Treating people as things

Sunday, November 24, 2019

5:20 a.m. I see that we had queued up “why treating people as things is evil,” but I want to include a couple of grafs that came to me early yesterday.

I got a sense overnight how our minds use bits and pieces of various things and associate them by something they have in common other than, different from, our daytime logic. So if I am watching a lot of “Doc Martin” and “45 rpm” and reading this or that, and writing this or that, it may find bits from the same emotional string, so to speak, and play with the underlying string along the lines of whatever it ostensibly deals with. Thus our dreams may be so strange; they don’t follow daytime logic, but another logic. I should look into Robert Graves and see if this is what he meant by solar mind, lunar mind.

That thought leads to a sense of how very much “on our own” we are in this culture. No communally accepted belief-system such as the ancient Egyptians had, so we each go looking in our first- and second-hand experience, trying to find out what is real, what isn’t. That’s all I have been doing, all this time.


Only that Robert Graves’ thought may not be so easy to pull out of the matrix of his work, and you already have the basic idea. Don’t forget, you are not dependent upon asking someone else (someone “external”) but can ask us, that is, use your intuition, and follow where it leads. Your own discoveries may only overlap, rather than duplicate, those of another, so too much scholarship may actually hinder the formulation of new and authentic insights.

Interesting thought.

And of course you will know that in place of the certainties of a coherent world-view, your time has the chaotic potential inherent in a  lack of one coherent, over-arching, pervasive world-view. Each condition has its advantages and disadvantages. Now as to our indicated topic —

Bearing in mind that we are using what you as an individual know (because that is always what we have to work with, no matter who is on the 3D end), remember that we have used the remembered remnants of Christian theology to illustrate the realities that that theology tried to express in its own time. Thus, the seven deadly sins. Regardless what the churches thought, regardless how generations of the faithful regarded them, we find them useful not to bring you to a religion even as an ideology, but to demonstrate a relationship between errors and effects.

Which is precisely what the churches were doing, I assume.

Yes, only at some point obedience became more important than the underlying logic of why they were seen as deadly sins.

We have gone through that logic, showing how they are seven ways of mistaking your position in 3D life and the greater life beyond the 3D, and mistaking who and what you are. Now let us look at them as seven specific channelings of the one sin of seeing and using others as things rather than as persons.

Straining the point a little, aren’t you?

Let’s find out. If we over-reach, there may be something to be learned.

[And here, remarkably, we consumed nearly two full journal pages before they conceded that their example didn’t work.]

So it seems to me your intended lesson falls kind of flat.

Not everything succeeds. Nothing lost.

So haw about addressing your thesis more directly. Why is treating people as things evil?

Is it not obvious once stated?

It feels obvious, but that isn’t the same as having the reasoning behind it.

In a way, lunar mind, solar mind. You know things you cannot prove or demonstrate. You feel things you don’t realize you know.

You as a human being are an extension into 3D from the larger world that surrounds it. You as a human being live in non-3D as well as in 3D, and are in continual if not necessarily conscious connection to it. you as human being consist of uncounted connections to non-3D filaments shared with other humans. You as human being are tied to all others in ways seen and (mostly) unseen from before you are born to after you die to 3D.

To treat another human as a thing is to treat a part of yourself as dead.

Sin, remember, is defined as “missing the mark.” Basically it is error. Error unconsciously persisted in is error compounded. Error persisted in despite the knowledge that it is error is worse than error compounded, it is a wrong turning chosen.

Sometimes sin is merely or mostly error; sometimes it is the deliberate choice to do evil.

Now let’s not get lost in abstract theoretical discussion of evil. You know evil when you see it, even if no two people’s definitions match. It is not about definition but about knowing. We repeat, you know evil when you see it. This, even though it is often true that you may mistake for evil something that is merely undesirable or repugnant or forbidden, as we discussed earlier. The fact that you may mistakenly judge something to be evil does not mean evil does not exist. This should by now be obvious.

Well, in considering what happens when people are treated as things, there are two aspects to look at: what it does to the subject and what it does to the person made object.

It dehumanizes the person being considered as an object.

Clearly. But suppose that person never becomes aware of being treated as an object?

Is that possible?

Of course it is. Are you aware of most of what goes on around you? Our point is that the damage is done, seen or unseen. Think of the physical trauma that persists beyond lifetimes and into new lifetimes! All this acts as a drag on that person  and everyone that person connects to and interacts with. Considered in non-3D as well as 3D, the results are incalculable, literally. And this is without respect to the deadening that occurred in the one doing the damage.

Jesus! What price sociopaths?

Precisely. Now, you may argue all you want in terms of how to define evil. Still, evil exists. And if putting drag on the entire human race rather than aiding self and others does not count as evil, we don’t know a better example.

I think this is the first session where you went extensively into an argument [not transcribed] and then abandoned it.

We won’t obsess over it if you won’t. We have been saying from the beginning that we are not all-knowing or all-anything, any more than you. Even mistakes have their value in showing you something that doesn’t work.

Have you said what you want to say about the evil of treating a person as a thing?

What we have to say on the subject is implied in what we did say. Some time investigating it, pondering it, reflecting over it with your lunar mind, so to speak, will prove productive.

Okay, then. Our thanks as always.

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.