you should keep in mind that you are better advised to judge actions than character, because if you try to come to a decision about a community as if it were a unit, you’re going to be mistaken. There is no such thing as collective guilt except in a collective way. Yes, of course this leads to all manners of slippery slopes logically and in practice, but that’s just too bad. The fact that something is untidy doesn’t mean that the untidy pieces don’t belong.
So, when you are thinking about my life with Pauline and then my life with Martha, the temptation is to think you’re dealing with a unit, in either case, and then that that unit is a constant thing, that I am more or less unchanged, or that I change by decision-points or by slow degrees, but otherwise I am the same. And that is what life looks like, isn’t it? You always feel like you are the same you, no matter how different you become to yourself and to others over the years. In fact, the differences you somehow attribute to “the years,” as if the very passage of time were an active factor. Someone in his 20s is expected to be different from when he is in his 30s but the change is attributed to the passage of time affecting an otherwise constant quality.
Hemingway: Nov 25, 2015
EH: The parts of you that engage with one person are not precisely the same parts, in the same proportions, that engage in or are called forth or suppressed in a relationship with a different person. That should be obvious to anyone who has ever had more than one relationship! And of course I am not limiting this to romantic or sexual relationships. Any relationship between any two people is going to be unique.
Well, how is that going to manifest? To each of the people involved it will seem like they are the one who is different and the other is the one who is unchanged.
F: Let me try. If I am in a relationship with x, certain parts of the total community that is me manifest in a certain way, and that is the “me” that x experiences. To me, the change in myself will be obvious (assuming I am perceptive enough , self-reflective enough, to realize it) and chances are I will experience it as “the person I am in x’s presence,” or let’s say “x brings out this in me.” But although I will be aware that I am or seem different when I am with x, x is likely to seem more of an unchanging quality to me. I mean, x may have as a characteristic an ever-changing nature, but that ever-changing nature will be what I experience as an unchanging quality. Not sure I clarified it any. Words really can be slippery.
EH: You got the gist of it, but it’s true, it may not be any clearer to some than what I said. Let’s keep on with specifics and hope it clarifies.
I was not the same with Pauline as I was with Hadley or would be with Martha or Mary – and this does not refer to how I acted toward them, but how I experienced myself, and how I was “objectively.” Nor was this limited to my relations with women or
EH: My relations with Max or with any of my friends or with various members of the public or my family – or anybody – the same dynamic played out, because it has to. No relationship involves the exact same parts of you as any other does. The more superficial the relationship, the less the difference is apparent, in the same way that small talk at a cocktail party is less distinct and distinctive than a tete-a-tete.
Probably we didn’t need so elaborate an explanation of something that ought to be pretty obvious, but it is the obvious things that sometimes need to be emphasized, because they are obvious. Or rather, because something that is obvious in one context
So, let’s try again. Hadley and I had a closeness that was different from the closeness Pauline and I had. What we shared and what was separate were different; what attitudes we had in common were different, and surely you can see that those differences, in turn, affected where we put our energies. You’re not going to go out of your way to experience a sore spot. You aren’t going to miss chances to minimize things you have in common. At least you aren’t, other things being equal.
From my joint mind:
Have you ever been in the presence of a friend when they got a phone call from a family member? It’s possible you noticed a change in their tone or attitude when they talked to their family versus when they were talking to you.
Have you ever been in the presence of a family member together with one of their friends and noticed your family member having a different attitude than when the friend was not present?
Have you ever gone on vacation and felt like a different person? You may let your “play” personality out when you vacation, and your “adventure” personality out when you go for a hike.
When you have the desire or urge to contemplate reality, it is common for you to find a place in your home that says “peace and quiet” to you. The same effect can be accomplished by moving to a similar “place” in your mind by shutting down the noise around you with meditation.
When you have the urge to work, you move to your desk where the environment is conducive to that tempo. You could do the same work anywhere, but you find yourself doing it at the desk.
At this moment you sit in your creative space. It’s comfortable, quiet, peaceful, and you relax naturally when you sit in this space. That same space to another might be a reading space or a space for chatting or blogging.
Think of your frustration when you are unable to find the “place” for the (mood) you’re in; for example, trying to connect with us when you are standing in line waiting to board an airplane. Compare that to how easy it is when you’re zoned out sitting in the plane, or a car at times, or in the shower….
Individuals can have different moods, so how would you know if it’s a different strand expressing versus different moods of one strand? To emphasize the complexity, there are overlapping traits and characteristics from the different strands that go into you, and those will not be attributable to any one strand; plus, each strand is itself made up of numerous other strands.
It can be different moods or different strands expressing or both; and they are all aspects of you. It is so fluid that it is easy in 3D to overlook it. Contemplating metaphysics is quite a change from designing and building airplanes, and if you DO think about it, you will notice some of the different you’s in your being, perhaps not by name but by interest, attitude and tendency.
You may find different “place personalities” expressing if you change your residence from one location to another. You might find your “growing up” personality come back out when you go home. Those aspects of you that are congruent with the surroundings will emerge naturally if you allow them. You were a different person when you were living in Germany, and even expressed the importance of living “like the locals”. Now you are a different one yet living in the Northwest. (The Northwest is one place I FELT I had complete freedom to choose, not constrained by work. No wonder it feels like it fits.)
There are many, many aspects within you and most don’t get the chance to express themselves in a lifetime. Those urges you get to “go somewhere”, even if it’s the local mall, are often parts of you wanting to express themselves. So we say to everyone, follow your urges to let other parts of you express themselves. Go to your spaces!
You are always the final filter on where you are and who you are.