Communication with non-3D: Three factors

Sunday, May 1, 2022

6:40 a.m. I don’t remember where we left off, what loose ends we left strewn about, but I will assume that you will know. I set my switches for maximum focus, receptivity, clarity, presence, and – over to you.

“And,” (you think, on another channel) “there went one-third of 2022 already.”

Well, it is pretty amazing, no matter how usual it has become, to see how fast time flies as I get older. I feel the opposite of rushed or overwhelmed, so you’d think sometimes the time would hang heavy, but it doesn’t.

But you don’t really want to talk about the paradoxical nature of time as experienced in 3D.

You lead, I’ll follow.

Your conversation yesterday [about information received in the old Explorers program at TMI] reminded you that different interlocutors got different pictures of reality, and it has finally hit home to you that ultimately there is no reconciling different experience, and no need to reconcile. Each window into reality being different, each portrait-painter is going to produce a different report. Even if the reporters were identical, which could not happen, the reports would differ.

Bullets?

Why not? We’ll see where it leads. Any report consists of three variables:

• The non-3D respondents
• The 3D inquisitor
• “The times,” as you call it

The pitcher, the catcher, and the baseball, I would have thought, but “the times” doesn’t fit, so I guess I’m on the wrong track. Proceed.

Remember always that “the times” determines what may be or may not be able to pass into 3D consciousness, except that “3D consciousness” itself needs to be defined, so let’s begin there.

We have described, or let’s say, have roughly sketched, the composition and functioning of the mind in 3D. No need to repeat that here. But one aspect that may easily be lost sight of is that it changes, moment by moment. Yes, you are the same mind – but no, that mind is not unchanging. Every 3D and non-3D stimulus alters the balance and in effect changes what it can manifest and experience. That being so, how can it be regarded as unchanging between experiences?

It is the nature of consciousness to seem to fluctuate, for  what is consciousness but a reflection of what it is conscious of? Yes, consciousness is more than what it registers; nonetheless, given that its 3D and non-3D perceptions and elements are continuously fluctuating, how can consciousness itself not fluctuate? So now, you see, it itself (being active, not merely a passive recipient) is an element in the equation.

Did I botch that last? I got distracted.

No, close enough. The three elements:

• The non-3D – “the guys upstairs,” or Seth, or Cayce’s source, or however the non-3D is experienced and interpreted by the 3D interlocutor, itself changes. You under-appreciate this. Casual thought says, “The non-3D doesn’t change” in the same way it says, “On the other side, there is no time.” If the non-3D had no change, what kind of immortality would that be? What would be the point of 3D, which is dependent upon non-3D, being of its substance? What exactly are we supposed to do with ourselves in an eternal stasis? Therefore, recognize, the answer you get today may differ – is very likely to differ – from the answer you got yesterday or may get tomorrow. This doesn’t mean anybody is lying, or fantasizing. It means, different moments shape the same truth differently. You might want to mark this as something to look at in greater detail at another time.
• The 3D. In this case, you, whatever “you” any present moment brings to the table. The fact that your particular qualities will flavor the conversation is a concept now familiar to you. But we’re inviting you to realize that the fact that different aspects of you manifest, means that different aspects of us You sort of know this and you sort of haven’t fully realized it. You know that when you contact Hemingway, you are likely to contact only those aspects of him that are within your range, and another person, contacting him with the same openness and integrity, will experience someone only somewhat similar to what you experienced. But realize fully, the same restriction applies when you set out to understand anything. Be it the nature of the universe, or the price of eggs (so to speak), who asks it is going to affect who answers and what the answer is.

“Which you,” as you keep asking.

Yes. Remember, it’s all mind-stuff. We keep telling you that. That means, as one result, that it is always more flexible, less susceptible to firm definition, than you would like or would expect.

And this means,

• “The times” are the result of a relationship between non-3D and 3D. It is the net on the tennis court, through that is in many ways a bad analogy. “The times” have been called the zeitgeist by philosophers seeking to express something intangible but real; something with discernible effects that is not itself observable.

This is going to be the hardest to get across, isn’t it?

Probably. It is taking something that is commonly seen as inert, and recognizing it as a catalyst.

That’s a nice vivid analogy. It may strike sparks.

A different analogy might involve the three necessities for fire.

I’m blanking. I suppose you know, but I don’t. [Transcribing this, I remember: heat, fuel and oxygen.]

Let us skip to our point: One of the necessities of communication between 3D and non-3D is always present and therefore is functionally invisible. That is time, or timing, or the unfinished business (that is, the pool of available resources) of the shared subjectivity. If you are not precisely the same being, one day to the next, and you don’t encounter precisely the same mixture of non-3D elements, one day to the next, what is it but “the times” that determines the bounds of the changes?

In practice, it is we in 3D who change, and our changes determine who and what in non-3D we can contact.

That is a perfectly acceptable way to look at it. But not the only way. It is 3D-centric, to coin a phrase. From our point of view, we are unmoving (in a way) and so are adjusting, to relate to a moving target. That is the converse of the view you just expressed. But there is a different way to see it, which is that we are not unaffected by the passage of time (though not in the same way you are frog-marched moment by moment), and therefore we could be seen as moving, no less than you.

That’s pretty vague. If you aren’t being frog-marched by the ever-moving living present moment, what moves you?

Hmm. Longer subject. 3D time is experienced according to the movement of your planet through space. Every new moment is actually an experience of the quality of the place your planet is moving you through. You intuited this long ago. Non-3D time does not exist under those same constraints, of course – how could it? – except in relation to 3D. As we told you long ago, you are a moving target we must continually track if we are to remain in contact. That can look to you like we are moving, or anyway changing, in ways you are accustomed to as 3D motion.

But non-3D time results not from our being dragged through a medium that presents different aspects moment by moment, but from “the times” calling forth this or that quality.

Not even slightly clear to me.

No. Let’s pause here and begin right here next time. Bear in mind, “next time” means you in 3D will be in a different place, literally. The earth will not be in the same space. Neither will you be in the same place mentally, necessarily.

So it may open new doors for us.

You will have often experienced something unclear one moment, clear later. That is why some people are in the habit of “sleeping on it” when they have a decision to make. It is not only that this gives 3D and non-3D mind time to sync, but that’s what it amounts to.

Today’s theme could be titled –?

How about, “’The times’ as a player”?

Well, I’ll think of something. Looking forward to continuing this. Our thanks, as always.