TGU– In search of a redefining image

Friday May 4, 2018

5:05 a.m. Okay, let’s go at it again. Active and hostile forces? Or some other aspect of present-moment reality?

Let’s look at the unknowable nature of the world. You don’t need to be able to know a thing in order to know that it can’t be known. There is value to knowing that what you know (or think you know) is more an approximation than a measurement. But let’s look at this unknowable essence in light of the filters that make it difficult for you to see clearly.

Some of this you gave us long ago.

And some we didn’t. Repetition in different contexts is necessary, as we have pointed out repeatedly. And it isn’t repetition so much as revisiting the same thing in its different aspects.

I wasn’t criticizing, exactly. More like commenting on how hard it seems to be to get beyond certain places. It is as if you – we – get stuck.

As if we lose traction. Yes, we’re aware of that, and there is something of that. But then after we have imprinted a central question in your mind, unpredictably there will come the “aha!” moment that readjusts things, and that’s what we work toward, because it is that moment that provides, if not a new scaffolding, at least the foundations for one.

In this case, what we are working toward is an understanding of the present moment as it really is, rather than as it is commonly experienced. Get that, and many things will become clear in association with one another, things that before that moment you will have held separately.

I sometimes think that the fact that we experience the world in separate mental buckets is the single biggest obstacle we face in seeing things right.

And it is of course the inevitable result of your immersion in 3D. So the obvious answer is –.

Oh, I get it, no problem. The obvious answer is to get into better contact with our non-3D component, which acts as compensating source of gestalt perception, seeing whole what we in 3D see only in pieces.

That is sort of true, but subject to so many qualifying elements as to make it a hazardous guide. It would be a bit safer to put it this way: Your 3D brain has left and right hemisphere functioning that (generalizing) provides sequential and gestalt perception. As they work together, you get a better handle on things, as the view of the whole orients the details and the details check the whole. So it isn’t strictly a 3D v. non-3D division of labor. And in a larger sense, you in 3D may be considered as the left brain of your All-D self, your non-3D components functioning as right brain. However, remember, this is metaphor, analogy, not careful description.

Strange morning so far. It is 5:30, 25 minutes, and only three pages. But I notice it goes like that sometimes. I’m at the end of another notebook (that I began March 29), so I know that things do pile up, if I keep adding word to word. Still, some mornings it is like pulling teeth, or rowing against the tide.

The key is to keep rowing.

I know. Next time I’m going to sign up to be coxswain, calling out, “Stroke. Stroke. Stroke.”

And now you are thinking more of filling pages and minutes than of actually learning something.

Recalibrate, I know. [pause] Okay.

So many things to keep in mind at the same time. We need an image to contain these elements: contradictory forces and values; extreme plasticity of the present moment; the entire unknowability of reality not because “God is keeping secrets” but because the lesser does not have the receptors to understand the greater; the extension – suspension – of an All-D creature between 3D and non-3D; the connections among them in all directions – contemporaneous, along soul-development lines, back to the Sam, etc.; continuous relative readjustment looking like alternate versions of reality or like perpetual revisions of reality.

And that isn’t a complete list, by far, is it?

No. But you see the problem. If we have an image holding various elements in relationship to one another, in effect your RAM increases to be able to comprehend it, because the icon requires so much less memory than a comprehensive description would. In the absence of such an image, such an icon, the readjustment can’t be held even if it can be fleetingly realized. But you don’t come to an image first and draw the conclusions afterward. The readjustment has to come first, to precipitate the image.

A chicken-and-egg situation.

No, not really, the new realization always has to come first. Then, when it has been capsulized or incorporated into an image, the further implications of that image may be developed, leading to greater insights. Of course, this means you should be careful in choosing your images.

Do we choose them, or do we receive them?

Well, that’s a good point. But in practice there is little difference. The concentration on the problem will bring the new images within your range, and whether it is you associating ideas or you actually doing the work of thinking about it, the result will be the same, or anyway will serve, either way.

So what is our coordinating image?

You tell us. That’s how it has worked so far, mostly.

It is??

