A new puzzle

Wednesday, July 18, 2018

6:35 a.m. Okay, guys, Judith [Pennington] says [in her report of a session in which she monitored me with Mind Mirror while I wrote, talking to the guys]: “… it’s interesting that the water [which I drank during the session] distinctly lowered your heart rate. Perhaps you could ask TGU why this occurred.” So – why? I certainly don’t know.

And, as you are aware, you have always been moved, in talking to TMI participants at Guidelines, to have two glasses of water, from which you sip as you go along.

Yes. Two glasses, no more, no less. I just followed instinct there, which I take it means it was your idea.

Think of it as a means of removing the stress of dealing with an audience.

Robin Williams did that, in a video I saw. He had a huge pallet of bottled water which he chugged as he went his high-powered way.

Yes, only you aren’t functioning on cocaine.

So, the relationship between water and heartbeat?

It smooths things, but don’t ask us for the medical explanation.

Actually, I thought that is what I was asking you for.

Well, don’t; we can’t give it.

That’s interesting in itself. Why can’t you? My limitations?

No. We have brought through information outside of your comfort zone before.

Yes, you have. So why not this time?

Maybe we don’t know.

Maybe you could go ask.

Well, we won’t.

That’s very odd. Why not?

We just won’t. It wouldn’t be good for you.

Because I’d get all egotistical about my ability to get the information? After all this time?

No, nothing to do with ego. Just continue to drink lots of water.

This is the damnedest thing. Here we have a request for information and you are refusing to give it. Not saying “We don’t know,” just refusing.

Yes, puzzling, we know. But we have told you what is important: Water relieves stress. You don’t need to know how.

Well, okay. This is seriously weird, though. (And I hear, “Get used to it.” Is that you, or a stray thought?

How would you know the difference, and what good would it do you?

My, aren’t we in a cranky mood! Okay, maybe later.


Thursday, July 19, 2018

5 a.m. So, guys, what’s the story? Your “won’t tell” intrigues me, and not only me.

Yet you do not allow it to shake your faith in our good intent.

Of course not. I have never gotten a feel of malevolence or even mischief, even when I have been most strongly disappointed. By results, by lack of results, either one.

You are fortunate.

Yes, though to a degree it is a conscious decision in the way “Life is good” is a conscious decision. If you are fooling me, if you have other items on the agenda that to some extent cut me out or go against my interests, you can probably blow this right by me, and I won’t know. That’s a risk that I’m willing to take. For me, at least, maybe not for everyone, the alternative is too self-crippling. I don’t want to be a fool but it’s a risk I prefer to being a cynic.

The optimal place – at least for you – is indeed between the extremes. We agree. And, we appreciate what it costs you, to maintain yourself there.

I wish I had been able to hold myself in that place in relation to other people. It would have made my life easier.

Easier in some ways, maybe harder in others, maybe less productive. But the point is, this attitude serves you, and we wouldn’t like to discourage you.

Only, I can’t figure out why I shouldn’t know how water smooths things. The technical details don’t interest me beyond a certain point, as you know, but up to that point, they do, and I cannot see any reason for your caution, if that is what it is.

If our refusal did no more than demonstrate to you that different people face different limits to their access, it would be worthwhile.

I suppose.

Not everyone has the access you do. While it is very useful for you to encourage others, it is technically incorrect to say, “Anybody can do this,” implying that everybody can do so – even potentially – at the level of proficiency you have obtained.

I never quite say that.

No, but your de facto attitude is, “If you can’t do this as fluently as I have learned to do, you’re not trying.” That is useful for a few who can; perhaps it is frustration for the many who cannot.

But the problem is, people for a variety of reasons are too prone to assume that they are among those who can’t. and how can they learn whether they are or not, save by assuming they can, and trying? It worked for Dirk, for example. If he had not tried – if I had not strongly prodded him by my assumption that he could do it – would he have ever discovered that he could? Maybe yes, maybe no – and don’t think I don’t recognize being used as an instrument of providence, so to speak. But the point is, my working on the assumption that any given individual can do it is better for them than their own tacit assumption that they can not.

So, you are willing to frustrate the many for the sake of encouraging the few.

Well, the many don’t have to respond with frustration. They could respond with redoubled determination. Or with the awareness that whatever their limits are, they pushed against them, and at least now they know. And anyway, frustration may be different things in different circumstances. Sometimes it leads to “I give up,” sometimes to “Grr, there’s got to be a way to accomplish this.” It’s always up to the person. Besides, I assume that only people that this is important to will be drawn to it, and those for whom it is not their path will be left uninterested.

