The process of naming, and other questions

Thursday, September 28, 2017

6 a.m. Three questions queued up:

Henry Reed: Many ancient cosmologies point to a dualistic interplay of opposites that produce creation… light, dark, yin/ yang, creator/destroyer … any relation to what somebody is referring to? Is somebody’s perspective shared by everyone in all-d, or are we interacting with something that expresses relative to its history?

Subtle Traveler: I am wondering if a more focused question helps expand the conversation here (another one of my ideas, Frank, so use as you wish). What are the underlying forces of lust? Desire? Attraction? Ever expanding (pro-creation) Consciousness? Something beyond human language?

Jane Peranteau: We are affected by the forces as they come through. Do we affect the forces in any way, other than by how we express or channel them? In other words, you could say they hone us. Do we hone them? Or is it just about honing us?


Somebody? – And, do you mind if we give you a name, just for ease of reference? I realize that behind the name may be a shifting coalition of forces, and that the person responding to the name one day may not be the same person another day, but you see how we’re situated. Calling upon “somebody,” as I have done, isn’t any improvement over calling you Jack, or Rover, for that matter. A name you’d like?

We do see the problem, and rather than having you call us Fido or something, we will agree to a name. but – you select the name. If we were to select it, people would wind up reading things into the name, no matter how often or how emphatically we might deny any implied significance.

Oh, this is the dynamic behind the creating of idols in the desert in the Moses story, isn’t it?

Human nature – or perhaps we should say compound-beings’-reaction-to-3D-limitations, only “human nature” is far more concise – doesn’t change much over time. The Jews wandering around in the desert were uncomfortable owing their allegiance to an abstraction. A golden calf had symbolism; it offered visual reassurance. And, as is typical of human 3D reactions, a symbol became an objectified reality in about three seconds.

Hence the tension over the centuries in all the religions over representation or iconoclasm.

“All” might be a little too broad, but in general, yes. People who have an ability to perceive abstractly are not as numerous as those who take sensory reality to be “the” reality, and anything beyond that reality to be just words, or anyway either debatable or somewhat fuzzy, somewhat theoretical. So religions using symbols move over time toward a more literal interpretation of symbol as itself the thing symbolized, and you have the worship of idols. And, conversely, over time every so often counter-forces will acquire influence and will smash those symbols and representations as idols.

Thus the Protestant sects that accused Catholics of being idolaters, and did not allow any statues or paintings of individuals. And come to think of it, thus Islam, with its ban on the creation of similar representations in art. (I wonder how they deal with photography, let alone the Internet.) And at the other extreme, Hinduism with its vast array of statuary and art, Buddhism with its endless array of statues of the Buddha.

You may choose to look at the tension of opposites as an example of the natural effect of living in a dualistic world. There is no “right” position, and no “wrong” position other than the position that claims unique validity for itself. But even that is an argument waiting to happen, and perhaps our focus today should be less abstract.

Yes, but that was a very interesting side-light. Okay, I’ll call you – let me think –


I’m tempted to say Moses, in the hope that you will lead us out of the wilderness of our own confusions. But Moses never saw the promised land, come to think of it. Or, he saw it, but he could never get there. that was left to others.

I’m tempted just to call you Friend. But then somebody sure as shooting would read Quaker into it. Ridiculous to spend so much time on something totally arbitrary anyway, but for some reason this seems important. I can’t use the name of people I respect as pioneers – Swedenborg, Emerson, Thoreau, etc. – for the same reason, to avoid unwanted associations. And you decline to suggest, then?

You can see why, in your own process. It can be very difficult to avoid unwanted accretions by those who come later, perhaps with misplaced admiration, let alone reverence. That is what happens in churches.

Oh, I know. I’ve been explaining that for years to people who think churches lose integrity only by someone’s malicious intent. Superstitions grow from the bottom; they aren’t imposed from the top. But this still doesn’t result in a name. Maybe we ought to just proceed to the business at hand?

Maybe this – and the thoughts it brings up – is the business at hand.

Interesting. Well – Nathaniel. I don’t know where that comes from, but suddenly there it is. Let’s call you Nathaniel.

That’s fine, and we’ll see how long you can remember the caveats about it being only a brand name, only a label, and not an individual.

And don’t go looking for significance in the name.

You just saw, and shared, the process. Ultimately it was like any time you “get” a bright idea: It wasn’t there and then it was, and who is to say why it emerged? But hopefully our spelling out the process of searching for it will discourage people from being too sure of whatever significance they choose to attach to it.

Okay, we’ll see. So, let’s go to work. Henry’s question?

