Friday August 19, 2016
4:30 a.m. “Groups of spirits coordinate to form a soul.” Can’t say I’ve gotten any enlightenment from this idea.
But you haven’t done any thinking about it, either.
Perhaps not. Hard to see what to do with it, though.
This. Think: organizing principles. Think: scalable repeatable patterns. Think: knitting.
That is – all of life (all of reality) is pattern and interaction and
And?
You may not be awake enough for this. If you want to continue, concentrate.
[I did.]
Now, what did you just do? You recruited your forces. You brought them to the center (your present attention being the center). Can you feel what we mean?
Maybe. There is some analogy between the act of connecting and the bringing into being a new soul.
There is, and it is not necessarily any more permanent.
I beg your pardon?
A life – a soul – a moment of concentration of the universal mind. Not so different. Mostly, it is a matter of scale. You must learn to scale your thinking, if you are to understand a universe without structure that is nevertheless not chaotic (in the ordinary sense of the term), not formless.
The universe has form, not structure. It flows in patterns, and those patterns are inherent in its structure. And yes, we are phrasing this in mutually contradictory ways for a reason. To get snarled in implications of the word “structure” or “flow” would hamper your coming to an understanding.
We want you to intuit what cannot be expressed in 3D terms. Just as we must use terms like “3D” even after we have explained that dimensions are only a way of thinking about things, so we must use analogies to suggest, more than describe.
If you can intuit a vast swirl, repeated fractally (that is, the same pattern endlessly repeated at larger and smaller scale), it will give you an entry. Not that the universe is a fractal, any more (or less) than it is a sphere, or a hologram. But you have little to work with but vivid analogies, because you can’t get where you want to go by logic.
You have gotten used to the idea that what looks like an individual is actually a community of strands. And you have accepted, recently, that perhaps each strand is itself the equivalent of a “past life.” That idea helped marry two concepts, or rather two ways of approach, that until then had remained separate. It connected life-as-individual with life-as-all-one-thing.
But it silently
Well, one more piece before that. If you carry this logic backwards, you wind up asking how it began. I mean, before anybody had conducted a 3D life, how were there 3D lives available to act as strands? What comprised Adam, so to speak? (And – detour – we aren’t necessarily confining the argument to the earth. Wherever 3D life originated, and whenever, the question remains. What were the first 3D people made of when there were no prior lives available to act as strands?)
I get, clearly enough, that you are going to say “spirit,” and that earlier you started to say, “but that silently assumes that spirit is indivisible.”
Not indivisible so much as interchangeable. You tend to silently assume that spirit is an undivided undifferentiated mass like water, or air, rather than with properties such as molecules or substance.
That got muddled, didn’t it?
A little. Less in concept that in specific wording. The important point is that spirit is not uniform and featureless, just because it is indivisible and unbounded.
This reminds me of TGU telling us, years ago, something like we are not specialized, but we’re not jello either.
We’ll have to meet them.
Yeah, very funny. So the important point here?
Several interconnected points, only the real importance is not any of them or all of them together, but the new glimpse they may offer you. Life is never static. Life is never divided absolutely, in any way. Life is always deeper, shorter, longer, more ephemeral and more unchanging than you can realize. Name an attribute, life – reality – has it, and it expresses, and it adds to the richness and complexity of the whole.
I get almost a sense of despair at the prospect of getting across what you want to get across.
“Despair” is a little too permanent (not to mention dramatic), but it is a daunting task, yes. So many things to do at once, and so few resources to do them with. If it were not for people’s ability to intuit, with the active assistance of their own non-3D component, it would be hopeless.
Hmm. So it’s everybody fill in the lines, or connect the dots, their own way?
When is it ever any different? The very thing you complain about in theology or science is that they set out to use rules to connect the dots only one way, and any one way always necessarily suppresses other valid ways. You compromise – that is, society compromises – so that you can act together (that is, can co-operate), but it is only a compromise, and like all good compromises, it satisfies nobody and necessarily disregards valid contradictory points of view.
Now go back to the idea of your concentrating, in order to produce for the moment an intensification of focus for a given purpose. How is that any different from the non-3D forming a soul in 3D? You could be looked at as a moment of concentration, or, equally, as the result of a moment of concentration. You could be thought of as a thought, or as a mood even (almost), of the larger mind. And if you think of yourself that way, you will see yourself as ephemeral, dynamic, as a bridge between other concepts or ideas or moods. And all of these things are somewhat accurate.
