TGU — the larger being’s agenda, and ours

Sunday, June 12, 2016

F: 5:30 a.m. all right, friend. Yesterday you said we are one part of a larger being and that was our starting-point for today. I’m ready to continue if you are.

TGU: You aren’t quite as ready as you think you are. But we can try. When you are too tired, we can stop.

This may be difficult to say clearly and I know it will be difficult for some to accept. The answer to that is as usual, don’t accept it unless the material compels you to. And by that I mean, not compels you by logic, but compels you because it resonates. And even then, you will want to examine it for contradictions and questionable inferences, because the more severely you wrestle with new understandings, the more they become yours, the closer you bind them to you.

F: Odd way to put it.

TGU: Odd, perhaps, but not random.

Remember that one starting-point for this long exercise in redefinition was for you to realize that souls are created and then go on. I was going to say “go on forever,” but that isn’t exactly true and isn’t exactly not true either. For the moment, as a rough approximation, say forever.

A second point was that spirit, unlike soul, is from forever to forever, and is not modified, nor can it be tied in knots, but nor can develop. Whereas soul experiences and grows, spirit is, and continues unchanged. Only, don’t overly separate in theory what function together in practice during any one 3D lifetime.

But if the spirit is unchanging, in the larger being, from any lower being’s perspective, there is experiencing and growth just as you experience it in the life you are leading.

And, remember, the larger being is part of the life you are leading. That is as true a way to put it as the opposite way, that you are a part of it. I invert the order merely to remind you that it isn’t a situation in which you feed the larger being but it does not feed you. There is a continuous two-way interchange going on, rather.

Even this is somewhat distorted by analogy.

F: Went wool-gathering there, for a moment. The distortion?

TGU: Your liver, your heart, could be considered part of the larger being that is your body. They could be described as continuously interacting with that larger being. That wouldn’t be untrue, but really they are part and parcel of that body; without them the body would be incomplete and in fact could not function. So it isn’t just a matter of considering how the liver “feeds” the larger being, nor of how it “receives feed” from the larger being.

F: Our 3D lives are more intimately connected to the larger being than we sometimes think.

TGU: Yes, but remember, you say “our 3D lives” – don’t forget that your 3D life includes your non-3D component. All that is you is inherently connected to the larger being.

F: And presumably so on, up and down the scale of being.

TGU: Precisely. No “you” and there would be a hole in the universe, so to speak. [That is, “if there were no you,” etc.] A body could survive amputation, or the surgical removal of a given number of cells, or the malfunction of its organs to a certain extent – but in any such case, it is not unaffected by the loss.

F: It is striking to me to see – by implied comparison – how accustomed we have become to thinking of ourselves as being dispensable, accidental, perhaps detrimental.

TGU: It is part of the disease that is eating at your culture, that sense of being unneeded, and separate, and insignificant.

F: Colin Wilson used to argue against what he called “the fallacy of insignificance,” come to think of it. But I don’t think he meant it in just this way.

TGU: He did not have a very definite or very clear idea of what he would have thought of as “the afterlife.” It was struggle enough in his life for him to overcome the implied meaninglessness the early twentieth century took for granted.

F: Which he did.

TGU: Which he did, and which would –. Well, let’s use that as a starting-point, an example concrete enough, enough of a known quantity, to serve as a public example, and one known to you [personally] as an individual, and one suitable to serve as an example of relationships between the larger being and individual souls.

You – any of you – are well familiar with people who do, and people who don’t, think there is any “afterlife,” and with people who do, or don’t, think they have a firm idea of what the afterlife is. Among yourselves you are beginning to see that the very term “afterlife” might as well be renamed “afterthought” or even “aftershock” – in other words, it is more current and more closely connected to everyday life than a term like “afterlife” implies. And isn’t that what we are about here, providing a corrected picture of life?

So, let us take the life of Colin Wilson as an approachable model for examination.

Seen as a 3D being, his life is as familiar a story as your own. He lived in one time and place, and lived connected to his non-3D as you do, regardless whether he (or you) realized it at any given moment. Well and good.

Now let us look at him as part of the larger being, taking a little creative license if need be so as to enhance the clarity of the relationship.

F: Not sure what you mean by that last.

TGU: No matter. Colin Wilson is created in 1931 in England, blah blah blah. You know or can learn the biography. But a more interesting question is, why that combination of elements, why that combination of possibilities? On two levels: what was his mission over and above the usual mission of living his life and making of himself what he wished?

There is always the primary mission of living your life and choosing what you want to be. (Not talking about external achievement, here, but of self-creation from the materials provided by your inner and outer environment.) But there is also another level of mission that can be considered as more impersonal and less particular. There are choices the larger being is making that you and all others are executing. Sometimes what you want as a 3D soul and what the larger being wants (experienced as part of you), only overlap, or conflict, and this too as a part of your life’s choices. Do you wrestle with those uncomfortable “otherness” wishes? Do you say, “Your will, not mine”? Do you say, “I will not serve!”? These choices are choices on your 3D soul level and, at the same time, they do not leave your higher being unaffected, for how could they?