[Henry Reed: Many ancient cosmologies point to a dualistic interplay of opposites that produce creation… light, dark, yin/ yang, creator/destroyer … any relation to what somebody is referring to? Is somebody’s perspective shared by everyone in all-d, or are we interacting with something that expresses relative to its history?]

Two questions, actually, the second quite incisive. The first is easily dealt with: The dualities he cites are examples of people’s interpretation and representation of the dualistic nature of reality as experienced in the constricted awareness you are calling 3D. Everything expresses as part of a duality, and it was the contribution of these ways of thought to see that duality extended to the non-physical world (as they thought of it, most of them) as well as manifesting in the physical world they experienced.

But as to the second question, that is not so easily answered. Superficially, yes, we could say – and will say – that everyone observing the same conditions will describe them more or less in the same way, and so what we are setting out would be obvious to anyone in the All-D – that is, anyone whose perspective is not constricted by 3D conditions. But at a deeper level, any agreed-upon view of anything, seen more closely, resembles a compromise rather than a definitive view. Is the color orange really a color at all, or a compromise between red and yellow? And the same question applies to red and yellow, of course. So, for all practical purposes, everybody in All-D sees what we see. But if you look at that shared agreement more closely, it would break down somewhat. We will not pursue this farther, as it is a distraction in context, save to note the fact.

Subtle Traveler’s question is going to be an involved discussion, I imagine, so how about dealing with Jane’s first?

[Jane Peranteau: We are affected by the forces as they come through. Do we affect the forces in any way, other than by how we express or channel them? In other words, you could say they hone us. Do we hone them? Or is it just about honing us?]

The short answer is yes, it is a mutual interaction. But don’t take that to mean that 3D choices will—

Well –

The closer you look at this, the more complex and nuanced it is. As usual.

If we stick to the human level as commonly experienced – that is, if we consider only the effect of 3D decisions upon the forces that blow through them – then you could say, no, there is no effect. Hurricanes are not much affected by whether you do or don’t leave a lawn chair out on the deck. The lawn chair will be affected! But the hurricane, no. The disparity of forces is immense.

However, 3D experience indirectly affects you in 3D – that is, the real effect is in your changes, which are decisions express or implied. In turn, changes in you result in change in your overall being, hence in your Sam. Again, the disparity of forces is great, but there is an effect, especially considered cumulatively. And – we aren’t going to go into it – changes in Sams in effect result in changes in the winds sweeping through 3D life. But that is all we’re going to say about that, as well.

And we’ll defer the third question for another time.

Yes. This was better work today than perhaps you realize.

Well, if you say so. Thanks, and more another time.


13 thoughts on “The process of naming, and other questions

  1. I am thinking the inner knowing function can also be essence to essence. And that our culture tends to distort that into essence->thought->mind and then things get blocked. Internally essence to essence would mean (to me) dropping off the narrative/story (he did me wrong, that kind of things should not be done etc). Just feeling the feelings and letting the physical vessel have its way in the raw experiencing. Paying attention to the physical, realest level of the process. Or to put it in this level: Fully feeling as pissed off as I am. Without resorting to any stories about who or what or wrongness or rightness. Staying at the abstract level of energy. This changes the character of what happens to me. In the thick of the moment I may not be able to have this perspective, but when I catch myself chewing some story, I can direct my attention away from the story and into experiencing. It is a tough job for the attention to turn away from the railing and wailing thought-process that wants to hog all attention/awareness. But knowing it is possible makes a world of a difference to how life feels.

    I do not know if the inner process could be permanently essence to essence. Maybe the laundry and the groceries need a different form of attention. But even in shopping, it may happen that I know straight: yes this I take, that I leave. No thinking process. Is that the goal? Tuning to the essence and minimizing any distraction? I will have to chew on this a bit. In communication, even a little bit of effort at catching the essence level makes the connection incredibly rich and rewarding. And with animals it seems it is easier to catch that essence-level communication.

  2. After reading this, I want to make my question clearer by spacing my writing:

    “What are the underlying non-physical forces (qualities) of lust?”

    Is the underlying force desire? Or attraction? Or the continually expanding Consciousness (like pro-creation)? Or something beyond human language?


    Also, I really liked Henry Reed’s 2nd part of his question above. This is something that I have been wondering throughout the reading of this newer material and Rita’s material. It has crept up several times.

  3. As always grateful to you but Frank? This is reminding me about something told within Blavatskys`….About names. F.inst. “Nathaniel” belonging with “a Force-Commitment” and signifies The “EL”, names with the ending of “el,” the Ang-EL Force….or, if you wish, the Power of Angels.
    Once upon a time(several years ago)to have EXPERIENCED “the Angel-Force” TWICE in my life. And I have nothing to compare it with if somebody asking me how it was. No word for the experience. They were PHYSICAL visible….out-of-the-blue but no wings.

