Wednesday, July 21, 2021
1:15 a.m. So, my friends. I suppose I ought to include yesterday’s brief conversation, and my dream. I will decide whether to do so when I come to transcribe this. But in any case, let’s begin with questions Mr. Kornilov asked after seeing your statements of Monday. His email shows good understanding in general, I think.
[Received 7-20-2021, 6:33 a.m.
(1) [Frank… I was overwhelmed with emotions when I read the piece, so it took time to settle… I understand that, perhaps, that was my ego’s reaction, which felt kind of glorified by being involved in communication with the TGU. But still, on a deeper level I was moved… We all have that theoretical knowledge that we are all one, but to me this message is an example of how it practically works, and a call to try accessing the Guys on my own.
(2) [And, of course, their explanation and the advice helped me to look at the problem from a completely different angle. The general understanding I got from reading the text is that I should accept magic as an ordinary though often unnoticed part of our everyday life, and treat it like all other things, be it positive or negative. And that is what the TGU meant by “removing it off its pedestal” – it shouldn’t be seen as a bigger trouble compared to other daily troubles.
(3) [However, I struggle a bit with the part where you and them say that this was an experience of an interaction between my 3-D conscious self with the non-3D rejected (?) parts of the self. Does that mean that magic was part of my other 3-D lifetimes and is being brought to my awareness in this current lifetime because it resonates to a certain sector of collective consciousness (or subjectivity)? And is shared subjectivity the same as collective subjectivity, collective consciousness, or am I confusing the terms?
(4) [Once again, thank you for posing my question to the Guys, though I’m a bit curious: it seems that they themselves chose the appropriate moment to elaborate on the topic. Does that mean they had already been aware of the question by the time I e-mailed it to you?]
Your response?
We begin with the paragraph you have numbered as four, because simply dealt with. Yes, we chose the moment. But that may not mean quite what he may think it means. We’d put it this way: We became aware of the email when you did; we suggested responding to it when the general discussion and his specific questions formed an easy link. “The times” made it appropriate to segue from one topic to another, you might say. Nothing extraordinary about it, and nothing particularly noteworthy. We do it all the time, and so do each of you. There are reasons why thoughts and associations well up within you: “The times” and your personal consciousness produce moments of convergence.
I think you mean to say, our own mental world and the possibilities raised by the specific moment allow thoughts or associations to surface, in the same way our personal world and the “external world” come together to allow certain combinations of strands to be born as 3D babies.
Yes, that’s our thought, but we considered that we had expressed it. In any case, yes, that’s it.
But there’ no reason to assume that you knew of his question before I did.
That could happen; sometimes does. But it is hardly necessary, in that these conversations are a cooperative effort. We prefer to work with you on things you are consciously aware of; it’s far easier and allows discussion in greater depth.
Paragraph three is a misinterpretation. It is more correct to describe the interaction as between the self one is conscious of, and the parts of self one is not (yet) conscious of. The parts not recognized may have been rejected, but they equally may have been unnoticed, or not yet encountered. In this we are again reminding you that 3D life is not what it seems. It is a continuing interaction of the inner world you identify with and the “external” world (that may seem entirely alien to you) that we are calling the shared subjectivity, to remind you that the “external” world is not “things in space” – material somehow external and dead – but is mind-stuff like you, only collective and not merely individual. What you experience of the “external” world is what you connect to via your own known or unknown extensions beyond the familiar individual mental world you live.
Thus, what we said does not predict whether you did or didn’t have connections with magic in other lifetimes. All we know is that the subject is alive o you in this 3D lifetime for some reason, and therefore manifests as “external” things that catch your attention. You can probably attain greater clarity on the subject by careful unemotional meditation on the question of why and in what way magic affects your present life.
We trust that you now see that shared subjectivity = external 3D and non-3D world. Collective consciousness is closer to a description of the shared mental world rather than the shared mental and physical world, but perhaps this is only adding to confusion to address it.
Your understanding expressed in paragraph two is generally correct. In general, removing something from its pedestal means merely, see it as it is, don’t see it through a mist of awe, nor of detestation nor fear.
And finally, your first paragraph is exactly right. We are pleased that you see that it amounts to our saying, you have access to your own sources, specifically tailored for your use. Use them.
Again, productive questions that should be helpful to many.
Then shall we continue with the question of control and the surrendering of control?
It would be a better use of your time and energies to transcribe yesterday’s brief interactions, including the dream.
Which was followed by my receiving Dmitri’s email. Okay.
[Tuesday, July 20, 2021
[2:35 a.m. Controlling, and surrendering control. A dance, you said, with its own rhythm. Learning through joy rather than through pain. You said there is more to be said on the subject – but then you immediately hared off onto the subject of magic.
[The discussion had led you to just the right place to hear about magic as an interface between individual and shared subjectivity. And indeed there is more to be said – after you get a little more sleep.
[If I can. It will be welcome. I certainly am tired.
[3:15. Trying again. Can we first get rid of the pain? {Back pain was preventing me from sleeping.}
[You know what to do, do it. First, concentrate on the pain as if you want it to fill your consciousness. Then, in this case, since you know you don’t know why you hurt, you can’t merely explain to the body that you know what’s going on, and don’t need the pain. If you were interested in the “why” at the moment, this would be the time to ask.
It isn’t that I’m not interested, but that I get no answers, so have to move on.
The next step, as you well know, is to request that the volume of pain be dialed way back, so that you don’t forget that there may be a problem to address, but still are left okay to work or sleep.
[This worked.]
[5:30 a.m. For a while, I dreamed, thinking I was awake, thinking I was writing it down. All lost now, if there was anything to lose. I guess we don’t do a session today.
[6:10 a.m. A long dream, the punch line of which is that they ask us how we found them and I say, rightly, “We didn’t. We got lost too.” The boy was mentally handicapped, they were wandering around in the woods or somewhere. We – whoever “we” were – came across them not knowing about them (in other words, our finding them had nothing to do with having looked for them) and as we made our way back, to a city of some sort, perhaps in England, we naturally brought them with us. The older couple was very grateful. The mentally handicapped boy – a man chronologically – had become very attached to us. He wanted to know if he was going to see us again, or really I think he couldn’t understand that we were going to separate, until we were at the point of doing so, then he asked me if he’d see us again tomorrow, and I said I didn’t know. The mother said again, she didn’t know how we had found them, and I said again that we didn’t, that we got lost ourselves, which was true if you looked at thing a certain way.
[Somehow associating this with “Something’s Gotta Give,” watched last night.
[It feels like the dream refers to my life and its effects on some others who have profited from TGU’s advice and, perhaps, my example.
[2:35 p.m. Just climbed upstairs after having some lunch and some The Great Bridge, and realized, nothing is hurting. When my back stopped hurting, I didn’t notice.]
Little needs to be said. It is all examples of things you can do to have life more abundantly. Theory, health, dreams, discussions, “stray” thoughts – it all works together for good, only it works better, the more you actively cooperate.
And that is enough for now. The time saved from our discussion [this was at the 45 minute point] will be eaten up by transcription, and it isn’t worth overworking you. We can still get to control and surrender.
All right, well, thanks for all this, as usual. Till next time.