Upton Sinclair: More on psychic exploration

May 16, 2007, continuing

9:40 a.m. While I was cooking my eggs, a couple of crystallizations. Telepathy! Tecumseh! Mr. Sinclair (interrupting my breakfast) pray proceed.

You thought that I had made up Lanny Budd’s difficult relationship with “Tecumseh,” the “Indian chief” of the same name as the famous warrior – and suddenly (I wonder how it happened! I am smiling of course as I say this) you realized that I had drawn on real life. What else does a novelist do? What else could he do?

Yes, so many perplexities worked out. Would you want to proceed with brackets – filling in later – or have me say it here?

Hard choice. I guess I’ll put in the background here. Go ahead.

Tecumseh was always scoffing at Lanny because Lanny was trying to decide if he was getting a real spirit or if it was “telepathy.” You saw my rather unsatisfactory analogy of the bubble, and may provide it in brackets. It wasn’t satisfactory but was the best I could do at the time.

Your experience should show you that the mistake was in thinking it had to be either/or. Of course it was telepathy! Of course it was a real spirit! The thing that makes it comprehensible to you is the notion that all time exists as all space exists – and therefore the part of us outside time-space – superior to it, as it must be – knows no barriers of time. And thus all people are alive at the same “time” (so to speak) and may communicate as freely as they are able to believe they can.

So the “spirit” doesn’t talk “in character” because it is translated through a mind with its own way of seeing and saying things. It knows what it “shouldn’t” know because it is alive and communicating. It knows what the communicator knows – “that old telepathy”! And if the communicator’s mental prism is so rigid that he or she “knows” that the spirits come through in only one way, or talk in only a certain way (sometimes in the way that the communicator imagines that the spirit would have talked –

Yes, I see that. It leads many people to conclude that it is fraudulent or is self-deception.

How many times have you been on the verge of coming to that same conclusion?

Yes, and me inside the phenomenon! But I never wanted to fool myself, and often suspected that I was.

You weren’t the only one. If you aren’t a true believer, what else can you be but an occasional doubter? Of course I know that you regard belief and doubt as the same thing looked at from opposite angles, but you know what I mean here.

Yes, I do. So other than the fact that the associates you had available to work with believed in controls, and used them, was there any other reason you should have or would have had to?

Certainly. Ease of access. Think of your own experience, these past 18 months!

Would you care to spell it out?

You had an idea of Joseph Smallwood’s existence. You had seen him in a particularly vivid and believable vision. You had seen a hand write his surname on a chalkboard. You have a connection there, even if you often wondered if he had been objectively there or was some kind of construct. He was a point of entry, you see.

Say a little more.

If you have all the information in the world (and out of it) available to you – as you do – it may be difficult for you to think where to begin. Saying “is anyone there” was a starting place, and if the same control came forth more or less reliably, as it did, there was your entry-point. Not very satisfactory, and you from your end can see why – and it seems obvious now but didn’t to me or to us then. We allowed things to drift instead of pointing them.

A little more?

The most we might do is ask for a given individual through the control, and if they came through asks the control to ask for information – or, sometimes, put us into direct communication. But our own background assumptions were getting in our way! How could a spirit follow us if we had moved our bodies halfway around the world? How could a deceased person’s spirit continue to exist, even if it seemed to? Since the past had ceased to exist (we assumed, despite the bewildering new evidence from the advance edge of science) certainly it couldn’t be changed! Certainly alternate pasts and futures couldn’t exist and be equally real! Certainly therefore we faced conundrums like free will versus a future that already existed, which seemed to show us to be puppets.

All these things worked on our unconscious minds – which means that we had no control over them except by an occasional act of focused intention which often seemed to us like playing pretend.

Whereas I got Joseph’s undocumented and perhaps nonexistent life in day after day beginning in December of 2005, and the long effort widened my access.

Precisely. Besides, your mental defenses are miles out from where mine were. You don’t have any problem believing three impossible things before breakfast – so a lot less is impossible for you.

So came Bowers, and Carl Jung and A. Lincoln and one after another and I stopped worrying about it because I could see that I was getting interesting information and couldn’t prove it one way or the other anyway.

And so here you are, confident that you can talk to anyone you have a mind to, whenever you have anything to exchange.

Not autograph-hunting.

No, that’s right. Communication is for a purpose – which can be pleasure, of course. But even autograph hunters really want to touch you, so maybe we should distinguish between those who want something to show others and those who want to contact.

Well I thank you very much. I think some people will benefit from this.

That is always the hope, is it not? Good day.

Good day to you too.

One thought on “Upton Sinclair: More on psychic exploration

  1. This person is benefiting greatly from this; the growing understanding of how this ‘stuff’ works is beyond useful. Coupled with the continued experience of connection, it’s leading to remarkable places … thank as always Frank!

Leave a Reply

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