      1. ….. Okay, of course to try if you`re interested. When thinking it over now is it felt as “a dream” as if it wasn`t real.
        But back then it felt as very TANGIBLE “beings.” And they “materialized” out-of-the-blue as told before.
        Back in 1970-1975 lived in Thailand(the Vietnam-war “going on, with the U.S. Army bases in the surroundings). My husband I am living among the U.S.Army in 5 years of time. BUT, as tourists travelled all alone up to the border of BURMA and also close to the Vietnam Border up north in the country… The two of us me and my husband. As the stupid western tourists(despite of being warned on forehand), youngsters as us to be back then, we did a stop for a rest in a small jungle-village with approximately 4 or 5 “houses” along a jungle-path.
        Also among the “houses” a hut which to sell coca-cola and water bottles(those small “shops” to find everytwhere it seems(laughs), even in the midst of the jungle.
        Well, when out of the car, the two us parted in the small village. My husband walked one way and I did the walking into another part of the area, and walking on a tiny path OUTSIDE of the village all alone. AND of course ending up into a unknown tiny path as a villain in the midst of the jungle. And could not find my way back.
        I stopped to make some orientation where to go back when all of a sudden two oriental men came upon me all of a sudden (they were looking as the pictures from the Vietnam-guerilja), and had big knives in their hands. I became shocked, and complete “frozen” as a salt-pilar of fear. Then and there knowing I had no chance to survive if they wanted to do a robbery or “something else.” Nobody would ever to have known what had happened if killed that`s for sure. I was 25 years old back then.

        Well, here comes what NOBODY to believe will be TRUE…But it IS true: Out of the blue on the same jungle-path TWO IDENTICAL FIGURES, AT LEAST TWO METER HIGH “PERSONS”. They were PERFECT OF THE OUTLOOK, TWO BEAUTIFUL AFRO-AMERICANS, dressed as the U.S. SOLDIERS, both with SHORT-CUT Black hair in the camouflage uniform. I could not tell if they were males or females. They wre looking as ANDROGYNOUS BEINGS…..They appeard between me and the two asian-looking “guerilja-warriors.” What happened next IS not to believe…. The two asian looking guys fled as the devil were hunting them. They SCREAMED out loud….and RUNNING away panicking.

        The two ANGELS(they “gave me” the IMPRESSION as a thought-transfering), smiling(perfect smile with white teeths) to me, and then as sudden as they “came”, they vanished again “into-the-blue.” BEFORE they vanished pointing for me the way back to the village. And finding my car, where my husband never thought about to become worried where I had been at all(as usual he never worries). TThe rest of our journey went all fine without other weird “episodes.”

        Next “episode” of the meeting with an Angel was about 20 years later on when living in Norway. And within another quite different occassion. That`s another story(smiles).

        BTW: I came to be thinking about the ending of “EL”….could it be a sort of “a POWER-Formation” the electricity-power? A kind of attracting the special ELECTRICITY, which belonging to the Angel-Powers ? I am to recal to have read somewhere about “God” as Electricity, a Power-Plant.

        1. VERY interesting. Does it ever strike you, what a charmed life you are leading? I’m sure you have had troubles and sorrows — who ever doesn’t? — but really, your life sounds magical.

          1. Frank ? Thank you very much !
            Glad you to believe my story. The few peoples to have told about it, looking at me as I am not to believe ! Except for a few friends with spiritual interrests as my american friend, living in Norway. She is married with a norwegian. The coincidence when to meet her is rather peculiar likewise. There is five years ago when meeting her for the very first time. She is a AFRO-AMERICAN, a beautiful lady in her 40s, tall and slim. Taller than the average human beings. I am as a dvarf beside of hers( and I am of a “normal-average” size.
            Here in Norway she`s practizing as a Healer(besides being a wife and a mom). Her name is Rometris Davis-Wright, born in Los Angeles. And Rometris is a certificated Healer from the school of Doreen Virtues`, if you ever to have heard about Doreen Virtue that is ! (Doreen Virtue is all about the Angels, and she is living in Hawaii now).
            Rometris Davis-Wright is among the VERY RARE genuine “channelers” indeed. She is reminding me about Edgar Cayce….. But she is not in trance, she is fully “awake” when to read the Akasha-recordings.
            Well, I have not been talking with Rometris since in the spring. She is pretty much occupied with travelling around in the country doing courses. I do not feel any “need” of doing any more courses in my “time.” I have done enough of them(not to make “a bastion” about it that is) … smiles !

