let’s consider your lives as you know them. In all their infinite variety, still they have patterns common to all. No need to enumerate them, you know life. But for the moment, concentrate on your internal life. When the morning’s energies flow though you, how do they flow? Do they flow through unshaped space?
I think you are meaning some illustrative images, like wind flowing across a field, unobstructed; or funneling through terrain, perhaps through and between trees, or being channeled down the streets of Manhattan, or blowing into windows on one side of a house, blowing through and emerging on the other side, things like that.
Yes only more intricate, more obstructed, more convoluted, and at the same time under less pressure and more pressure.
Harder to find an image for that. [Pause] All right, the analogy came to me, but I think it will end up causing us some confusion of ideas. Instead of wind, let’s think of the forces as electricity moving through a neural net. The configuration of the net determines the direction of flow and, to some extent, the strength of the flow (in inverse proportion to the obstacles it throws up, the tortuous pathways it requires). The configuration is determined not by the electricity but by the controller of the net, however we wish to envision that.
A much more elastic, serviceable analogy. We congratulate you.
I can’t decide whether that is sarcasm. I’m well aware that what I did was wait, receptively, holding the requirement in mind, until it surfaced.
No need to fear sarcasm. When something has been achieved, it has been achieved.
Okay. So then—?
All right, so look at what we have. Energy flows through you. If it did not, your computer would not work, so to speak. But how it flows through you is not the same as what flows through you.
A better analogy comes to me: Light shines through a vast maze of fiber-optic threads, and the configuration of the threads is what channels the light.
Now, bear in mind the contradictions in what we have said, for it is in reconciling contradictions that greater understanding is produced. We have described these vast impersonal forces – and we repeat these words for a reason – as representing or even exemplifying what you know as sinful or soulful attitudes, negative or positive biases, predilections that dominate and complicate your lives. We have also described these vast impersonal forces as being, in effect, causative and neutral, like wind, like channeled air, like electricity, like light. That is contradiction, and in contradiction, if faced and (so to speak) faced down, is greater understanding to be found.
In effect, you are asking us to be Rita when she was in the body, posing questions and pointing out ambiguities and contradictions.
Wrestling with the material, yes. Taking it seriously. That’s the invitation.
Well, how do you reconcile the two positions?
We don’t reconcile them, we use them to show that they are contrasting points of view. And in such case, resolution always comes only by moving to a higher, more encompassing perspective.
The analogies are still too simple. They are good as halfway houses, to position you, but they contradict the facts somewhat. The resolution is in realizing that the terms are too simple. It is as if all the light shining through the fiber optics must be white light, or all the electricity must be at the same amperage or voltage.
All light may have been white on the morning of creation (so to speak), but that was a long time of experience ago. All voltages may have been uniform initially, but, again, not by now. Remember, these are analogies. Try not to get caught up in the logical problems caused by the nature of the analogy; center on the logical problems posed by what the analogies are trying to convey.
I get that by this act of the play, nothing is pristine; everything shows the result of prior use.
An interesting take on what we are trying to convey. Not that the forces of the world are shopworn, but that the very energies that flow through you are themselves the product of much that happened before you arrived on the scene. It isn’t white light, but light some of whose qualities have been enhanced or hampered. (That is a definition of color, you see.)
So that we as 3D individuals may be receiving different inputs, as well as treating our inputs differently?
Next time.
—
This is an edited excerpt from “Only Somewhat Real,” not yet published.