Rita and TGU — “off the rack”

Friday, June 3, 2016

F: 5:10 a.m. Well, Rita, let’s go back to work. Souls and Greater Souls and Greater Soul Communities, if I’m not mistaken.

R: As I pointed out the other day [in a brief paragraph not transcribed] these are concepts, they are a way of seeing things, [they are] not absolute and not intended to be absolute. They are intended to help you clarify your ideas, to clarify your relationships in your minds.

F: Don’t turn your words into scripture, in other words.

R: Well, don’t turn them into scripture, or any other form of dogma. Use them as signposts, or stepping-stones. That is what ideas are, really. Given that any combination may be seen from innumerable viewpoints, which will change their relative relationships, nothing may ever been seen as absolute.

So with that limitation held firmly in mind, let us examine the difference between a Soul and a Greater Soul as I am defining them. Other people’s road maps may differ, or may overlap, or may sometimes agree, sometimes overlap and sometimes disagree. In comparing descriptions, bear in mind that what you see depends upon where you stand when you are looking at it, and sometimes apparent contradictions are only apparent, and not actual, and in any case are not absolute.

F: I can see that this prolog may strike some as defensive, though I don’t experience it that way.

R: No, not defensive, but it is well to keep in mind as we go that the map is not the territory. Description is always relative.

F: Understood.

TGU: We have been at some pains to describe the Soul, or mind, and in so doing, of course we have had to ignore many aspects of reality that would have blurred the picture. The purpose of any higher concept is to reconcile seeming discrepancies among lower-level descriptions.

F: I know it doesn’t matter, but this doesn’t have the feel of Rita.

TGU: As you say, it doesn’t matter.

F: No, but I noticed.

TGU: You will find, upon self-examination, that different strands come front and center according to different tasks and situations. The part of you that talks to your young child is not the same as the one that engages in technical discussions or holds political views or experiences a novel or a movie. It is the same thing “here” in non-3D, only perhaps more obvious, once you clarify your discernment.

So, the soul, or mind: a collection of threads, coexisting in a body, a unique collection assembled in one time / space location, experiencing life sequentially and in relative isolation. [The expression “time / space location” became awkward enough that upon transcribing this, I derived the acronym TSL, which I think will serve us better.] This soul is not confined to one time, one place except physically, for its threads, its strands, extend to other TSLs (other lives), and these lives interconnect to a larger extent than is usually obvious to the conscious 3D personality living the life. Usually, not invariably. And not at all times even when the interconnections are relatively obvious.

F: I got the word “porous” but I couldn’t figure out where it belonged.

TGU: The barriers between lives are relatively more porous or less, differing with the individual. But still, most 3D lives are experienced as in one TSL, with at most extensions or glimpses into other 3D lives.

Now, the soul we are discussing extends into all dimensions, however little it may understand what it experiences of the higher dimensions, so that has to be remembered, too. It knows more, experiences more, than it can understand or absorb on any conscious level. At some point, any 3D personality has to reach a limit of understanding, and the rest is mystery to it.

This somewhat rough-and-ready description of a soul leaves many reports and many concepts without explanation. Old souls, young souls, for instance. The larger development arc that leads to ever greater integration of function and super-position of relationship.

F: Did I get that right? That sounds like empty phrase-making, there.

TGU: Let us ignore the last sentence, then, and stick with the question of what is obviously untreated by the understanding we have fostered to this point.

Remember always, “as above, so below.” This will serve you well as a rule of conduct in examining any new reports, so long as you do not let it become a strait-jacket by assuming that any new level must look like that you have absorbed to date. It is the reality, not the appearance, that will always be repeated. But different contexts and different viewing-points will alter appearance, so that what is fundamentally similar may sometimes appear contradictory, or, at least, not similar. When you find yourself at a loss, ask yourself in what respects any new data may be similar to what you already knew – similar in essence, not necessarily in appearance.

So now, this line of inquiry began with the request that you ask Rita what about a soul’s progress. It wasn’t phrased that way, but that is what the request involves. Is life nothing but running in place? If the larger being continually creates new souls out of its own substance, incorporating bits of this and bits of that (in effect), then what of perfection? What of relative awareness or attainment? What of a sense of purpose for the 3D soul?

