Saturday, September 28, 2024
7:30 a.m. I am ready to begin, assuming you have a topic. I haven’t been going through the transcripts yet, though I hope to begin soon.
But you must have something that bubbles up to you as you wait for it. Use that.
A very circular process – I remember mentioning it years ago – in which I have to wait for a non-3D source to suggest what I should ask of (perhaps the same) non-3D source.
Well, what do you think intuition is, after all? How is it different from your writing your responses as they well up in you, rather than thinking them out?
And as you say that, I get, “And even if we do think it out, where is the answer coming from?”
Correct. We keep telling you the distinction between 3D and non-3D is turf, not substance. No matter what you think of the distinction, it is only somewhat a distinction. You are not body as opposed to spirit, not 3D person as opposed to non-3D persons. You are one whirlpool in the ocean, partly in 3D, partly in non-3D. There is never a 3D being that does not extend into non-3D, which as we have pointed out would be impossible. More, there is never a 3D mind that is in any fundamental way separated from its non-3D component, because it would be truer to say that all mind is in non-3D, funneled down to include the 3D incursions. It is so simple, so obvious, we cannot understand why people are always forgetting it.
All our sensory experience points in the opposite direction.
It doesn’t. Your interpretation of that experience may.
All right. So even the most logic-bound person depends upon the intuitive mode in thinking.
How could it possibly be otherwise? A thinker – a rationalist – may be a better reasoner, a better perceiver, a better discerner between fact and fancy, truth and error, than someone depending upon intuition alone. Nevertheless, both types function through the mind, and the mind is in the non-3D, not subject to the accidents and limitations of the 3D experience, as we have said more than once. This appears to be an untrue statement, but that is only appearance.
The brain is in 3D, and the brain is what processes mind.
You may think of it that way, though it isn’t really correct. It is a simplification. But this simplification is more true than the simplification that thinks that mind is primarily a 3D phenomenon.
Remember as a rule of thumb: Things are as they are for a reason (and in fact usually for several mutually reinforcing reasons). Before you set out to decry “the way things are,” first be sure you understand the foundations and dynamics of what it is you are decrying. Otherwise you are likely to find – as reformers usually do – that removing or altering a manifestation is not the same as removing or altering the factors that caused that manifestation. Remove the shoot, and the untouched root will produce another, or more than another, perhaps in many unexpected forms.
Thoreau: For every person hacking at the root of an evil, there are a thousand hacking at the branches.
He was hardly the only one whose wisdom discerned the difference between intent and effect.
And I get that this is connected to Jesus saying, ”The poor you have always with you,” which I always resented. And of encouraging people to ignore the world and concentrate on salvation (although I don’t recall if he used the word, even in translation).
Isn’t that what you were led to do, after so many sojourns into “practical” careers and endeavors? You may have thought of it as retreating or even as licking your wounds, but was it not following the golden thread and refusing to be distracted?
I think that would be giving me the benefit of a lot of doubt!
The point is not you, but the situation. To take the 3D world as it appears would be to endlessly defer the only real work you have – to choose your own being – until some impossible time when all would be well in “the outside world.” That will never happen and could never happen as long as there are multiple points of view, because different people want and value different things.
I had some similar thought the other day, but didn’t write it down, and so lost it.
Even if you had written it down, you wouldn’t necessarily remember it now. However, you would have had to hold it in mind longer (the writing takes time) and so might have had it fresher. The nub of it is simply that everybody wants different things, some of which will conflict. Even lack of conflict is a specific value not shared by everyone, and in fact not shared by anyone all the time. Where is the pacifist who doesn’t wind up approving of conflict (not necessarily armed conflict, but contention) in the cause of whatever reform?
So waiting for the 3D world to be “perfect” or even peaceful is to wait forever. It wasn’t created to be an island of peace, but a workshop, a laboratory, an arena.
Stephan Daedalus, saying he was trying to be the smithy forging the uncreated conscience of his race.
More or less. Don’t bet on Joyce signing off on the comparison.
Mr. Joyce, he dead.
To return: Intuition rests in the non-3D. but so does sensation, not to mention reason and logic. If you doubt it, merely look at them more carefully.
Say more.
Everything you perceive, think, feel, decide, suffer, enjoy, is a mixture of 3D and non-3D, because you are a mixture of 3D and non-3D. What 3D conditions do is not separate anything, but separate your awareness. The earth and sea and sky continue to be part of the same harmonious whole no matter how many people experience them separately. (In fact, nobody experiences them separately, but many do separate their ideas about what they experience.)
You are almost saying, mostly we’re just playing with words here.
No, that would be true only if you didn’t mean it. As long as you do mean it – as long as there is sincere intent and focus – we are using words to try to remove the worst distortions in understanding that arise from the necessary use of words.
So what is the practical take-away for us?
Ultimately, to see that what life is, in all its manifestations, depends, for you, upon how you conceptualize it. You have heard that nothing is, but thinking makes it so. A more careful statement would be that nothing is for you but your thinking makes it so. And that is a very powerful statement, reformers! Regardless whether you change the world for others (because, after all, most will be unable to follow your lead), you will change it for yourself. And if you think that is escapism or is trivial, we have been wasting a good deal of time, effort, nervous energy, ink, paper, and electron movement.
Pretty good deal for you: Everything you listed is mind.
You used to joke, “Who promised fair?”
Today’s theme?
“The roots of thinking,” maybe. That doesn’t quite capture it, but close enough.
Okay. Thanks as always.