I begin to see how to reconcile two views: one timeline at a time, and all together.
Who says the probability clouds experience closure? Who says everything closes off, like a play ending an act and beginning another? What if every new split-off stream continues endlessly? In effect, we as individuals would be experiencing ourselves living on one stream that we could jump to another from – that is, one at a time. And that is how we experience it. Thus we’re always voting by what we are, but I don’t know if there is a cumulative election-day, Armageddon or Eden. Maybe more like an on-going Gallup Poll.
We suggest that you think on paper now, even though you just copied your initial thoughts, for every moment is its own quality, and things will come out differently now than they would have then or would 10 hours or 10 days hence. Where you are affects your ability to see.
Okay. Well. I realized while transcribing that I had been assuming, for some reason, that each of our lives was a limited thing, with not only a termination but a summary.
And a judgment at the end, regardless whether followed by a sentence to heaven or hell.
Hmm. Did I? If so that would be an unconscious leftover from my religious indoctrination as a boy, I suppose. But, at least consciously, I was not thinking of judgment.
What is a summing-up but a discernment, whether or not discernment is accompanied by condemnation or approval?
In any case, I had assumed that the end of a physical life marked the end of separate paths. I suddenly saw that this isn’t the way to look at it. A theoretical example, using names from my “past lives” while remembering that “past lives” is a linear concept, almost certainly a distortion of how things really are.
Let’s start with Joseph the Egyptian. We don’t know anything about his external life except for the strong feeling that he was a priest of some sort in his time, and, I think, someone solid and respected.
Joseph lives, choosing, and choice after choice leaves two paths where there had been one. By the time Joseph’s life terminates in 3D, he could be seen more as a probability-cloud of Josephs than as any single individual treading any single path. Only, he doesn’t stop there, and his consequences don’t stop there, and neither do the consequences of his consequences – including all his mental or soul-carrying descendants.
There is no need to assume that a 3D life is a closed loop. The probability-cloud does not collapse upon our 3D death. In effect, it goes on forever. All the versions of Joseph continue because all the versions of his life-circumstances continue. Every decision that affected others – should those alternates disappear? And if they did, what would happen to the others who had been affected?
For the first time, I can make sense of what happened to Joseph Smallwood, whose back injury in 1863 I healed from 1994, who then went on to lead another version of a life that was already 130 years in the past from 1994 when it became possible in 1863. How could any of that make sense? But it makes sense if all possible paths exist and continue to exist regardless what happens to any given person.
But finish your example, for you have left it mostly unsaid.
Have I? In living we tread all possible paths, and there is a version of us for each path. These versions, and the reality they fit into, do not disappear when we die to 3D. Each goes on to further adventures. The version I know (that is, my life) stitched together Joseph the Egyptian, Bertram, Joe Indian, David Poynter – but it’s easy to see that versions that made different choices may have magnetized themselves into different situations, perhaps contradictory or unimaginable to me here, and yet we are all related. It is, come to think of it, another aspect of “we are all one.”