            As both your TGU`s and Seth says: “Nothing is settled but probabilites.”

          2. My first thought was, “why wouldn’t I believe your story?” But then I remembered the customary arrogance with which people DECIDE whether or not to believe something someone tells them (regardless of that persons’s track record for veracity) depending upon whether or not what they’re hearing agrees with their belief system. Have you ever read “Tell No Man” by Adela Rogers St. John? This 1966 book (I think it was a best-seller for a while) tells a true story that many will choose not to believe. If you can get hold of a copy, I recommend it.

  4. Inger Lise–thanks so much for sharing this story. Sometimes I think those are the real stories of our lives–what happened to us spiritually, what we were open to, what we risked by acknowledging these stories and even sharing them. Your story reawakens stories the rest of us have. In light of these sessions, these stories can seem more real than real.

  5. Inger Lise,

    Thank you for sharing your profound story. Stories like these always draw me in like a magnet. I have experienced other worldly beings in various ways but usually through the non-3D world, in dreams, channelings & synchronistic events. Those experiences have played a huge part in widening my perspective on myself and the interconnectivity of the All-D. I would very much like to hear about your 2nd experience with the angel in Norway.

    Frank, at one time Rita mentioned a relationship between unitary beings such as angels (who have not had and will not have the 3D experience) and the Larger Selves of 3D beings. I don’t think she provided much more information on that. I would be interested to hear more about the relationship between unitary beings and our Sams and the role such beings play with us in the 3D.


    1. Jane and Karla, thank you very much likewise.
      And yes, and I am interested in the very same as the two of you without a doubt(smiling).
      Since the childhood to have FELT “something” watching over me somehow. Of course it could be felt as many, but all different, energies from time-to-time (as the energy is felt as changing about me), or eventually, felt as some deceased family-members and/-or, other “Beings” too. I have come to see the Angel-Energy is far different from all others. The many facets of the Energy at large.

      Jane ? I have several of the Angel-Cards by Doreen Virtue….Hm, maybe to find them again and bringing them into the light once more, since all of a sudden talking about the Angels nowadays ? Perhaps the time for the dust-cleaning of the Angel-card-boxes long forgotten ! The cards are BEAUTIFUL by no doubt, and comforting.

      You know when to study Seths`….And Franks` of course…..we are told to become cocreators with All That Is.
      Obviously the Seth-Books are all about “leaning upon your own Power,” and the trust in “Your Own Being.” BUT I have found The Angels to become SUPPORTIVE BEINGS to us anyway. And eventually, and to believe in “they” using the word “Angel,” for us to understand their function as “Messengers,” and likewise “they” being a part of SAM ! We are really working with Energies.

      Right now to find Franks book “The Cosmic Internet” in my book-shelf, and looking up on page 123 about THE POROUS NATURE OF CONSCIOUSNESS.
      And quote from the top of the page 123:
      “Now, if, withi this vast sea of atmosphere with its own rules of being, we concentrate on any particular bit of it, our area may have a certain cohesion for some reason, but defining it is necessarily going to be ARBITRARY. It will be a separating for the sake of clarity of things that belong together quite as much as the things that are contained within the unit you create by your definition. Can you write boundaries in sea-water ? Only as abstractions. The water itself flows. We cold use an ocean as example nearly as well as an ocean of atmosphere, and either analogy would have its particular drawbacks and advantages.
      You can see perhaps why we discouraged you from starting to sketch the porousness of things. To think in terms of levels is well and good, but not if it exaggerates the solidity of the level at the expense of its continuity wherever divisions are made, We still don`t want the illusion of individuality sneaking back in through the side door. ”
      The end for now…. I`ll NEVER stop to become surprised when to reread the books.
      LOL, Inger Lise

      P.S. Karla, I`ll try to recall the story behind my next encounter with an Angel: It is a long story. But Iam vividly to recall THE OUTLOOK and THE IMPRESSION of the Angel; the next time around meeting with another LARGE ANGEL.
      The Angel-appearances seems to show themselves up as very TALL beings ? The last “meeting” were not with the Afro-americans of the outlook, but very much a BLONDE Angel.
      The Angel had long hair, curly blonde hair, falling upon his/her shoulders(very much androgynous of the figure/outlook again), and the very blue color of the eyes, the eyes shiny, starry-blue, and CALMING eyes….and giving you a peace “that passes understanding.”

  6. ….Just a quick note to tell you Frank, in to have ordered “a used” copy of “Tell No Man” by Adela Rogers St. John from Amazon. And right after your recommendation. As always interested when it comes some “tips” from your readings as well as Charles`, cannot let it be(smiling)….Cannot wait…..Thanks, Inger Lise

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.