Continuity in form and pattern

Friday, December 4, 2020

5:20 a.m. This email from Bob Washburne came more than three weeks ago. It is in two parts, the second of which perhaps we can address at another time. Guys, do you have anything to say about this interesting question?

[Bob Washburne 11-16-2020

[I have purchased and read all of your non-fiction books….  While trying to get my head around it all, I came up with a question for which I don’t see an obvious answer. Several times TGU tells us that the body is more of a colony than a unit with all of the major organs having their own minds and consciousness. I took this literally rather than allegorically – that the liver has its own mind and consciousness. But if that is the case, where does the liver go when the body dies?  Or the individual liver cells who each have their own minds and consciousness?  I am having trouble applying “As above, so below” to this one as the body per se doesn’t appear to extend beyond the lower astral.]

We do, as it happens. As you know, this is the kind of response we would encourage: He read, he pondered, he tried drawing inferences, and, failing to find a satisfying answer, he asks for clarification.

Yes. Rita’s method.

Hence your transient importance. While you are here, he can ask you to ask us. When you are not here, finding a source of connection may not be obvious, like someone seeking clarification from Seth, say. The information is still there; potential access is still there; plenty of people will be able to access the material both from your point of view and independently. But the question will be, How do you know who to listen to?

And the answer will be, you’ll just have to decide for yourself.

A more careful answer will be, “Righteous persistence brings reward.” It will be up to each one to hone the skill, just as it was for you. You did not learn to ape Cayce. You do not contact Seth, as far as you know. (We don’t mean, by that, that you are contacting Seth unknowingly, but that you are not reaching specifically for that particular source.) You developed your abilities, which often feels like “not doing it right” until you find your feet. You tapped into sources of information suited to your interests, your emotional and mental processes, your known and unknown connections. Things that are easy for you will be hard for others. Things impossible for you will be possible, even easy, for others. There is nothing new in this; it is always that way. Perhaps Swedenborg wouldn’t have found it easy to channel musicals, let’s put it that way.

This amounts to saying, we are all important, all unique, and at the same time all limited, all dispensable.

Isn’t that your experience of life? Only, “dispensable” doesn’t in this context amount to “throwaway.” It means, nobody’s absence will cause the world to come to a halt.

Understood. So about the question specifically?

Applying “As above, so below” is exactly the approach to take here. The difficulty is to find the proper analogy.

I immediately thought, “Trees, animals, any form of consciousness not individuated like our level.”

Yes. Just as any particular maple tree may be regarded as one cell of a larger thought-form known as Maple Tree, so with livers or kidneys or lungs. And this leads to some interesting information we have never wandered into, if you want to hear it.

We do, of course. And in passing I would say (as I suppose we must have said before) that this sounds like Plato’s Ideal forms.

It should.

Now remember, we are looking at the world not as dead (or even living) “matter,” that is, as chunks of things sitting in space interacting, but as concretized thought. If you keep that in mind, many things change. A tree, a brain cell, a bacillus, is real; it exists. It is not a figment of your imagination, but is as real as you are (which, we remind you, is “only somewhat” real). As real, but not necessarily real in the same guise as you.

In other words, it would be a mistake to think that an individual maple tree or liver or liver cell had an individual destiny.

The only reason we would hesitate to agree with that statement is because of the second half, not the first. Your own destinies are not exactly “individual” in the way you are thinking. But subject to that caveat, yes, we agree. The pattern of slowed-down energy that is a liver does not need to (nor can it) evolve. When the 3D body dissolves, as when the tree is chopped down or dies of some infestation, the energy is released. The pattern continues to exist as pattern, and thus shapes future livers or maple trees, but the specific consciousness that the liver or the tree exhibited during life is not bound to repeat as a “more evolved” liver or tree. It is not bound to continue a genetic or a non-3D line, any more than the atoms and molecules and tissues that constitute your bodies are bound to continue in your genetic line. How could they, when your 3D body at any given moment consists of material borrowed for the moment?

Meaning, I take it, that our bodies continually shed cells, acquire cells.

Continuity is in form, in pattern, not in the same old cells proceeding on together.

So, you see, you as an individual are real in one sense, only an abstraction in another. You are permanent in pattern, temporary as manifestation. You can be considered as the holder-together of all the elements that go into your 3D life – physical, mental, personal, impersonal – and at the same time as only temporary from the 3D viewpoint. Your fingernails are not immortal as fingernails. There is no non-3D museum displaying them as relics or examples of you. Just as the physical atoms served and moved on, so the archetype itself may be said to have served as pattern but not been enmeshed in the specific creation. How does a blueprint become a part of the structure it shapes and describes? It doesn’t. The blueprint as blueprint remains in being, but no matter how essential it was to the creation of the thing, it is separate because it is of a different order of things.

