Wednesday, June 16, 2021
5:45 a.m. To continue –?
In what sense can it be true that “the times” call forth – that they “constellate” – you? If the exterior were a different thing than the interior, such connection could only be a mystical concept – a mysterious affinity at best. But if outer and inner are the same thing experienced differently, then of course the one will be connected to the other: It is the other. Thus our insistence on calling the “external” world the shared subjectivity, to ease you out of the habit of thinking of outer and inner as separate things.
From what we have said, you should see that “the times” always have unfinished business. Another way to see that would be, everything that has gone on up to any given present moment will amount to an imbalance of energies, automatically calling out for a rebalancing. You understand, this is not a simple matter of any one scale of things. It is not merely X and Y on a scale, but millions of X-Y scales, for, you know, life is complex. How could a complex thing be represented by a simple polarity, or even a few polarities? There are millions of them, uncountable numbers of different polarities, some slightly different from each other, some radically different. Or, you might say, everything shades off into something slightly different, and each different polarity is a scale in itself. You can see that bringing everything into balance would be scarcely possible. Neither would it be desirable. The 3D universe was not created to be in balance, but to automatically correct toward balance. It is, you might say, perpetually rebalancing. And your lives – our lives – are the agents that unbalance and rebalance it, by continual 3D decisions.
That’s very clear as a concept, at least at the moment. Not sure how easy it will be to ground it in our lives as we perceive them.
That is what we are attempting to do. You will concede, a tremendous amount of background must be sketched so that people may understand – and this is much more background-sketching than most people will sit still for. That’s why this knowledge is not available on every street corner. That’s why it has to be packaged as fable and in distorted form, not out of an intent to confuse or mislead, but just the opposite, out of an intent to give people at least something they can live, regardless that they cannot understand the real reasons behind the admonitions.
Religions, you mean.
Also fairy tales, folk wisdom, myths, creative stories, intuitions, rituals, you name it. You may regard 3D life as being continually haunted, shadowed, accompanied, by non-3D forces attempting to give you the word, even though you don’t know the language.
So. Life proceeds, and at every point the enormous – and vastly complex and differentiated – imbalances create opportunities for new 3D creatures. Each moment’s opportunities vary from the previous moment’s. Not radically, perhaps (though, occasionally, they may be), but at least slightly. That is to say, every moment is more opportune for certain combinations of traits than others, and so new 3D beings are molded in their possibilities. Or, well you say it, if you can.
Yes, I got that “molded” wasn’t right. You are describing an influence, a bias, almost a statistical trend, rather than any heavy-handed intervention one by one.
Yes. That’s correct. Some things are more “in tune” with the times than are others. This is not by chance and it not by someone’s arbitrary decision and is not by some pre-determined necessity. It is more as you put it, a bias, a subtle preference that might be observed statically, if the statistician happened to have the data.
And – I get – it may look like any of these things: chance, will, law.
Yes, of course. And anyone with a mental bias in any of these directions will find ample evidence supporting that way of seeing things. Only, as we say, it is deeper and more subtle than any of these.
All right. And –?
Well, you see, “the times” need you, or you would not have been able to incarnate. Perhaps a slightly different combination would have been, but your particular combination would not have been.
Let’s accept that as a working hypothesis. I’m not sure you could prove it.
We couldn’t prove any of it. We couldn’t prove anything about anything. We aren’t in the proof business, but the pointing business. It is up to each of you to look where we are pointing, and see whatever you can see. The only thing we can do is to provide you the best view possible.
“You do the best you can.”
That is as much as anyone can do.
Now in the picture we have just sketched, perhaps you can see some of the implications:
- Everyone is special in that everyone comes into 3D existence as a result of an existing imbalance.
- The 3D world obviously does not consist of “important” people and “unimportant” people.
- External events do not proceed without consequences, and those consequences always include the types of people who can come in, in their wake.
- Millions of people may seem to be identical and interchangeable, but in fact each is slightly or significantly different, and these differences may be invisible from one angle of viewing and very obvious from another angle.
- It is thus true that the 3D world is trending toward something – and also that it exists for its own sake. Contradictory ways of seeing life, both somewhat true, neither the only way to see it.
I get the feeling there was more, only I went wool-gathering.
These implications by themselves should be quite enough, when associated with what else we have been saying these past few years, to give you a far more sophisticated view of life. Life – reality – is not simple, let alone simplistic; it is not arbitrary, nor unfair, nor disconnected, nor meaningless. Your lives – our lives, we remind you – are not pinballs being hit by malevolent or mischievous or sleepwalking forces. You are not accidents, you are not being punished, you are not subject of arbitrary codes of behavior, you will not be faced with a final exam or a court of justice.
That’s quite a list of “nots” but perhaps worth providing, given how much incorrect information has become encoded in your society’s assumptions. (And by “your society” we mean any society. Which society do you suppose can see life in its full complexity?)
So then, this being said, what can we say positively about life and reality, keeping in mind that we are working toward hints as to your lives after you shed the 3D body and resume your underlying relation to your larger being?
I get that it will have to touch on two things together that we usually consider separate.
Correct.
- What did you do in your 3D life? That is, what effect did you have on 3D life around you? On others, on your surroundings, perhaps on your culture.
- And what did you do to change who you are/were/will continue as? Your choices affect you as subject, quite as much as they did you as part of the shared subjectivity you experienced as “external.”
- And, perhaps less obviously, what is/was/will be the interaction between the two kinds of effects? How did changing you change others? How did changing the shared subjectivity in time change you?
And this – particularly the last point – will serve as our jumping-off place next time.
I see. Impressive. Thanks for all of it.