Rita on consciousness and us

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

6 a.m. I should write about John Tettemer, because the end of his journey as a religious speaks to our own condition, but it is not easily summarized or quoted, and I am still too headlong after all these years to be the careful scholar.

But I had half promised myself that we would pursue the first of two proposed subjects from yesterday’s session. Rita, you said we could discuss the nature of consciousness as experienced in 3D, and then maybe later we can discuss how evil intent manifests in the non-3D.

But don’t forget the lessons of John Tettemer’s life. Yes, it will require some work to set out, but it is work you are able to do, and it is exactly appropriate to our current situation – for you don’t think we are unconcerned with 3D struggles, surely, nor insulated from them – or why do you think it [his book] continued to surface in your life, most recently Monday night and most of Tuesday?

Well, I’ll try. (Yes, I know, “there is no try.”) So – communication in 3D.

All right. I suggest that for those for whom it is convenient, re-read the first paragraphs of yesterday’s message.

I’ll just slip them in here, courtesy of copy-paste.

[Rita, I woke up with a thought on the nature of evil, but I forgot what it was, because as soon as I formulated a question to ask you, I got a pretty definite concept in mind. Guidance in play, I take it: immediate answers to questions.

[Or you may choose to look at it as an example of you doing the work behind your own back. You think of a subject in a certain way, which poses or reveals a question. Then you go away, so to speak, doing other things. But the associating-machine continues to work the problem. Then, when you return to it, there is all the associated material ready for display. Magic.

[And as I was writing that out, I was hearing, feeling, all the questions about your explanation: the question of who was directing the “association machine” when my conscious mind was elsewhere, who was presenting the result, who was drawing my attention back to the subject in the first place.

[We can talk about the nature of consciousness as experienced in 3D, or we can set out your idea about evil.]

Fine. Here is the thing. As so often, when you look at something from an unfamiliar starting-place, you see it differently. It seems to change, because the context you suddenly (or gradually) see it in, changes. So you may look at something over years – our way of hearing what the guys were telling us, say – and it’s one thing to understand but a very different thing to see. And, as I say, that change may be a sharp insight or a gradual, perhaps imperceptible, transformation.

So, here. Describing this will do nothing. What will change things is for people to make the effort to grasp it, or, for the fortunate or the prepared, for it to suddenly seem to click on its own. It is not consciousness itself that seems to flicker and alternate and change condition. Consciousness is steady and perpetual. What flickers and alternates and changes condition is your connection to consciousness. And – if only you can really hear this – this is not mere playing with words! It is an entry-point to a fundamental readjustment, for those able to step through.

What you call unconscious life is really the life that goes on without you being conscious of it. There’s a huge difference!

I took a minute to reflect, and what came into my mind was something the guys told us years ago, and now I see I have forgotten it.

And there is your Exhibit A, that phenomenon of forgetting. Given that the memory is there to be retrieved (as, clearly, it is, else it would be lost and gone forever, whereas as you know so well, it resurfaces in its own good time), how can you forget it? What can forgetting be, but an interruption in the connection between the memory and your consciousness?


We now resume our regularly scheduled program.

When you see that all reality is consciousness, that the world does not exist in a state of unawareness, that the ideas and memories don’t flicker in and out of existence, you realize that it is the 3D-only portion of life that experiences interruptions. But of course this sentence requires careful interpretation.

Which I can do, because the sense of it is clear to me, at least at this moment. We say “3D-only” and of course that means “life as we in 3D experience it,” not “life can be lived in 3D and not also in the rest of the dimensions” – as we have been at pains to demonstrate here.

Perhaps a better way to put it would be that while your consciousness is centered in 3D (because of the evidence of the senses), your awareness of the continuing beyond-3D environment that you do live in is what flickers or alternates or flees from you.

Life has a continuity of consciousness that may not be apparent from within the 3D pressure-cooker.

