Thomas, Saying 60

Sunday, June 30, 2019

4:20 a.m. Now we come to a puzzling Saying.

Saying 60 They saw a Samaritan going into Judea carrying a lamb. He asked his disciples: What do you think he will do with that lamb? They replied: He will kill it and eat it. He said to them: As long as it remains alive he will not eat it, only if he kills it and it becomes a corpse. They said: Otherwise he won’t be able to do so. He said to them: You too must seek a place for rest, or you may become a corpse and be eaten.

If you can make sense of this one for me, I’ll be impressed.

List the parts of Saying 60 that puzzle you, then. Item by item.

How about if I list specifics, whether they puzzle me or not, and you can comment as needed.

That’s fine, do that.




Kill it and eat it

He will not eat it while it is alive

He won’t be able to, unless he kills it


Seek for a place of rest, or you may become a corpse and be eaten.

As I say, it’s a puzzle to me. I can get the general idea, but not what it amounts to in specific – becoming a corpse, being eaten because you don’t find a place to rest. I’m hoping you can shed some light on this as you have on others.

So, Samaritan.

Remember, Jews regarded Samaritans as outcasts; as, you might say, relatives turned outsiders. The parable of the good Samaritan used Samaritan as the archetype of the person not expected to be trusted, not expected to be trustworthy or good. It would not have had its desired impact if it had used someone of whom good actions were expected.

So here, while the Samaritan carrying a lamb to kill and eat is not condemned for it, neither is he an example of “one of us” carrying out a normal action. It is an outsider, not to say an outcast.

The lamb you know; the lamb allows itself to be killed without making resistance. Jesus became known as the lamb of God for just that reason, which dwellers in that more rural, more close-to-the-earth time and place would have known without needing it to be spelled out. So, an outsider carrying an animal that was going to be sacrificed. Note, too, there is no hint of condemnation that the man is going to kill the lamb; that was just the way of things.


He is going to kill it and eat it. Now, while that is for his own nutrition, so that the lamb’s vitality contributes to the man’s, that is not part of the point being made. The point is that while the lamb is alive it will not be eaten. Can not be eaten.

I think I begin to get a glimmer.

What did the previous saying imply?

There are things we can do only while we are alive in 3D.

Similarly, there are perils you will not face while alive. But this does not mean, “After death, watch out!” After physical death, that is. It means, while you are in 3D, you can be alive or dead. But let us go through the other elements before we say more about that which is the point of the Saying.

He will not be able to eat the lamb unless he kills it. He will eat only a corpse. He will be unable to eat anything that is not a corpse. So, the way to avoid being eaten is, avoid becoming a corpse, and the way to avoid that is to seek for a place for rest. And what does that mean?

That is the least clear of all of it.

“Let the dead bury their dead.”

Yes, I was thinking that. It seems the application here is that we will be awake and somehow find a place for rest – whatever that means exactly – or we will be in danger of dying and being eaten.

What does it mean, to be dead while alive?

I could come up with something – dead to our true nature, etc. – but why don’t you just tell us?

If you haven’t noticed, it is by playing off your expectations and understandings that we most easily make unexpected points. But, all right. Look at it the other way. What does it mean, that Jesus “came that you might have life, and life more abundantly”?

Well, that we would awaken to our true nature and would live it, thus transforming the life we lead.

That’s well and good, as far as it goes, but is there no downside to the picture? Are there no consequences if the opportunity is not taken?

You are broadening this out considerably, aren’t you?

Yes. As always, we are providing a broader context, that what you see may mean more, and that what is in your potential field of vision may have a better chance of being observed, understood, assimilated, and lived.

You are meaning to integrate into the picture the vast impersonal forces as they play out in our lives.

Those, but not only those. Also what we sometimes call the vast personal forces. In short, your world in which you function, and the you that functions in it. It is a prime mistake to think of yourselves as separate from the world you live in.

We live our lives, but that life may be seen in two ways.

Yes, good, now expand upon your thought.

From the 3D point of view, our life is lived among externals. Our own point of reference identifies with our body, our immediate environment, the things we do and that happen to us. Much of life seen this way is external to us. We react.

From the non-3D point of view, our life is entirely self-centered in one sense, entirely part of everything in another sense, but, in neither way of seeing it, is anything “external.” Either it may be seen as us functioning as in a dream, or it may be seen as our automatically creating an environment, as in a dream, that reflects what and who we are, what and who we are experiencing and relating to.

So, if you live in 3D thinking your life may be divided between internal and external, you will not come to the same conclusions you will come to if you see your life as all one thing. Your potential will be unlimited, as it is in a dream. The artificial constraints that seem so realistic to ordinary consciousness will be seen as arbitrary and unreal.

But –

Yes, “but.” But your life is lived amid and through and among vast impersonal forces. You personify a particular combination of those forces, channeled in certain directions. Your day-to-day existence reflects who and what you are, but not necessarily who and what you think you are. That’s the value of 3D constriction; one value, anyway.

So, “a place to rest” means what?

Think of it as if it said “a place to stand,” or “a place to root yourself.”

Something independent of the winds that blow while we are here.


But then, what does it mean, to become a corpse and be eaten?

You have gotten the sense of it while yet writing out the question.

Yes, I have. It is the opposite of becoming a permanent point of view, of becoming a crystal, as you used to say, to Rita’s and my confusion, so many years ago.

That is a part of the stakes in living a 3D life. This Saying looks at 3D life from a 3D standpoint, because that is how it would appear to those who heard it. If it had been said from a non-3D standpoint, it would have been wholly unintelligible. As it is, you found it puzzling, even after working through so many Sayings. Some gaps are too wide to be leaped.

So I guess the Saying puts the Samaritan in place as a symbol of life.

Yes. Not malign, not benign, just carrying on for its own purposes, but bringing inevitable results. If you don’t want to die and be reabsorbed into the undifferentiated being that is life without particular consciousness, find a place to stand – and this is done by coming awake and remaining awake. He came that you might have life, and have it more abundantly. He did not say he was or was not the only one to do so. But he said that’s what he was doing, that’s what he was about.

And so now it makes sense to me. Very satisfying, thank you.

You are welcome, and we will see you next time, as you often say.

Yes. Thanks again.


2 thoughts on “Thomas, Saying 60

  1. This work you’re doing is always greatly appreciated especially by someone like me who had no religious upbringing.

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.