Monday, November 18, 2019
4 a.m. Gentlemen? A sus ordenes. And as you will have observed, I am gearing up to attempt what you have been after me to do for some while. Perhaps with help from friends suggesting topics for me to address, at least I hope so.
You will find that writing a summary of the point of view you have come to will nicely complement the on-going record you have kept and disseminated of these communications.
Well, I’m thinking of it as my legacy book.
And so it may prove to be – if you write it.
No promises except that I will give it a try. I haven’t decided if I should write the history of how my view of things changed, or just what I see now (knowing that this probably will continue to change as fast as I write it).
You will discover the path as you walk it, as always, because another way of saying that is, you will create the path (for yourself) by your choices as you go along. It’s called living in 3D.
I was interested to read my morning post from 2010, selected a few days ago to post this morning. There is often a strange synchronicity between what I choose (in advance) from the past, and what comes that day, only usually I don’t read the post before having the morning’s conversation.
And that is good practice, for loading the 3D conscious mind deliberately actually serves to interfere with a larger harmony. When you let things flow, they flow. When you try to let them flow by directing them, it’s like instructing a person to not think of something: The instruction itself runs counter to what is desired.
I get it. Not a new idea, of course.
No, but even old ideas, well understood, are not of much use if not applied.
Okay. So –
So let us address “better or worse” in terms of “good and evil” and of the nature of the vast impersonal forces as they flow through 3D lives.
- 3D is only one aspect of the larger world. Creation does not depend upon elective results on one planet.
- Nonetheless for you while you live on this planet, this is the whole game. How can you actively and intelligently participate in elections being made on other planets in other galaxies?
- Nonetheless, equally true: Everything connects. Striking a balance is an individual decision, always necessary but never absolute.
- If the forces beneath 3D life are motivational, nonetheless they do not necessarily partake of 3D nature.
That one isn’t clear, plus I lost part of it.
You exist in 3D as, so to speak, a formed creature. Even if you are mostly a habit system, still you exist – in effect – prior to the forces that flow through you. Electricity exists prior to a light bulb being fashioned, but from the light bulb’s point of view, or seen in a functional way, the light bulb has to exist for the electricity to flow through it, so in effect the structure predates the force because in fact the preexisting force cannot flow through a thing until the thing exists. Of course from the electricity’s point of view, the light bulb is a late-comer to the party; may in fact be considered inessential or may not even be experienced save as a vague interruption or interference with the flow.
In short, we aren’t the center of the universe except in our own eyes.
It is always that way, for everyone, from which you may conclude that there’s nothing wrong with the situation.
Well, it is a striking analogy, anyway.
And not a bad one. Remember, there isn’t any reason (nor any advantage even if there were reason) to adopt the electricity’s point of view. So you are an annoying nuisance from its point of view, so what? You have a right and duty to be that annoying nuisance. You can’t avoid being it even if you wished you could. That is only as you seem to it; its point of view is not any more universal than is yours.
- However, analogies are not identities. That is, there is a difference between an illustration and the thing being illustrated. You are not light bulbs; vast impersonal forces are not electricity.
- These forces are intelligent, self-willed, purposive, just like you, but on a different scale.
- Consider the implications of that statement. You are vaster and more significant than ever appears to you living your lives. At the same time, so is everyone else.
Is there, then, some relationship between what forces may affect us and what we are prior to the interaction?
You may choose to consider yourselves not light bulbs, which after all are simple resistance to flow for the sake of producing the desired side-effect of light and the undesired side-effect of heat, and instead consider yourselves as circuit-boards, designed to function as the current flows through you, but not designed merely to be an interruption or rather a constriction of flow, but to use that flow to enable decisions.
And here is where we find things confusing; at least, I do.
The confusion stems from attempting to comprehend the whole prior to comprehending the parts. Yet, that is precisely how you do get to learn things. That’s why you function with two brains, one attuned to detail and the other to gestalts.
Yes, I get it. We grok things, but grokking them isn’t the same as understanding them.
No. As in art, for instance. One may look at a piece of artwork and be moved by it, not knowing why. Or one may understand the craft that went into it, and either be moved or unmoved but either way experience it differently.
Well, we’re all experiencing 3D life, and I have been working on the assumption that you are helping us understand it.
A little of each?
Just as experiencing artwork may change you by activating something within you, and just as understanding something of the underlying structure of that artwork may change your depth of understanding, so here. Who can say that it is “better” to grok something than to understand it? Or vice versa?
I suppose not everybody will get the reference to grokking, though it is culturally widespread by this time. It comes from a science-fiction story and means to know something entirely, without logical analysis, and perhaps (though not necessarily) immediately.
One reason we invented what we are calling ILC was to produce communications and records of communications that are more active and obviously open-ended than 3D thought alone or transmissions from non-3D alone. We wanted and want to encourage by providing both moments of illumination (grokking something suddenly) and moments of exposition (logical working-out of implications of things said). That requires an active process of interaction, and this is what will lead people to new patterns of connection in times to come, insofar as they adopt it.
So we circuit-boards may process more efficiently.
Not exactly, though that may be a productive side-effect. More like what Jesus said “I have come that you may have life more abundantly.” He didn’t come that you might have new sets of orders to follow, more blinders preventing you from inquiring and experimenting. He came – he said it himself – that you might have life more abundantly. He also said the kingdom of heaven is within you. He also said trust life and the source of life.
Does any of that sound like he was hoping for more obedient robots? For blind followers? For, so to speak, trance-channelers of life? Or does it sound like someone saying, “Wake up. The best is yet to come”?
Surprising theological twist, there.
But you see, it isn’t! And it is precisely the habit of dividing life into compartments that tends to deaden one’s experience of it. If the advice and examples you have been given over the centuries have to be considered or ignored separately rather than in smooth connection one to another, you are left with distortion. It is in nobody’s interest for you to listen to anything that deadens the world for you, or cuts you off from your full potential. Quote Emerson’s words, and that will do for the moment.
All right, and our thanks as always. Emerson said, in 1844 when he was 41,
“Be an opener of doors for such as come after thee, and do not try to make the universe a blind alley.”