Not a bad assumption. Another is that for some people, frustration in a certain way may be productive.

Didn’t I just say that?

You did. We are agreeing.

I am struck by something Judith said in her report that amounted to, “in this state, the boundaries between Frank and other are less important.” Not her words, and it may not have been quite her intent, but what I got out of it was, such boundaries, between our 3D selves and our All-D selves, are arbitrary. They don’t refer to anything other than horseback distinctions, perhaps drawn to enable us to function in 3D without confusion while we learn the ropes. Therefore the boundaries are nonexistent in any absolute sense, and only come to play when needed.

True enough.

So, isn’t that what I tell people? You can do this. Only the silent caveat is, “unless you are so constituted that you shouldn’t, in which case you won’t be interested anyway.”

That isn’t 100%, but close enough to being, empirically true. In practice, anyone who is drawn to a given subject is drawn to it for a reason. Invert that and you get, “Anyone who has no reason to be drawn to a given subject, won’t be,” and that is mostly true. It functions as an automatic safety valve.

Now – you may have heard this before – why shouldn’t I know how water smooths things?

We ought to withhold information more often. It certainly seems to spur your curiosity.

Yeah, well, don’t. And the answer is –?

Maybe it is as simple as protecting you from your own psychological reaction to our saying, “We don’t know and can’t find out.”

If you were to say that, I’d have to agree that it could be necessary sometimes, only I’d think we would be far beyond that stage. The Mind Mirror verification was huge for me. I don’t know who or even what you are, but after all for 25 years I have been willing to apply Jesus’ test: “By their fruits you shall know them.” You’ve never given me thorns in place of nourishment. So why should I now panic and say (as, I admit, I might have said, decades ago), “Oh my God, they don’t exist! I’ve been making it all up!”

No, that’s true. Perhaps we are underestimating you. We are only partly you, you know, so to some extent our group opinion is one of outsiders looking on rather than insiders participating.

That’s kind of a big monkey-wrench to throw into the works, isn’t it?

Needn’t be. It is only a minor tweak to your belief system. And maybe you’re ready for a bit of refinement of the picture.

That would be welcome.

Next time, though. This will repay a fresh start – that is, starting when you are fresher.

All right, I’m looking forward to it. But we have time for more today re a related topic, if you wish.

No, enjoy your access of clarity, as it manifest in various ways. Only don’t let yourself drift off to sleep; if you sleep, sleep consciously so that you may awaken. Do not sleep to avoid consciousness.

I believe I know what you mean by that and I get that you wish to leave it a little cryptic.

Yes. In puzzling it out for themselves, different people will gain different but appropriate-for-them insights.

Okay. Well, I look forward to your redefining the whole concept of TGU, if need me.

Stay tuned.

I shall. (Unless I fall asleep.)



2 thoughts on “A new puzzle

  1. Yii-ha! A new leg – a new flavour of content. I like it! Very useful information – I will drink more water, and not ask too much questions, as keeping stress levels tolerable is a priority. But this skirts a question I am chewing currently: the occult tradition considers human body a clump of meat, a sort of meat robot, maybe. And shamanic traditions consider the body somewhat sacred. A fairly big difference. I have always somehow been taken aback by the occultist’s idea of forcing will upon bodies – be it my own or another’s. This has something to do with what I’ve learned from horses: they have intelligence and can contribute/join forces with the human or just obey and be done with it. I think only cooperation makes the connection interesting. Of course, completely blind obedience doesn’t even exist. It is mainly an excercise in communication, getting it to a more refined level. And that can only happen when the intelligence of the other end is taken into account.

    So having this body I try to sense what it needs to cooperate in good faith. If I thought it is a meat robot, I would treat it (me) differently. Whatever the body is, sacred vessel, meat robot or something in-between, it seems appropriate to treat it as well as I can. And I keep learning new things that make me more skillful in treating the body well. And I also see that there are things that have been programmed and that can be re-programmed in a more benevolent way. Yet again I am at the octopus limbs: by programming the independent limbs to more appropriate actions, the central head will also do better. Maybe assuming the intelligence of the body is a useful idea, even if it is untrue?

  2. For me, it is more than a useful idea and if you observe how your body reacts/responds in different situations you may be able to closely co-operate with it. Besides using EFT, reflexoloy etc I talk to my body and have found it very responsive. I thank it for being intelligent and for looking after me. After all I do not know how to make my heart beat, nor indeed how my liver processes everything…It does. 🙂 nor would I be in 3D if it were not for inhabiting my body.

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.