Friday, March 30, 2018
5:40 a.m. We need to continue, though I have felt better. I notice I usually feel better as we go along. Your move.
The present center of interest is how you live your lives, and for what purpose. If you can’t get a useful perspective on that, the rest is just spinning theory.
Thoreau’s “Where I lived, and What I Lived For.”
Both halves, yes. Ignore the former part, and you have only theory. Ignore the latter and you have only anecdotes. Nobody needed GPS to tell the lives of the saints, but neither could they make any sense of those lives – by definition they couldn’t – apart from the circumstances of their 3D existence. So you may say that here we are attempting to give you latitude as well as longitude, warp as well as weft, 3D as well as non-3D, so that you would have enough of a complete pattern to be useful. You aren’t getting “the” complete picture only because neither you nor we are capable of comprehending it; but, completer. More useful. Omitting fewer vitally important subjects.
But maps, while interesting in themselves to a certain kind of mind and temperament, are meant less for admiration of their aesthetic qualities than for their more or less passive assistance in somebody’s journeys. Let’s be a little more active, at this point.
The map is more like a GPS, talking to us?
More like Data in Star Trek, conversing, not merely responding.
Isn’t that what we have been doing, all this while?
To a degree, yes. But it is time to move beyond what we have done to this point.
Well, I’m open to suggestion.
That, in fact, is what we have in mind. Anyone who reads this, quite apart from the irrelevant fact of when they read it, will benefit from reading it in that way, as well as reading what we actually said.
We may have to unpack that. I get that (a) direct mind-to-mind between you and us is not 3D-time-constrained. Two non-3D minds are in contact whenever (within a 3D-time context) they connect, and (b) how we read the material will determine how active we are in the process. Read it for its literal meaning and we get a certain amount. Read it and allow it to suggest, and we get more.
More, and maybe different, or at least contradictory of the literal meaning, if only in appearance. It involves putting greater trust in yourselves and less trust in the disembodied voice from Olympus, or from the voice belonging to the statue on the pedestal.
I see it conceptually. So what do we do differently?
It isn’t a skill involved, so much as an attitude, an approach. It involves closer perusal – you can’t do this by merely scanning the material and then following your fancy – and at the same time, deeper assaying, feeling for what thoughts, opinions, feelings, memories, half-ideas surface as you do so, and either following them or deciding not to follow them, but taking them seriously. Is the idea clear?
It is to me. And it’s “slow down” all over again, isn’t it?
It is the old railroad sign: “Stop, look, and listen.”
That’s a very good way to think about it.
Now, this entry is a good example of what we’re talking about, because it can easily be read either casually and quickly, and dismissed with a brisk, “That’s obvious,” or “That’s nothing new,” or even “That’s a good idea,” – or it can be pondered, sat with, examined at leisure.
It isn’t as easy to get the idea across as one might think. On the one hand, pay closer attention; on the other hand, pay closer attention to what it stirs up in you, and trust that with at least as much reverence as you give anything else in your life.
It would be to nobody’s advantage to give you one more source or one more body of knowledge to put upon a pedestal. It would be not only to your advantage, but to everybody’s, to give you at the same time new information, new clues to your situation, and more confidence in yourselves as navigators.
Yes, I heard the analogy come up as I was writing. Your data as to our positon and speed and any possible landfalls and reefs are not meant to be of academic interest, but to assist us to navigate; only, we must do the navigating.
Must do the navigating, must bend the sails, must decide (to some extent) which port to make for. No publisher of navigational charts can be responsible for people’s skill in sailing. That’s up to them. The best the publisher or the chart can do is see to the accuracy of the material that is designed to give the sailor as much useful information as possible.
All right, I think that’s clear.
So, to make it a little more specific, as we said, we are tying together two points of view – your lives as they affect your growth, put it that way, and your lives as part of something far greater than yourselves.
Hmm. Our lives as biography and our lives as part of society.
Is it not true that a “Life and Times of…” biography takes a broader view of the subject than one that sticks closely to the personal and somewhat ignores or takes for granted the context of the person’s life?
And it can go either way, I see that. Today a biography tends to include what the person customarily had for breakfast. Adomnan, on the other hand, took for granted that any possible reader would know enough about Columba’s external facts (to the extent that anybody cared about them) and set forth the outer evidence of Columba’s inner life, as his qualities spilled out into the world, so to speak. Two extremes, centering on 3D data or on non-3D meaning as it appeared in 3D data.
And there’s nothing wrong with going to extremes, though one may find it difficult to remain there, but it is better if you can touch both extremes at once.
[I can’t remember now how what follows was suggested by the sentence on extremes, but it was and seemed a logical extension at the moment.]
I don’t see you giving us tips on the stock market, or the winning lottery number, or the winner of the third race at Hialeah.
No, you don’t see it. Does that mean it doesn’t happen? Where do hunches come from?
Where do mistaken hunches come from?
That’s easily answered: from wishful thinking. But what of true hunches?
Since I know that you already know that I know that they come from our non-3D mind, I presume the point here is that you are perfectly willing to give us that kind of information as well. And Joe Gallenberger’s course comes to mind as I write that: ESP as source of gambling winnings.
It’s a matter of what is important to you, and here again the question is —
Which you. I got that.
Of course. For you to become aware of a hunch, and for you to act upon it (two steps, not one), there must be agreement between conscious and unconscious mind, or call it 3D and non-3D mind, or one will sabotage the other. A conscious mind that arrogantly denies the possibility of valid psychic input will disregard the hunch as self-evidently (that is, really, by its definition) impossible to be anything more than fantasy. An unconscious mind that for good reasons or bad does not want the 3D life to win that lottery or call the number will arrange circumstances that result in the number not being played. The two must be in cooperation, and that cooperation obviously cannot be willed by the 3D mind on its own. It must be the product of true cooperation, which will likely be [i.e. will likely take place] beyond 3D awareness.
So there’s an hour, and clearly there isn’t much need to do more than lightly scan the material.
Very funny. Okay, till next time, and thanks.