Well, I’ve subscribed to the idea of the universe as a great thought rather than as a machine or even an organism, but I’ve never extended that to us ourselves.
No, and it is in the connection of concepts that the value inheres. As above, so below. It really is the key to understanding, provided you don’t let it calcify into one way of seeing things. If the universe (3D reality) is a great thought, what are you, furniture? Objects? Lumps? The constituent parts of a thought are – thought.
Stop here, and think about these things. Daydream about them. Let your intuition lead you on. And then we may proceed, but perhaps not right away. While you wait, much valuable work may be done – but you have to do the work, if only by being open to suggestion.
All right. Curious, it has been the usual hour, and we haven’t had any blockages that I’m aware of, yet we’ve covered only eight pages. Well, till next time, then. Thanks as always.
Hi Frank:
These thoughts came to mind as I read your recent posts:
Groups of spirit form a collective viewpoint or joint perspective of 3D conditions at a chosen point in time and space (an incarnation). This extends to multiple viewpoints simultaneously (our other lifetimes) of the group.
Karla
Interesting. Say more!
Frank,
I’m often amused and delighted by how TGU’s posts include examples of the concepts in the words.
In today’s post I see your writing process as an example of
“The universe has form, not structure. It flows in patterns, and those patterns are inherent in its structure.”
To me your writing comes from many patterns at varying levels of ‘complexity (?)’ Without getting overly analytical, there’s
– the letters and words,
– sentence, paragraph, and document patterns,
– conceptual ‘meaning’ behind words and sentences,
– high-level concepts of the entire document (post, book, etc.)
and way up there:
– the virtually ‘un-word-able’ ideas and feelings TGU is trying to get across.
(“I get almost a sense of despair at the prospect of getting across what you want to get across.)
So I strongly get the feeling of all these patterns ‘swirling’ around, flowing through/modified and interpreted by/written down by you, into the structure I read as a post on your blog.
Pretty damn miraculous to me … and deeply rewarding!!
Jim
From TGU via Frank: “Stop here, and think about these things. Daydream about them. Let your intuition lead you on.” And…
We are driven toward perfection in the way that Usain Bolt runs 100M faster than any other human has run. Not only has he done it one time, but he repeats the feat to do it more times than any other human. Someday someone will do it even faster. Look at that as an extension and perfection of previous attributes, or let’s say, physically manifested thoughts about running. The extension comes from learning, success and failure, building on experience to find a way.
You can sense progression in many aspects of life, being careful not to label it as good/bad. Sometimes it shows up as taller, stronger, faster. More or less of this or that, until it reaches the asymptote of the trend, or fails of related weaknesses. Teenagers find new ways of being different, always pushing the envelope, so to speak. That is a characteristic of the universe: pushing its envelopes.
Alternatively looking at it as a greater pattern, threads or aspects can run so far unilaterally in their own direction, or as fragments, until they need to be knit together for connection, for strength and support, in the way a spider web binds the spokes with connective rings. In this kind of knitting, thoughts or ideas or previous concepts get fused together to form a new basis for growth and extension, just as TGU is (or we are, depending on how you want to look at it) doing by first extending and establishing chunks of knowledge about reality, then knitting them together.
Extensions can have weaknesses that make them difficult to use as foundations for further progression, in which case deconstruction may be the way toward further progression, such as the fascist dictatorship forms of government taken down by WW II. As an example of building complexity, there is currently the evolving collaboration that brings together the capabilities and resources of multiple countries to form global teams, such as that used to develop and produce Boeing’s most technologically advanced aircraft.
These are not meant to be literal physical translations of the progression of thought flow in the one great mind, but physical analogies of what mind progression and knitting might be like.
The image in my head is a vast sphere-shaped, highly complex network made up of strings tied together by knots to make a fabric. it extends itself by selecting a number of existing nodes and then tying them together, or knitting them into a new node. It may be highly “localized” as a means of extending an attribute in any “direction”, similar to a highly gifted musician emerging from strands of previous musicians. Or the knitting could be less local, as in more complex music that evolves from combinations of previous genres. Or even more extended node-knitting as a new development which combines the attributes of music with mathematics and memory and sound technology to create new digital sound available for online composition.