F: I am beginning to see it. Once we think of the larger being as having the same possibilities and limitations as we do, but at another level, it is no longer a matter of gods and worms, but of contradictory and confirming currents within us.

TGU: And with this new vantage point you can begin to do the work of seeing your life as an integral part of a larger life – and can begin to see that many a theological puzzle, or problem, that you may have passed by as superstition is in fact a record of people wrestling with perceptions and experiences that are not only real, but critically important to understand your lives – if you bring them into your present. In other words, if you wrestle with their meaning so that you may re-interpret them in your own terms.

So, if Colin Wilson is born into certain circumstances, it is not only for reasons that may be considered to be reasons of his own (how can that be the truth, given that “he” as a bundle does not yet exist?) but because that mixture of elements may serve the purpose of the larger being.

F: “God has no hands to use but ours.”

TGU: And substitute “the next larger being” for “God” and you see a very true statement in a new way. The larger being is not God, yet it has many of the attributes attributed to God, and you can see how people would have been led to accept an over-simplified picture of man here, God here, because it is truer than experiencing man alone, or man subject to many insensate forces, or man subject to conflicting gods.

Now, it remains true that even using the word “God” confuses things because of the mental and emotional baggage people bring to the subject, but we have reached the point where the roiling is beyond necessary and becomes productive.

F: Meaning, I take it, we now begin to wrestle – there’s that word again – with accepted theological systems, to see what light they can shed on things.

TGU: Not quite. Not as any one individual. You rightly have said that you don’t have the background in such matters. But you as a community, each one sticking in his or her oar, can offer valuable bits that will add up to surprisingly more. Whether you will or will not is of course not up to the larger being. In a sense, the larger being always lives in hope of cooperation from its constituent elements. That’s the awkward side of free will in practice.

F: Always on Plan B. That’s what the guys told Rita and me, years ago. “We’re always on Plan B.”

TGU: I believe they said actually on plans C, D, E, etc.

F: Probably so. That sounds right. Anyway, shall we continue, or pause?

TGU: We can pause. We are doing a little better – so far – than I had expected.

F: Well, good. See you next time.


6 thoughts on “TGU — the larger being’s agenda, and ours

  1. Wow, Frank. Moving toward another level of understanding not only of higher agendas in our lives, but a different understanding of the source of that agenda as compared with some belief systems which have foundations in a man/God relationship. It would be easy to see how this material could lead some to be very uncomfortable with ideas such as a) there is a will from above, and b) it is not the will of God per se, at least as Jim Marion would say “The Mythic God”.

    Yesterday I was having a rambling discussion with my guys about the game of golf (which I seem compelled to try to learn) as an analogy for consciousness seeking perfection.

    At the end, the following came in quite distinctly. It was so clear that I wrote it down in bold letters: “ Trust that the directivity flowing from above, the environment provided for any given part of consciousness is such that it leads toward a creativity sought, toward a fulfillment intended, toward experience desired.“

    At the time it seemed somewhat out of context with the discussion I was having. I need to reconsider that relevance; nevertheless, it has much meaning and reassurance, at least to me, in the context of your material today.

    I do hope those with the expertise on theological systems will dive in here and contribute. It appears from your dialogue that their input and our joint wrestling with bringing it into the present is important to our further understanding.

  2. Frank & John, thanks !
    ….when listen to both what is told here (this time around)…. THEN have thought by myself IF “God” is immanent within ALL THINGS, and WE ARE THE MIRROR of ALL CREATION ? Well, then, science and religion(or whatever it is called in all of its forms and symbolism), cannot be other ONE and THE SAME…

    Last week all of a sudden got dreams and visions about the winged horse Pegasus.
    And then, as a lost memory, came to recall an old dream from many years back in time about the horse Pegasus. The vivid dream back then “happened” after one aunt of my husbands had died…. I saw her ( the aunt of my husband, who was a very old-fashioned & religious person, a church-goer, but kind ), shapeshifting into a winged white horse.
    She ( btw; the very religious aunt of my husbands in the dream and I was good friends. She always had a good sense of humour and was a very artistic person, smart & clever as well ).

    In the dream I am watching her at first when she stood on a green field (I believe it was a couple of nights before I had got the message of her death if not to recall it all wrong).
    She stood on a wide open green field/clearing, when she all of a sudden began running ( the auntie was 86 years old when she died, and quite corpulent ) : And when she began running over the field SHE BECAME THE WINGED HORSE PEGASUS. And me watching her did ” the take- off ” from the ground ( as a jet -plane )….. looking at the shapeshifting into Pegasus, and the horse moving above the field, and up in the sky and vanished before my eyes. When upon awakening from the particular dream in me writing it down in my ” dream- journal ” of course.
    Hmm, perhaps the auntie of my husband, within another reality/dimension, really were a SHAMAN who only did her own shape-shifting in front of me.
    Okay, if God is within ALL THINGS both seen and unseen, THEN, it is obvious nothing cannot be without ” God. ”

    B & B, Inger Lise

    1. Well, this is very interesting. I just took quite a bit of time to make this comment a little more English and a little less Norweglish, and when i came to save the changes, the machine wouldn’t let me. So I’ll leave it alone, and restrict myself to the comment that i think you husband’s aunt transforming into Pagasus is a wonderful metaphor for leaving behind the restrictions we take for granted, and flying.