You could almost say the cel is not the cartoon. Absurd comparison, but since it came to me, I throw it in.

Let’s say the cel, and the entire construction of the cartoon, is not the same as the projected image, but yes, we agree.

So then the swirl of consciousness that is someone’s liver is a manifestation of a pattern, produced for the occasion and dissolved afterwards.

There’s a little distortion there, but not enough to worry about at the moment.

BTW I questioned Bob’s use of the word “colony” but decided it is a minor quibble.

Welcome to our reality. We are always doing that, deciding which slight misconception needs to be cleared up and which can be slurred over for the sake of making a different point. Nothing wrong with it, that’s just the process, and the closer you look, the wider you will see the examples of it, in 3D as well as non-3D. No, you aren’t a colony as much as a construction. But it is a minor point.

I was intrigued by your saying that this could lead to more interesting information. I suppose we are out of time to even hint at it?

Mostly yes.

A hint, even? A bread-crumb for next time?

All layers of reality exist equally but do not exist in the same way. Hornblower is real in the sense of a mental archetype but not in the sense of a physically existing 3D human. Isn’t now, never was. He was created (or perhaps we should say abstracted) by a 3D creator-being named C.S. Forester. Who created Forester, who lived at another level of being?

That’s a hint, only, and that is enough for the moment.

Hmm. Well, to be continued, I guess. Thanks for all this.

4 thoughts on “Continuity in form and pattern

  1. Thank you so much for all this amazing work you all do, to further our understanding of a subject/concept not easy grasped, in such a non-fuzzy, clear way.
    I have a few small question:
    1)As the human form exists as a permanent perfect pattern /blueprint used for all manifestations of humans, how and when do the actual temporary manifestations pick up all their deformities they born with, illnesses and so forth?
    For example: does the non 3D ‘community’ say: “Lets try that experience, find the parents, culture , timeline, set up the abnormality, focus in the body and see how the personality develops and how it can change/adjust our understanding?’
    2) If we, as physical manifestations, are experiencing for the 3D ‘community’ to expand, did ‘I’ have a say in this?
    3)Do I make the daily choices from my local consciousness or not really? 4) Was ‘I’ just a spark of consciousness with no prior awareness (personality) before conception into this physical life experience and the personality awareness is the outcome which expands the infinite?
    If these questions have been addressed somewhere could could please guide me in the direction? Thank you very much

    1. Hi Frank,

      Thank you for your answer and offer. I just arrived during my current reading to a point where Q4 seems to be answered by Rita saying “you, remember, won’t have existed before. That is, the newly born 3D mind insofar, as it is functioning independently, has never experienced any of it”. I also realized that I need to sit with each subject/point a little longer, even when I think I got this, and ponder. Thank you, Inge

        1. Thank you Frank,

          A question came up last night, in a zoom group, and it is a repeated question people struggle with. Free Will and choices as a 3D personality!
          Mostly the example given by Non3D is that the total planning is completed by the non 3D part before the spark starts in the physical timeline to create a personality. That implies that we just follow a pre-planned path and people do very often struggle with that explanation. Rita commented somewhere that we are puppets as well as the puppeteer which feeds into this understanding as well. 1) Last night the example was given by Non 3D:” you as an author plan and write a book about yourself in detail, then you publish it and no changes are made to the character’s experience as people read it and follow the character’s life chapter by chapter. We, from a Non 3D perspective outside your timeline, can assess this book in any chapter and see what happens, while you as the character live through all the chapters in a sequence.”
          2) Then on awakening this morning, another story played: ‘ Director (Non 3D) and Actor A (3D part) wrote a script together. The actor A (3D) follows the script and the director (non 3D) provides cues via headphones. The actor A forgets his lines and starts to make them up and doesn’t listen to guidance from the headphones. So the Director inspires another actor (B) to say certain words or complete certain actions to bring actor A back to script. ‘ That would imply actor A has free choices to make, while the Book character didn’t. I am sure their are many more perspectives to look at it, but I wonder what is the answer, or are both correct and I just don’t get it? The simple question would be: did we plan, were born, forgot the plan and now just run along unconsciously following the plan? Just another pondering.

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.