Oh yes. Why do you think you so often accused yourself silently of making it all up? When time and time again what we said echoed what you had said to yourself, or thought, or suspected, naturally it would look to you like you dramatizing your own thoughts. Of course, in a sense that is your life – is everybody’s life – but not in the sense you mean it. But for encapsulating relationships into distinct awarenesses, there is nothing like a mind in All-D conditions, able to drill down into 3D detail and yet preserve non-3D awareness of interrelation. So – your image?

Well, all I have is a vague memory of Carlos Castaneda’s division between the tonal and the nagual, if I have remembered the terms correctly. But that isn’t an image.

Bear in mind, you have examples of how this is done. You don’t need to begin as if nobody had ever done this before.

Religions, yes, I get that. Siva, Jupiter, The Great Spirit –


No, I felt that too. I was being led astray by something – the rhythm of the idea, we might call it.

Stick to what you know best, and then allude to the others.

Okay. So, in the Christian mythos, there is –

No, that isn’t right either. Frist I was going to list saints and all, then I thought images, like The Garden of Eden etc., which is of course pre-Christian. So, I’m here in receptive mode. Can’t you jump-start the process?

We had hoped you could easily sketch an alternate way of understanding the world, as preparation for revisioning it. What is wrong with sketching the Christian mythos and the materialist mythos, by way of contrast?

Well, Christianity says the world was created out of nothingness by God as an act of intention – he spoke the world into being, and created it and saw that it was good. He created the world, created the Adam as the crowning achievement, related to it directly (talked to it in the garden), saw that it was lonely and created the Eve as its complement. They were tempted into seeing the world as duality, which resulted in their experiencing shame at their nakedness, and resulted in their expulsion from the garden – for their disobedience, we are told. There followed what Churchill called “the lamentable catalog of human crime.” Cain introduced murder, and things got worse, until it appeared there was no way back. Then God sent Jesus to redeem humanity by suffering for it, and I’m afraid I’m no longer a very good interpreter, because I cannot understand the logic here. Nonetheless Jesus somehow in his life and death reconnected God and man and this provided a direct and an indirect link between humans and God. That is, people could follow his example and they could ask his intercession and that of the saints. (But all this is too judicial for my tastes, and I tend to think the important thing is that Jesus somehow connected as a spirt and soul in some way that opened the way for us to connect in similar fashion. All I know for sure is that history changed in the wake of Jesus’ life, as Chesterton pointed out in The Everlasting Man.)

The materialist mythos, by contrast, is simpler and bleaker. The world either always existed or came into existence via the Big Bang — that is, spontaneously, without plan, without cause. Through an automatic process, things developed over time. Evolution (used interchangeably with a sense of a directing controlling intelligence, though never described as such) formed suns, then planets, then – within this planet, anyway – oceans, land, vegetable and animal life and, as a sort of late addition to the entries, humans. Human intelligence may or may not be real; it may be only the epiphenomenon sitting upon life. And life, by the way, is the exception to the general rule that the vast majority of reality is dead. As to the purpose or prospects of humanity or of life itself – there is neither. The stars will cool, life will die out, end of game. Yes, that is the description “science” gives of the meaning of life, as far as I know. That is – it probably isn’t how advanced scientists see things, or maybe it is, but in either case this is the popular view of what “scientists say.” It reminds me of the joke where one guy says, “The world is going to end in three billion years,” and the other guy, startled and appalled, says, “What?!” The first guy repeats himself, and the second guy says, “Phew! I thought you said million.” It’s very edifying.

But now we have gone 80 minutes. Do we stop here, or can you point it up for us?

Let’s give you, and any of your readers who care to participate, a homework assignment. Try to create a story around what we have been saying for these past 20 years, and see if a new image crystallizes that will help move us forward. No harm (and some good possible) if you wish to associate it with Castaneda, or Cayce, or Gurdjieff, or Seth, or whomever.

Interesting idea. Maybe I’ll do that tomorrow in lieu of doing this. (Or maybe I’ll just take the day off.)

In either case, you see what is needed, a summing-up nor for the sake of pausing, but for jumping off.

Okay. Thanks for all this.