  3. A “Second Time Around” Addition (July 12, 2016):

    I would like to make some admittedly lengthy comments at this point in the on-going dialogue, because of where this material has brought me, and because of my own realizations that have arrived at this stage.

    My feelings are that I have been on a bit of a “pause” and not completely understanding why, but in the last two days it became clearer. First, it was necessary to let the material sink in. “The material” in this case means my current absorption of Jane Robert’s Seth material, Frank’s Muddy Tracks, Frank and Rita’s The Sphere and the Hologram, and what is fondly being referred to as “Rita 1, 2, and 3 and Rita/TGU 4”, the latter going through this past June.

    Frankly (and please see the humor in that particular word) the material is transformative, especially in its accumulated effects.

    My “pause” ended when the cattle prod, which is lovingly used by my greater being a) nudged me into rereading and contemplating Rita/TGU 4, and b) followed that with the prompting, “Well, are you going to get on with it?”

    “On with what?”, I ask.

    “On with your transformation!”, the answer coming through instantly with the question.

    The first time I read the most recent June, 2016 material it went through me. I read the words, but their meaning didn’t register. Not so this time. This time each major thought was like a big blinking neon sign saying, “Now Hear This!”

    To get on with my transformation is a choice to follow the inner drive and face the consequences of doing so, which I will elaborate on below.

    I have been aware of my own transformation since about 9 years ago. Not dying when you should have does that to a human. Doubt has been removed from my mind that this personal transformation is one my most important missions in this life. There is plenty of other doubt that still lingers.

    What have the changes been for me? (Emphasis on “me”, meaning it would be different for another person.)

    There is significant change to my beliefs: for example, the nature of reality, who I am, what I am connected to, the role I have as an individual and as part of something greater, my relationship with divinity, my understandings of my beginnings and “endings” far beyond physical birth and death.

    It changes my willingness and ability to perceive myself and the world around me differently and from more than one perspective. It opens me to further “lostness” as well as further understandings, to the nature of progression versus attainment, to knowing more but never all, to believing the world is here to transform me versus the other way around. (I recognize the controversial nature of that last statement.)

    How has this transformation affected my daily life so far?

    it awakens me with a combination of doubts and convictions. The doubts come from knowing I am limited and have limited and distorted understandings. There are convictions that reinforce my revised view of reality also arrive almost every day.

    The belief system differences are a gap between me and some friends and some family, not that we necessarily spend our time discussing such. My beliefs are a foreign language to many of them. When someone in a social setting asks “What are you doing in retirement?”, they are not expecting the answer, “Transforming myself!” So I usually don’t go there, or tread lightly on the subject.

    As a result of my changes in beliefs I do not see the events of the world around me in the same way. I believe myself to be a participant in that which affects me versus a victim of an external event. At the same time, I believe I (the body-based “I”) am even less in charge than ever, i lieu of a greater “I”. Yet there is only one “I”.

    I am more distant from the daily horrors and dramas of the world. Some see this as turning a blind eye to “the real world”.

    I am quite sensitive to the values of our current culture which wraps itself around the “supposed to’s” of life: the notion that we have to accomplish something significant, measurable in financial or other terms that man values such as inventions, art, writing, solving problems, making a better world, or at least making it better for some. Personal transformation does not rank high in our culture, and even has some negative connotations, like “rehab” or just downright crazy.

    Prior to the start of this transformation I led what might be considered a very successful traditional life with many challenges in my work, much of it quite rewarding; nevertheless, the degree of difficulty was nowhere near that of self-transformation. Changing the operations of a company is possible when you’re the boss. Changing myself? That’s another story, and I am the boss! I find I have little to no interest in keeping up with my previous profession or work life.

    Known mostly only to my wife, I spend significant amounts of time reading, contemplating, and accessing guidance in a meditative state, and following the TMI Community via the Explorer site. While internally this continues throughout the day, my “other” external life and my interactions with other people seem to go on oblivious to these aspects. I find it interesting that I have become quite excited about golf, and it serves as fresh air and “grounding” to the internal work that is going on. It’s like taking a walk around TMI at the breaks in the programs.

    My point here is this: When we look at our reality from the perspective of our greater being, it is/we are all about change, progression and transformation of greater consciousness:

    I ask, “What does transformation look like from the perspective of the greater being?”

    The answer: “Your part of it looks like you; is you. What you bring back is you; that is, the non-3D “completed” soul, and that (you) is part of us, transformative to us. You modify the rest of us with your existence, because you lived the transformation. We experience it, you live it; you become it. See the difference?”


  4. I think actual transformation involves reading about it, writing about it, talking about it, and acting on it–‘it’ being the compulsion that incites the transformation (at least part of that is based in educational theory). That’s why I appreciate your writings, John. You clearly and honestly wrestle with it, which helps guide and direct my wrestling. And it’s hard, as you say, to find regular discussion of it. Thanks for your ‘modifications.’

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.