Your dreams, your recurrent reveries, the unexpected ways your memories may link up and reshape themselves, the many ways you “unconsciously” do things that fit nicely into the unsuspected future you eventually live – all these things and many more should serve as evidence that your conscious life proceeds continually, without disruption or interruption or possibility of either, always. But you may not be aware of it, because your own experience may identify with your

Got tangled there, but I know what you meant. We are like terminals at a time-sharing computer, or telephones at the end of a land-line, or, I don’t know, fill in your own analogy: The service itself continues uninterrupted, but your reception may be interrupted or disrupted.

Perhaps radio receiver is a better analogy. Even when you are still receiving, you may be receiving static as well as programming. The static was not intentionally broadcast. In fact, it was not broadcast at all. It is an interruption in quality, call it, between source and reception. But remember these are analogies, and analogies are not the destination but the bridge over difficulties. Don’t carry analogies too far or adhere to them too strictly. They are meant to help you make intuitive leaps. Consciousness is not radio, difficulties are not static.


Well, yes, for the moment. The danger in analogies is that, providing images, they persist in memory beyond the words of explanation that qualify them.

So now, take whatever you have been taught or have taught yourself of psychology and invert it. Human 3D consciousness is not a peak above a general level of unconsciousness, but more like a pit, below the general level of consciousness. In a sense you could say that a cat or a tree or a stone is more consistently conscious than the flickering, alternating, unreliable form of consciousness you experience as “consciousness.” Yes, you can go higher, but you don’t live higher. You usually don’t live even at the level of consistency even of cats and trees and stones, that do not and cannot forget what they are, as you do.

So, Jung’s racial unconscious? (And I felt the prompting that led me to write that question.)

Here is the paradox that is worth exploring. To move in one direction, toward thinking, is to acquire the possibility of putting together bits of knowledge to provide a stable place to stand. To move in the other direction, toward intuiting, is to acquire the possibility of deepening your connection with the preexisting and often not-experienced continuity of consciousness that is a different kind of place to stand.

And to do both?

Ah, well,

That was odd. I got “Ah, well,” and then it was as if you were choosing among possible reactions and then deciding not to choose.

It’s just that over time one becomes so aware of the effect of an unconsidered word.

Which is all we have to work with here, words.

Yes, but I said “an unconsidered word,” and this is a different matter. I meant, the word that may be taken too weightily, as if more definitive than it really is.

You’re worried that it wouldn’t bear the weight people might place on it.

More or less. Anyway, let’s leave it as is: Ah, well –.

And I take it that’s it for the moment.

For the moment. But I would encourage you to do the work to tell John Tettemer’s story as it applies to our work. There may be no one else to do it.

All right, we’ll see. Till next time, then.


13 thoughts on “Rita on consciousness and us

  1. I liked your question “and to do both?” … as you would say I am smiling.

    I continue to assume (often) that the non-physical knows everything and has experienced everything. Sometimes, I catch myself in this thinking.

    It is only recently that I have considered that there are portions of the non-physical that are “often not-experienced (within the) continuity of consciousness”. That was a powerful descriptor for me today.

    Thanks again.

  2. I am fascinated, feeling all the words and yet I cannot examine this well enough to ask myself some questions. Cannot find the place that the words are landing, not emotion or intellect, stange, I am intrigued. Reading again. Thank you!

  3. Thanks, I love these communications between TGU, Rita & Frank`s ( and all of us ).

    BUT, here comes one of my “buts.” I can see to have become very much INFLUENCED by my former intense study of the Edgar Cayce Readings, and using the readings as a sort of “basic” questioning from there of what`s told by others about the same materials. Such as Carl Jung and Rudolf Steiner etc.etc.

    BTW: Especially a very good advice ( by E.C. according to my opinion) by one E.C. Reading which says: “IF you are IN DOUBT about what you are told by the many — then, to be sure, you must see to the “teacher`s” daily attitude & BEHAVIOUR to his fellow human beings. And then you`ll see he/she, is (was) under the proper INFLUENCE/ Guidance, for themselves and others.”
    The PROPER GUIDANCE which FRANK`s to be for me by the very first SIGHT of his books….AND your “attitude & behaviour” to all your surroundings. The GOODNESS of your Heart.