16 thoughts on “TGU– In search of a redefining image

  1. The image of a developing embryo came to mind as metaphor for the developing kosmos. First a cell expands as an undifferentiated mass, but in this model some sort of awareness or “prehension” as Whitehead puts it, is present from the beginning. Then the mass differentiates into exterior and interior, i.e. ectoderm and endoderm. We talk about exterior vs. interior here all the time, I think. Next, the mass of the body, the mesoderm that becomes the muscles and bones, expands between the two primordial layers. In this metaphor it stands for reality as a whole. Evolutionarily, it’s all about complexification. And importantly, the muscular part of the mesodermal layer is the one most responsive to volition or “free will.” The ectodermal and endodermal layers become responsible for interfacing with whatever is left over (spirit?) by sensing and absorbing, respectively, but maybe the analogy starts to break down here. The point is that the whole thing is alive and participates in the same sensing, living creature/creation, and it has some sort of teleology by virtue of its mere organization.

    Maybe that’s kind of unwieldy, but, there, I did my homework 🙂

  2. “Try to create a story around what we have been saying for these past 20 years.” I find myself VERY leery of stories, given all the examples of religions, philosophies, myths, etc. that began as stories, morphed into scripture then dogma, and eventually rule.

    If TGU means EACH person creates the story the lifts and guides her/him in their own completely unique life, I agree. If they in anyway mean a story that groups rally around I’d say “Probably not for me.”

    This ‘refactored’ list from TGU’s early paragraph really speaks to me, an engineer:
    “We need an image to contain these elements:
    – contradictory forces and values;
    – extreme plasticity of the present moment;
    – the entire unknowability of reality;
    – the extension of an All-D creature in both 3D and non-3D;
    – the connections among [ALL ‘creatures’] in all directions;
    – continuous relative readjustment looking like alternate versions or perpetual revisions of reality.”

    I would add (as summary): continuous conscious work to increase/become more aware of ?___? (guidance/higher self/God/All-There-Is) in your own way at your own pace. “After all, that’s what 3D is for!” 🙂

    1. I think the fact that we repeatedly see understandings become religions is an indicator that it is a necessary process socially. Every religion seems to have its exoteric teaching for the masses and its esoteric teaching for those able to comprehend a deeper meaning. So essentially, I think we wind up with both the exoteric — a new religious belief held in common among society — and the esoteric, which in a sense is each individual’s own best understanding.

      So give us your story, as you would see it, Jim, if you can.

      1. Frank,
        I agree. And it’s that ‘smearing’ of new information/new understanding/new worldview (through obvious and/or subtle human processes) that seems to bother me. Yet I can’t deny the manifest ‘smearings’ in Christianity, Vedic tradition, don Juan’s teachings, Eckankar, Zen (and more) have all helped me along my path.

        Now TGU are asking us to contribute to the processing of (what I see as real useful ‘truth’ in) your/their writings to more ‘exoteric teachings.’ And I agree with them that ENYTHING/ANYTHING I’m capable of seeing/understanding/connecting to is only relatively/somewhat/in-context ‘true’.

        So I’m resisting but working on it, and am wryly aware that this work is important too … thanks as always!

  3. Does this suffice as an answer to the homework , Frank?
    From Seth, “The Nature of the Psyche”
    Chapter 11 “The Universe and the Psyche”
    Session 797, March 14, 1977, pages 200-202
    Beginning: “Now in continuation: when you ask about the beginning of a universe, you are speaking of a visible universe.

    There is consciousness within each conceivable hypothetical point within the universe. There is therefore “an invisible universe” out of which the visible or objective universe springs…(…..and so forth…)

      1. 3 pages of relevant information …as i said for those with the book..pages 200-202. You must have that material, Frank.

        1. Hi Frank, Paul Coombs and Jim.

          I can add something more at the pages 200-202, which is the very same as the Edgar Cayce readings likewise.
          Quote Seth: “Give us a moment…Your universe did notnemerge at any one point, therefore, or with any one initial cell — but everywhere it began to exist at once, as the inner pulsations of invisible universe reached certain intensities that “impregnated” the entireb physical system simultaneously.”

          AHA! Here comes “the bible” interpretation about it:
          Seth tells, on page 200: In this case, first of all light appeard. At the same time EE(electromagnetic energy)units became manifest, impinging from the invisible universe into definition. Again, because of the psychological strength of preconceived notions, I have to work my way around many of your concepts…etc.etc.

