TGU, our strands, and us

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

9:20 AM. Startling thought. The guys upstairs are at least partly the same as my own strands. Though this isn’t as clearly stated as the way it came to me. (I was getting out of the shower. If I didn’t take showers, sometimes I think I’d never have any of these insights!) Guys?

You noticed how our latest piece reflected many things you knew such as Nazi psychology, historical knowledge you have long since assimilated. Suddenly – “from nowhere” – came the realization that a bunch of stuff in RAM is a bunch of stuff in RAM.

Yes, and then I realized, of course everybody has their guys upstairs. And of course the guys use whatever we know. And of course it can be hard to tell what is “them” and what is bleed-through from our so-called normal life. There isn’t any such interaction of units. It’s an interaction of elements.

To put it plainer, if I may – it isn’t as though the guys were separate entities that we are interfacing with.

And it isn’t as though there is any absolute separation between mental input from any one source or the other. A clue that I missed is that the mind is entirely non-physical.

That’s right. Therefore the unconscious idea you all have of ideas being “yours” or “not yours” is as wrong as the idea that your mind is confined to your brain, hence to your head.

There are at least two kinds of guys upstairs: what seem to us to be past lives – strands – and others.

Superficial analysis. You can do better.

I can’t just act as amanuensis?

If you prefer. But we will say again, it is easier on you, and results in a smoother flow of information, if you take a more active role in shaping the information. This is your normal flow in life, after all.

Well, all right. I rely on you to chime in when I miss something, or mis-state, or misinterpret.

You may rely on it.

We have, what?

  • Strands made of past lives.
  • Strands of affinity emotionally.
  • Similar strands of affinity through temperament, occupation (accustomed routine, anyway), hobbies, talents, etc.

Apparently some strands are our actual physical heredity, back from our parents seven generations.

We provided you with the chart long ago.

True. I’d forgotten to look at it. I have it – it should be part of chapter 1 in the book – and I’ll append it when I send this out. I see that you gave it to me July 3, 2007 – more than three years ago, but I didn’t draw the connection till now. It’s the old “can’t understand A until you understand B, but …” again. Okay, so add past associates.

Well, look at that chart a little more closely. What look impersonal really aren’t. They are gateways. Each form of non-physical heredity listed connects to people. That’s where your (shall we call us) more remote connections come from.

But regardless who or what the influence is, the mechanism is the same.

It can be no other way: You hold it in RAM and associate it with what else you hold. However, that process doesn’t occur in isolation. It has context, and the context shapes it. But we’ll talk of this another time.

You’re stacking up “to be continued” items, here.

Yes, and you’re beginning to notice, finally.

Touché.

 

One thought on “TGU, our strands, and us

  1. This is another of those breakthrough posts for me. It dovetails with exactly what I’m grappling with from another perspective (I’ve been dwelling on bots). In fact, I did a chart yesterday trying to trace, from the “real” world, my reaction to things and how that triggers bots (who may be even unwilling to engage in old reactive ways), rather than always thinking bots jump in with their fear responses they “force” on us, and we’ve got to subdue or redirect them.

    Your chart reminds me that there’s never a time that all of these things are not connected (or even merged), reacting (or not) to all that’s going on, and that these resources come from our own lived (emotional) associations–“It can be no other way…” So, for one thing, I can’t separate any of these things from me (in order to ‘demonize’ or ‘blame’ them). In other words, there’s not a bot over there trying to ‘make’ me yell at my brother or my cats; it’s all ‘me.’ Lol. This is all probably pretty basic for the rest of you, but for me, it’s fireworks. I love the chart.

    Also, really important to me, the idea is more of a reality now–that we’re never ‘separated’ from guidance. It’s there 24/7, not requiring our focus or attention or request to be there. It can be no other way.

    Again, thanks for letting us see the development of your understanding so that it can inform ours, leading to our own expansion. What could be more important?

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.