    Well, watching a documentary about Carl Jung here a couple of months ago….AND thinking by myself: IF the biography about Carl Jungs` private life was true- THEN his BEHAVIOUR towards his mistress` and wife was pretty BAD. Carl Jungs MORALITY in private wasn`t much to be proud of…?
    But of course geniouses are under the influence of their OWN all-D`s.

    I am into “judge not” anything of your material world at the time being, working upon myself with it….as newly voting for a new Government in this country. How MANY parties do you believe in us to have among a popuation of soon to become 5 millions ?
    Yes, my husband and I counted as many as 12 parties….FOUR of them won, called The BLue Parties, and continues to cooperate together another 4 years (to rule another 4 years).
    All the parties are competitors, and “parted” generally into 3 colors. The GREEN parties(greenpeace and such),
    The RED parties(the labour-party, including all the parties “to the LEFT” one communist among them for the first time in the history).
    And the BLUE parties which is “the RIGHT-WING” parties in cooperation, and all four of them with the Christian Party included won for the second time.
    It is laughable, and pretty unlike any other countries, and please don`t tell me how Norway manage to be as solid as the Nation it is , and still really is working peacefully. Maybe just BECAUSE we are FEW inhabitants? To me it seems each INDIVIDUAL having their own opinion and ruling by their own ….. Pretty odd how it is functioning is it not ? Nobody else can understand it either….
    Well, well, MY daily life so to speak.

    Thank you as always Frank.
    And Jane, we should have been neighbours – too sad we are living far apart.

    1. You raise such interesting points.
      Thank you for the assessment of my character, which I hope is at least mostly true.
      Re Carl Jung, I don’t know what behavior you refer to. Is it the fact itself of his having a long-time relationship with Toni Wolf? Because, if so, that relationship doesn’t seem to me to have had ill effects on any of the three of them, and may well have saved his sanity in the World War I years. Emma Jung herself said her husband needed something she herself could not provide, and she was grateful to Toni Wolf for providing it. But, perhaps you are referring to something else?
      As to your government, would you rather have ours? (If so, and if delivery can be arranged, I and millions of other Americans will gladly consent, though worried about your sanity.

      1. Hi Frank, thank you, cannot but smile sometimes about all “opinions” and all the differently world-views. Some journalists here in Norway to have found Donald Trumph to have Norwegian ANCESTORS….!!! Cannot recall how far “back” intime his norwegian ancestors moving to U. S. though ! But I am to recall thinking by myself by to read it…..How it doesn`t surprising me at all !!! (laughing heartily).

        BTW: Carl Jung seeing on the documentary….The documentary & biography to have seen on TV …. telling about the life of Carl Jung (also about his former friendship with Freud) made an impression (according to my opinion that is) of THE PERSON Carl Jung had many “sides”, and according to the documentary had TWO mistresses. And his wife wasn`t very pleased about it at all. If so, according to the documentary, which telling Carl Jung to become a very eccentric personality and ego-based. Obviously it is many “sides & parts” about seeing any persons, especially the famous ones.
        And as usual each of us “coloring” our own views.
        As I watched his life – within the particular documentary – wondering about THE TRANSLATION were accurate ? But I cannot recall who the producer was ? Wonder if it was Swiss made in cooperation with BBC ?
        B & B. Inger Lise

        P. S. It is sunshine today and with the nice autumn colors….We are off for a participation in a old-fashioned wedding today(a boy and a girl). A nephew to my husband is to be married(in a Church), LOL.

    2. I know what you mean, Inger Lise, about being neighbors. We could be talking over coffee. And thanks for the overview of your government. It’s fascinating.

  4. Absolutely thrilling! A different place to stand: Extremely useful perspective! Intuition is a sort of in the moment insight – very different from thinking. So going deeper into that would provide a different connection to the underlying consciousness. I don’t know if that would be any of the layers of collective unconscious Jung names. Or to put it differently: turning inside you will go through all the layers of private and different levels of collective unconscious. In accordance with how your consciousness can tolerate expansion without crashing and burning. Meeting evil may be one of the more diffiicult things to digest. And you&Rita seem to forget what Faust’s visitor says when asked who he is: part of a deep power that wills only evil and achieves only good. Force and counterforce – what does moral outrage add to this?

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.