The knitting point requires a strong fusion, a binding that is lasting, if it is to be able to be a usable node in further bindings. Whether it is so used downstream or not, it will always serve as a connector between nodes that would have otherwise not been so closely knit.
And when does the knot become so much a part of the fabric that it is no longer identifiable solely as a knot?
Resolve brings the ties that bind, creating a new organic entity, a more complex building block, or a unique envisioning (which itself is a way of organizing chaos). Strong intent brings dimension to that which is dimensionless. It brings structure to the unstructured. It adds meaning and direction to what otherwise may be random flow. That is (some of) the power of our vision, our willfulness: the construction of a more complex lens to enable new perspective.
Which brings us back to willpower as an internal drive, a fire from within, to push or pull or motivate oneself to work through difficulty in a way that creates resolve. It matters not what the goal is per se; more important, is the reinforcement and the knowledge that one generates (or releases) willpower with persistence and effort.
Exerting effort alone is not the objective. One can build strength by digging a ditch. One can gain strength to overcome by hating.
What we are getting at is a strength of character, consistent with the context of its function, its surroundings and with that from which it emerges. How is this kind of strength of character produced? Internal barriers must be often overcome, such as beliefs that limit in some way. Perhaps even more fundamental is accepting the challenge or call from within to do it. This is the signal that a greater possibility is at stake for you, and for not just you, however you think of you. The opportunity to build strength of character comes with hardship, comes with difficulty; comes with willingness to drift into uncharted territory. It also can come when guidance calls for realignment; for course corrections; for change.
There are similarities in the strength of character built by dealing with significant illness, or handicaps, or poor surroundings, or significant weaknesses (as mentioned in one of Frank’s earlier postings). It doesn’t take a gold medal in the Olympics to achieve strength of character. These former kind of opportunities help you to find more inside yourself than you might have otherwise found. The treasure is the discovery and releasing, or unleashing of willpower, not in the external result of the effort.
Willpower as a force that binds.
John
Absolutely fabulous John, what more to say ? And thank you.
But as funny as it is–this self-same morning (early Saturday morning), my husband and I am sitting on the veranda (outdoors), and sipping our early morning coffee. And looking at the hills and the view over the Lake…..everything in silence.
AND, the very funny thing when I read your excellent example (the one example especially), about the last fabrication of the BOEING airplanes later on this morning…..Because all of a sudden my husband began talking about SEATTLE and his time spent at the BOEING Factory back in the 1980s. His life was all about the Technique of Flying (and constructions) once upon a time.
Much has changed since back then that`s for sure ! It is all about changes in consciousness.
B & B, Inger Lise.
Two things occur to me: (1) All progress is permanent progress (Seth), and (2) Pain is one way to learn, but not a required way (several spiritual sources).
It sounds like your husband and I have a lot in common in our work life. I spent 40 years in aerospace, mostly with airplanes of one type or another. Many, many heads and hands it takes to produce even one airplane!
John
Yes, absolutely John.
I became aware of it when you told about it, your work before retirement, the very first time…..AND, you have once lived in Seattle. BOEING were one of the largest working-place there back then. Do not know how it is now of course.
My husband is 75 years old now, but his mind has never left 50 years pluss the early years, counting his interest of it since he was born ! ( all his life doing aero dynamics). He began as a 5 year old boy ( his mom telling me of course ), making models of airplanes from both WW1 and WW2.
When I met him for the very first time at the age of 16 years old ( he was 19 years old….we were innocent back then as youngsters….NOT as of the youngsters of today that`s for sure!! ). He had a roof filled up with all the airplane models you can know of in hanging there….You had to bow your head when entering the room…..And then we were talking only about the airplanes.
Peculiar how I met him….because the two of us lived at all different parts of this country !?! I was on the summer holidays with my parents and siblings along the norwegian coastline ( in the south of Norway) in the city where he lived. He was then already in the Air Force, doing his obligatory one year duty. But of course he continued later on, and became settled on one Air Force base outside Oslo ( the main capital of Norway ) where I was born, and living, back then.
Good for him in me to be interested in the history of WW1 and WW2 likewise. I had already read MANY ” historical” books from both the two WW`s . I was interrested of it VERY EARLY in my life.
F.inst. The TWO BIG VOLUMES by Winston Churchill among them, and me only at the age of 12 years old back then.
Well, well, the life is endless. And by no doubt we all meets again sooner or later.
Bliss & Blessings, Inger Lise.