Wednesday, September 14, 2022
3 a.m. First Life and endless revision? That’s where you said we’d pick up.
But you are already tired.
I am, but lying on the bed isn’t going to help anything, and this may at least get us a little farther along.
You will need to be extremely present.
Let’s try, anyway.
You found yesterday’s point clarifying.
Extremely so. It was like the sun rising, suddenly showing spatial relationships among many things that had been experienced separately.
And the key was – ?
Maybe it was your clarification of the word “insubstantial,” but looking back, it was the whole discussion, really. I saw what is wrong with our lives and what is right with them. If we think of our lives in terms of sequential 3D development, we attach concepts like permanent, leaving, definite, single-version, past lives, all manner of things.
To clarify for yourself and for others, set out your understanding, not worrying over the fact that it cannot be a final report. (Not that there ever could be a final report!)
I’m seeing it this way.
- A group of elements is inserted into a moment of time-space to live a 3D life together. This may be what the Egyptians meant by First Life.
- All during that life, the individual that is also a community chooses and learns from its reaction to past choices. Its first-tier choices are fixed, its second-tier choices perhaps fluctuating.
- At the end of that life, you have a permanent mind that hadn’t existed before. This is from a 3D perspective, though.
- From a non-3D perspective, the same three elements look quite different, because nothing is set in stone in any way.
See if you can make that last point clearer.
What looks like sequence to 3D – birth, life, death – to the non-3D look like not so much sequence as existence, as maintenance, as continuity. You can do this better, I think.
In 3D the sequence seems to proceed from past to present to future. From non-3D one sees that each of these moments does not cease to exist; therefore all parts are alive and (sort of a nonsense statement in non-3D terms, but) continue to be alive. Nothing replaces; it sets up next to the previous, as we mentioned many years ago, in passing.
And this means our ideas about life and death and afterlife are skewed by invisible links to 3D experiencing things as successions of replaced moments. We got that, in terms of past lives, but it was only yesterday that I got it in terms of everyday moments.
The Egyptians saw a distinction, you see. Succeeding civilizations mistook the Egyptian perception for obsession with death and the afterlife, and no doubt this was true as the centuries passed and superstition supplanted understanding, as it does over time. But what ended as superstition – that is, as repetition of actions after understanding of the meaning of the actions (the context) had been lost – did not begin as superstition, but as sophisticated understanding.
The Egyptians, like any hierarchy of knowledge – like we ourselves in this context – faced the usual difficulty of attempting to transmit non-3D understandings while using sequential 3D symbols in 3D time. It’s very difficult! Given the passage of enough time, distortion is guaranteed to enter in; superstition is guaranteed to replace understanding, usually a little bit at a time, but always in the direction of greater distortion.
I get that hieroglyphics had some kind of advantage over script, in that regard, and maybe that’s one reason they did so well over so long a period of time.
Yes, but in the larger scheme of things, one can only do so much to overcome the erosion of millions of seconds, billions of understandings, trillions of semi-comprehensions.
Odd the priesthoods, that work so hard to fight the encroachment of superstition, become blamed for the success of what they attempt to stem.
If you are charged with holding back the waters, there is rough justice in holding you responsible for floods, even though of course it was not you who brought the rainfall.
I suppose if they don’t have the active assistance of non-3D sources, they succumb pretty quickly, given that whatever they have learned, they still must maintain while living a 3D life that argues otherwise.
Why do you think priesthoods depend so heavily upon prayer and meditation? Until prayer becomes rote and meditation becomes stylized and in fact bounded, they help the priest maintain the link. And of course that is why other strictures upon them. But this is peripheral to today’s point.
The key for you yesterday – that you have forgotten, oddly, even in writing it down at the beginning – is that your 3D lives are never finished. There is never a final version. That isn’t what life is about. There is First Life, for each of you, and then the living of endless permutations of that life.
- Every decision anyone makes changes the person and reverberates along the threads to all who connect to it.
- Each other person, the same, and, you will remember, it is this endless interlinking that leads us to say that there is only one Individuals are relative and fractal, never absolute with solid boundaries.
- With everyone continually changing, there is no “final version” of anyone’s life. Those lives are – alive! They change, they grow, they express different characteristics, they affect each other, continuously.
- The better you did with your First Life, the better a platform you have. It isn’t exactly an “afterlife.” It is a revision process.
Revision, though, sounds like movement from less good to better. Is that what you mean?
How could it be? Who can get outside totality to judge better or worse? And what relevance has the apple in the garden, when you are considering all life?
- That’s another thing, by the way. This does not consider humans (or ex-humans) alone. The other kingdoms are mind-stuff too, and the more you take that into account, the better chance you will have of better understanding things. This is not a morality play; it is a light show.
Now, we aren’t able to translate Egypt’s understanding into your time’s mind-set. Even if we were able to do so, which version? No civilization persists for thousands of years without its understandings changing, for better and for worse. Think how America’s has changed, so many times, in only 500 years.
But you are using Egypt sort of as a shining example.
You won’t get there by scholarship, but you might, by meditation and open-concept feeling.
Say again?
We mean, take a fact or a photo or a remembered story and sit with it, not attempting to remember but to attune.
Is that what I was doing in Egypt in 2019?
You tell us. You held your hands near to – not touching – the carved stone walls, and felt the inaudible buzz, so to speak. You didn’t know why you did it; you longed to be able to read the hieroglyphs, indeed irrationally you felt you ought to be able to read them, and nothing you had ever read or heard suggested there could be benefit from attuning with the stone in the way you did. You were listening to an impulse that said to do so. You did not get much of what was said in each place, but we would hardly say you came away having wasted your time.
So today’s theme, “Egypt and us”?
More like, “Hints from the Egyptians.” It is only hints, at this point, but there’s a good deal of progress possible. Next time we will continue on the theme of endless revision, as we haven’t really spelled it out yet. And we remind you, you intended (where would you have gotten this idea?) to ask for questions and comments, as that will help us see what we have not get succeeded in sketching.
By now it’s a formula, but it is no less true for that: Our thanks for all this, as always.