          Thank you very much for your continued Spacious Present Frank. I`m lurking behind the corner ! The last 6 weeks participating (A INTENSIVE STUDY)with a Seth Dream-Study Group online.
          OMG… My world-view changes all the time(and I, who NEVER to have a headache).

          Heartily, Inger Lise.
          P.S. Should ol` aquantance(s) be forgot?

          1. Your example seems to me an example of the Bible and Seth saying the same thing in different ways. For that matter, the Big Bang theory is little more than the Biblical account stripped of causality, meaning, and relationship to anything human!

  4. In doing this exercise the image of a kaleidoscope appeared in my mind. It is a visual image of how I imagine Seth’s concept of creating your own reality combined with what I am learning from TGU. It is a way for me process the concept of the All-D from my vantage point as a mind or soul.

    Just a rough sketch:

    The multi-colored pieces of glass in the kaleidoscope represent the combination of energies of this incarnation (i.e. our strands and their multi-faceted connections with other lifetimes and other minds, the weather, the vast unknown forces). As we interact with our world, we continuously create unique patterns (i.e. create our reality) by tweaking the adjustment knob of the kaleidoscope. Every moment is a new creation. Our thoughts, emotions, beliefs are what tweak the adjustment knob and act as filters to what we create and they provide a new starting point for the next moment. What we perceive is in essence a feedback loop of what we have created. As we widen the concept of who we are and our interconnectedness, the creation of the patterns and how we view the world are made from a larger and more inclusive perspective.


  5. Tensegrity. This is a concept Castaneda used in connection to the physical excercises he presented. This concept came up recently for me in horse training. An article that presents the idea in relation to horse movement
    The idea of a dynamically moving balance, consisting of stabilizing, accelerating and decelerating energies. This kind of perspective helps the dimensions of the learning process needed to change it become visible. A moving balance is really different to change compared to changing something that is immobile. Learning a dance or some moves in sports or playing soccer- making the known become part of the movement is a skill in itself.

    Another concept Castaneda used: assemblage point – the hub holding the magic spell of normal perception together. Don Juan shifted Castaneda’s consciousness just by whacking him in certain way. It may be that we are learning the ropes of changing our assemblage point by ourselves. And to get back to horse training metaphor: so far we have just rolled forward pretty unconsciously with the weight of the all-D. It is like having an invisible weight that forces yoy veer this way and that. The aim of the training is to shift the balance so, that the rider/all-D is carried consciously and effortlessly and that the possible structural problems become visible so they can be corrected.

  6. I have considered the request for an image the last few days. I am reminded that the last time TGU (or whoever is stepping up at the time) suggested an imaging process that the analogy of a Vortex (e.g., vast impersonal forces) was used as scaffolding.

    I like the newborn (baby) suggestion above. It resonates (with me) BUT it also seems incomplete.

    Maybe a dual image is needed or would be helpful or would ease the process of imaging (e.g., much like TGU’s sphere and hologram image).

    So, the baby and ??? … OR … the vortex and ??? … OR

  7. OK. I did my homework, too. I’ve enjoyed reading the previous most excellent posts, and I thought I’d give this a go.

    I get the image of a neural network of light, where everything is connected to everything else by bridges of light. As I contemplate this, it morphs into the network of airways that airplanes use to navigate the globe. These airways used to be defined by radio signals from a ground station, but now they are defined by GPS. This network stretches off into the distance and out of sight, yet it is reliable for telling if one is on track or not. The vehicle I’m flying is an airplane, complete with crew and passengers. Then that morphs, and I am the airplane, it’s crew, and it’s passengers. Each of these is a component of me, as I travel along this network of light. As I go along on my route, I can’t know everything. The information I got during preflight was only good for a couple hours. After that, we go with the flow and devise an alternate plan as needed.

    The Vast Impersonal Forces are represented by the winds and weather that affect the route of flight. Guidance for proper navigation comes from the airplane’s flight instruments and ATC’s instructions via radio.

    I’m sure I’ll get more on this image as I contemplate it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *