Rita on life’s purpose(s)

Monday, July 10, 2017

7:05 a.m. Good morning, Miss Rita. Late start today. Care to talk about purpose? Louisa’s questions make distinctions that I think are false ones, but I would be interested to see what you think.

[Louisa Callo:  I do feel as Winter, that this is bringing back those wonderful conversations and texts of the days of Bob Monroe. How much I miss all of this! There is an ever expanding clarity and language you and Rita are sharing here. Thank you.

[The mention of Clusters reminded me of Bob’s M Field and your Guys as well. I am not sure if this was mentioned already, since I am only starting to catch up on these recent Rita posts, but when you or Rita or any of us speak of “Purpose ” in this 3 D lifetime could she, you or someone offer examples of what this really means…outside of general ideas like to become love manifesting or healing or vast areas of development. Or is this our truer purpose?  Do individuals come with clear and specific purpose or do they  develop and change over life experience?

[And why do some past lives seem to dominate during a 3D life and not others? Is this tied into purpose? At some point in my own journey I received a message that I was here to help the feminine archetype evolve. But now I feel a shift into a Creative work as a focus. Is this a change of purpose or an expansion?]

[Rita:] This is larger than a discussion of Purpose, or let’s say the subject of Purpose is larger than it may appear. And of course Purpose is integrally tied to the question of “what do they do over there?”

When you think of Purpose, you tend to think in terms of results. Don’t forget to think in terms of origins.

That isn’t clear to me, but I can’t seem to get it any clearer.

Purpose is an arrow pointing forward, and so it is natural to look toward the point rather than the tail feathers. Or, a more dynamic analogy, you are always looking at the future for change, not realizing that changes are

No, I can feel myself losing it. Is it that I have to think while receiving?

It is because a certain way of thinking interferes with, substitutes for, receiving. The thinking you do in choosing this word over that, this analogy over that, is helpful when you already have the idea. But if you are using that process instead of, or before, receiving the idea, of course it is going to interfere. It is perception v. interpretation all over again.

Slippery slope.

Indeed it is, for the very reason that in an altered state it can be easy to confuse your own filling-in-the-blanks intellect with reception from others, especially since the distinction between self and other is so tenuous and fluctuating anyway.

I think it happens mostly when I sort of have something but not really. Fill-in-the-blanks describes it pretty well. If I don’t have anything that’s one thing. If I have it and it’s all I can do to write it down fast enough, that’s the other pole. But there’s a wide range between. Shall we try again?

In this particular instance, you are trying too hard to grasp the material, using effort rather than receptivity. It is guessing rather than knowing.

Yes, that’s the difference! Well put. Whenever I am in a situation where I am to perform on demand, say, I am nearly always sidelined into guessing, which is useless.

Not when you are doing healing work. [That is, it doesn’t happen then.] So why is that different?

I suppose because healing – oh, I get it. Healing work stays focused on trying to help, not on proving anything to myself or others.

And that is the secret, at least for you as an individual. So bear it in mind and proceed with greater ease.

Nice insight. Thanks. Okay, then—

Let’s start at the easier end. The nature of Purpose. We’ll have to start farther back than you might expect, not only for clarity but for ease of flow, for you will get a glimmer of light and it will ease you into it.

Remember Sam fashioning the elements of itself into what becomes Life A. You could say that Life A’s purpose is to see what happens when that particular mixture of elements is inserted into 3D awareness.

And I just got – correctly? – that that same—. Wow, this is really complex to untangle.

It’s just a matter of going slowly and untangling as we go. What you got is that any particular mixture is inserted into the 3D timestream, but may be inserted more than once, in that same pristine state, at different 3D times and places. Is isn’t sequential and it isn’t solitary.

I see that all my ideas of it were too simple. I was still thinking in terms of one-and-then-the-next.

It happens that way too. So Sam puts Life A1, the initial combination of elements, into 1750 America and Atlantean times and for all you know other planets. Each of those Life A1 experiences is a separate life as experienced by that initial combination prior to any modification by 3D experience. (This isn’t quite right, either, but there are too many variables to express; we can’t do it all at once in 3D. We’ll correct the picture when the proper time comes.) So then each life A1’s life is perhaps re-inserted into 3D life. Each one is then Life A2, and goes through the life, emerges, perhaps becomes Life A3, etc.

Yes, it is multiple not only in its own sequence as it develops through successive experiences, but also as multiple variants of Sam, set into difference in sequence.

Because this gets so complicated, we will look at it in simplified form, as usual. You have to have the skeleton firmly in mind before it is time to clothe it with flesh.

So, back we go again. Sam sets Life A1 into existence. It is true that this is done in multiple rather than singly, but we will keep that fact in the back of our mind and look at only one issuance.

The purpose of that life is – see what happens. That particular combination of elements, coexisting in a body for a lifetime, coalesces (or doesn’t) in the course of a succession of choices. You know all this. So that is one layer of purpose – see what happens.

But there is another layer, and that layer develops with successive incarnations.

Yes, I get it. Something between fine-tuning and honing a precision tool.

Every lifetime of experience shapes that ever-developing life. If Life A50 has had a combination of experiences and choices and consequent developments unlike any other – and it will have had – then yes, it is to the extent of its difference, as you say, a precision tool. At some point, inserting Life A50 into a given time-space moment will have very different possibilities than inserting Life A100, or Life A73. You understand. And that difference can be used to affect the mental and physical situation of the 3D moment it is inserted in.

Which in turn further affects Life A50.

Correct. It is a reciprocating process. Every life affects and is affected. Every life may be said to start off where it left off previously in terms of its own development. That doesn’t mean it has “unfinished business” in 3D terms. It may, it may not. But it will always have unfinished business in terms of its own development, for there will always be things needing work, or you might say, offering dividends.

I hope this is helpful, but we haven’t really dealt with Louisa’s specific questions yet.

Implicitly we have. But we can deal with some of them easily enough.

Different past-life resonances come front and center in different lives, or in different times within a given life, according to opportunity and aptness. This is a big subject, come to think of it, and we could look at it another time. But the short answer is that you draw to yourself what is most appropriate at any given moment. Clearly that is tied in to your life’s purpose, or it would not have had scope to happen – only don’t let yourself think that purpose is only aimed outward or forward.

I couldn’t quite get that last.

Don’t let yourself unconsciously think Purpose means external result, or that it means internal result. It may be both, it may seemingly be neither, as the consequences of dealing with it may be invisible. Easiest just to go with the flow, trusting, and doing your best. Most of what your life is about, you will never know while in 3D, if only for lack of a way to express and understand it.

And, parenthetically, the distinction between “change of purpose” and “an expansion” is purely illusory. It is merely looking at the same thing differently.

Several things here we could say more about, and perhaps someday we will, but enough for now.

Our thanks as usual, and I don’t miss the fact that these sessions are as much an implicit “how-to” as a conveying of specific information. For both of which, we thank you.

 

7 thoughts on “Rita on life’s purpose(s)

  1. First, thanks to all involved here.

    Second, to you Frank, I really enjoyed reading the ‘live demonstration’ today in the struggle with perception vs. interpretation. It was helpful seeing this ‘in process’.

    Third, now that some past gaps are being filled (even going back to original TGU content), can you ask Rita to expand upon the meaning or definition of TGU’s term “crystallization”? (excuse my 3D thinking in framing my question)

    With the expanded discussion of Sam’s Life A (and Life A1 to A1000) today (July 10), I sense that “crystallization” would take on much more meaning for those of us dealing with this and other original TGU concepts. And if (without realizing it) I am getting too far ahead of things here by clothing Rita’s metaphorical skeleton before it has muscle, organs and skin … I will understand.

  2. So helpful! In so many ways. The part about receiving versus filling in the blanks with our own intellect instead of or before receiving the idea seems exactly right. Except when you do healing–so useful to juxtapose that with receiving words. And life purpose–“to see what happens”–I just love that. Thanks so much to you both.

  3. So interesting, thank you all – the questions, Frank&Rita!

    I’ve been thinking, even sometimes saying, that I feel like I am a precision tool for something that does not exist. So seeing precision tool mentioned in this context is useful perspective. About the arrow: the feathers of the arrow (tail) are the steering system, and there is the power/energy that is needed to propel the arrow. These come from the other side. So just paying attention to the me doing the aiming, the arrowhead and goal does not work, not in archery. Maybe also in life. It is just that the me doing (aiming) provides something for the surface attention to attach to. Anyone who has shot an arrow knows how everything, absolutely everything affects where the arrow ends up flying.

    As these qestions are so fruitful, I have tried to come up with something I’d want to ask. What I have been chewing lately is what would be the best possible attitude for the surface attention/personality so that the deeper layers can have the most use of this life? The thing is, as soon as I manage to formulate the right kind of question, I start to get something like answer. For this it came to me that I was riding yesterday a horse that I was unfamiliar with. There are certain things I like to do to check what kind of horse I am with: stopping, moving, lots of circles. And I realized what I do is attempting to give the horse an experience of not knowing exactly what is coming. In a safe way in the arena, but still, something he cannot anticipate, because that way he will show what he is really like – also if he listens to me at all. And I got that this would be a good attitude for the surface attention. Take all in as an adventure, avoid things that let the hardening of routine take over. This will let the deeper layers come forth better. For good or for worse. This relates a bit to the arrow, too. The arrowhead just has to trust the propelling power and the steering feathers, and it will be getting the impact of whatever comes. Regardless of what the arrowhead wants. And the me that aims? If the me-department gets into a mood of gaah! the arrow went completely wrong – this just adds confusion.

    I would really like to get more understanding concerning the deep, fairly incomprehensible currents flowing their course in the deeper layers. Or not just understanding – experience, that I can have something to build understainding on.

    Ha, this keeps expanding: the intellect filling up sentences out of its own automatism is an occasion of routine taking over. Listening, being open is help. Falling into any automatism is not help. Artists who need lots of practice to master a technique, need to reconnet the newness again somehow. Being able to know when routine/automatism takes over and when you are acting from innocence is useful. Could a violinist practicing scales be all the way through in newness, innocence? He is looking to establish structures in brain that will provide automatic access to musical scales on violin. Brain is plastic.

    Life will ride us through a lot of stop-go and circles to find out what there is in the concoction of this A(somenumber). And maybe, at some point, there may be a possibility to do something more complicated – grand in the social sphere. Or something grand in the deeper layers that never will register in any ape-tribe pecking order at all. Maybe, someone, somewhere, can say: this is an invisible step for mankind, but a giant step for the all-that is. I’d like to be that someone.

  4. Hm – now I think some things should be expressed more clearly. But if you think it is somehow understandable, why not? It would be an honour to appear in the posts!

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.