Thursday, March 17, 2022
8 a.m. Focus. Receptivity, clarity, presence. And I’ll follow wherever you lead.
Glance back at recent topics. No need to discuss your Alcott project. That one, you will do or not do, but you know what you need to know, for the moment. Meanwhile, recapture our larger theme.
You can’t just jump in?
We can. You can’t, or not so easily.
[A pause, as I leaf through the binder, looking at entries for March.]
As I skim, I stop of Friday, March 11, where you say that redefining our understanding of our 3D self and its relationship to the larger being is what you are about.
Yes, and that way of finding things will always work for you – for anyone, you understand – to the degree that you are willing and able to be steered by your non-3D component, which can see in the dark, so to speak.
It feels slapdash, from this side.
It would. It will, until you learn to trust it, then it will seem as natural as any other method you employ to sort through massive amounts of data swiftly.
So let’s talk about that?
Yes. Consider this to be one side-benefit of opening up. And, as always, bear in mind that what is new territory for some will be tedious rehash for others.
Sure. It pretty much has to be.
It does. We are always preaching to a congregation of mixed condition. Everyone is, always. Any group necessarily requires a range of exposition, a scatter-shot approach, in a way. But “hit or miss” has its advantages as well as its disadvantages. A shotgun is going to miss with most of its pellets; it only needs to hit with one or a few. “More or less” is effective; it obviates “A miss is as good as a mile.”
In any case –
In any case, let’s look at how you make sense of the world, and how that technique varies according to your own openness.
This is going to be one of those simple points that require careful exposition at greater length than will seem to have been necessary by the result.
Probably, but most of the exposition will be the sketching of context – as usual – so that you will see not the objects but the mostly invisible linking of the objects. It is context that is often lacking, and in the absence of context you end up with what seems like a mass of unconnected elements. It is absence of context that leads people to believe in chance.
Refocusing. It feels like you are having a hard time, which usually means I am insufficiently transparent as the medium of communication.
Remember our analogy of the smaller sphere contained within the larger sphere. Every part of the smaller sphere is contained in – is a part of – the larger sphere, but not vice-versa. Now, remember, the model is not of your being, but of your awareness of your being. You as 3D being are not
No, let’s rephrase that. You see yourself as a 3D being. That is a truncated view of what you really are, which is:
- A 3D being of flesh and blood and electrical and chemical systems, and what we might call mechanical awareness. That is, the intelligence of the cells and organs and systems.
- A 3D being that extends into the non-3D : that is, mental and feeling abilities and awarenesses. A consciousness centered on the one 3D being.
- A 3D and non-3D being that perforce extends far beyond a specific time and place, aware of the far greater pattern of that lifetime.
- A 3D and non-3D being that, as a unit, also relates to other beings as units, experiencing them as non-3D only, although they in their living awareness experience themselves as 3D and non-3D, as you do.
- A 3D and non-3D being, with all its associated threads, that is a part of the larger being of which it was created. Thus, you and all the other lives with which you are intimately connected are equally part of something greater. The grandfather analogy, which you can explain later.
- A being that therefore participates in that larger being’s life, in ways beyond your ability to imagine.
All of these layers are one layer. They seem distinct because each layer is perceived (or, you could say, is sort of created) by the psychical condition you perceive them from.
I think you mean, how we are at any given moment determines what we are able to perceive.
It determines what seem to be the boundaries of who and what you are, yes. You could say that your level of awareness determines your horizons. What you see within your horizons depends upon where you move to, and how you direct your vision, but the limits of those horizons depends upon how open you are.
So, to tie this in. You need to find something and you don’t know where to look. Or you need to remember something and you can’t fetch it. Or you need to know more about a situation or a relationship than is apparent. In any of these cases, what can you do?
We can expand our awareness.
Exactly. ESP, and every variant of ESP, is merely the expansion, deliberate or otherwise (we should say, directed by the 3D awareness or otherwise) so as to know what is obvious from a higher consciousness.
I get that you mean that quite literally, too.
Quite literally. This is why the attempt to achieve a higher consciousness is attended by the acquisition of unusual abilities and by the experiencing of unusual phenomena – and is why teachers caution their pupils against concentrating on the phenomena rather on the quest. Seek ye the kingdom of God and all else will be added. Sound familiar?
It isn’t an exact quote – though I suppose it is an acceptable paraphrase from Aramaic, come to think of it – but yes, I recognize it.
To sum up: As you expand your consciousness, your life may not (or may) become easier, but the things you need to do, or even want to do, become easier, if you let them.
That is, is we don’t insist on doing things the old way.
Yes. The old way you trust, but it won’t now be as efficient and smooth as the new way that you may learn only slowly to trust. Then when you do, another increment of consciousness is likely to arise, and further challenges (and, therefore, opportunities) will arise.
The grandfather analogy you cited comes from a John Sandford novel, where the character was an Army man, I think, who found that the Pentagon had done something to support a Marine against the Army’s interest. It reminded him of visiting his grandfather and realizing that his grandfather was also his cousins’ grandfather. That is, the relationship was one-way looking upward, but more than one way, looking downward. (Sandford would probably cringe at this summary, but he isn’t here.) The larger being is my grandfather, but he is also the grandfather of every other 3D-and-non-3D being he fostered.
That’s the nub of it.
So, today’s theme?
“How to see in the dark,” maybe?
Something a little more serious.
Don’t underestimate the pulling power of setting out a teaser to get people’s interest.
I see. Well, I may try that. In any case, interesting and provocative. Our thanks, as always.