F: I suppose that is a fair restatement of Uri’s questions. I’d have to go back and look. Let’s say it is.

TGU: It isn’t a restatement, it is a going to the nub of things. Souls at a certain level of development hunger for meaning, for a sense of direction, even for reassurance, sometimes, that what they feel and what they are basing their lives on is real and not self-delusion, for sometimes what you have come to may seem too good to be true, even while it is too true to be delusion. You understand, in this as in the answers to any question, the answer is aimed to provide direction to many, not just to one. Therefore it is not so much tailored as off-the-rack.

F: That is an analogy, or metaphor, rather, that I wouldn’t have expected!

TGU: Off-the-rack versus tailored? If you will look at it, you may find it unexpectedly useful. The reason racks are filled with various sizes of the same item is so that many may find something that will fit well enough, even if none find something that fits exactly. What is that but any teaching?

In order to proceed beyond the dead-end that New Age philosophy has come to, it is necessary to redefine and redefine, until the similarities between levels could be seen more clearly and the differences between reality and appearance at the 3D level could be laid out. Now that this has been done, we may proceed in the opposite direction, adding complexity to complexity until we return to our starting-place – your everyday experience – with new understanding. So the first layer of complexity to add is the next-higher level of organization over the soul, which as said, is not the larger being directly but, really, the Greater Soul. Beyond the Greater Soul is the level of belonging, of integration, that fits it into the scheme of things. And that level of integration we are going to call the Greater Soul Community, but we cannot talk of it very meaningfully until we clarify the nature of the Greater Soul itself.

So, in order to examine the Greater Soul, let us begin by holding in mind what we know of the Soul, and remembering that as above, so below. The Greater Soul is to the Soul as the Soul is to any of its threads. Let’s begin there, again remembering that we are looking for continuation of essence, not of appearance.

The Soul is a collection of strands developed in isolation in a single TSL situation.

So a Greater Soul is a collection of Souls. Let us begin with that. But the Greater Soul either must be considered to exist in each TSL that its various strands exist in, or more profitably and simply must be considered as living in no one TSL.

F: Yes, I can see that. And I gather you want us to remember that just because we choose not to think of it as existing in many, that doesn’t mean it isn’t in a sense true nonetheless.

TGU: Very good. Quite right. Hold that caveat in mind for another time.

So, we begin with this definition. As the soul is a collection of strands assembled in one TSL for the purpose of development, so a Greater Soul is a collection of Souls assembled from many TSLs, presumably still for the purpose of development. We say “presumably” because we haven’t yet begun to establish it.

The first question in both cases is, who assembled them, and, according to what law of development or organization? And it is no answer to say God, or The Creator, or to give a name to a process and think that providing a name is the same as providing greater clarity.

F: I see that. So–?

TGU: So what provided the continuity when you went from considering your own lives as experienced and the next level of organization?

F: Continuity of consciousness. If I can connect with other lives, I must be more than I experience myself to be otherwise.

TGU: Not really true logically, although as it happens it is true factually. You will recall, the fact that you have resonance with a lifetime does not demonstrate that you lived it, nor even that any of your strands lived it. It means only – there is resonance.

What resonance means, though –

And in any case, we will need to break off here and continue another time.

F: Very well. And as to your identity?

TGU: The expression TGU has served you well to date. No need to abandon it now.

F: So I’m being John Daly again [on the old TV panel show What’s My Line] – mystery guest, will you sign in please?

TGU: My name is TGU.

F: Very funny. Okay, till next time.

 

3 thoughts on “Rita and TGU — “off the rack”

  1. Frank,
    I’m confused a little with the revised definitions. Rita previously said, “The Soul is the 3D life you experience, which means not only the one physical life but all its associates (“past” and “future” lives).” To me this implies multiple TSL’s.

    Then today, TGU says, “The Soul is a collection of strands developed in isolation in a single TSL situation.”

    Can you please clarify?

    1. i think this is one of those confusions stemming from language rather than a real contradiction. I’ll bear it in mind and we’ll let them sort it out at their leisure.

  2. “Off the rack” made me laugh and I think works very well as an analogy. I think we are into some fascinating territory.

Leave a Reply

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