John Wolf on Perfect Peace

Perfect Peace: Where it is and where it can’t be.
It is timely to think about peace, what “perfect peace” is and how it can be experienced. I found this enlightening, but it arrived with a strong dose of realism. My feelings are mixed: “Aha, I think I understand some things better”; and, “Hmmm, so that’s the way it is!”
This information had been working its way through me for several weeks. I believe my struggle has been because the concept is new to me and 90 degrees from my previous more simplistic and naive perspective. Despite the difficulty it was clear to me that someone/somewhere had something worth knowing if I could just get it “out and down”.
Additional material from Frank’s The Sphere and the Hologram helped me understand the nature of duality and balance. It will become more apparent why a discussion on peace begins with duality when you read that and what follows from my joint mind.
I hope this puts your mind in motion as well on this subject of peace, and that you would share your thoughts accordingly. This is a perspective, no more no less. You will have a different one.

From Frank and Rita, “Duality”, The Sphere and the Hologram. (DeMarco, Frank; Warren, Rita (2009-06-01). The Sphere and the Hologram: Explanations from the Other Side (Kindle Locations 6638-6639). Hologram Books. Kindle Edition. )
R: Okay, I’ve been wanting to ask some more about duality. It’s clear that our physical world seems to be wrapped in duality, and I have sometimes felt from your answers that duality exists on the other side as well, but I’m not clear about that.
TGU: Oh, I think you’re very clear about that. It’s always a mistake to assume that the other side, as it looks to you, is perfect, or completed. When creation split things into duality, in order to create something, it didn’t only happen on the material realm. If you’ll look at your Bible, you have the good and the bad angels, or at any rate the angels that fought. Well, that’s a duality well beyond the physical. And don’t get your hopes up, once you go over to the other side it’s not all over. [chuckles]
R: I though it was all going to be love, because love has no opposite!
TGU: Uh huh.
R: [pause] You don’t want to respond to that?
TGU: Oh, well, we will if you want! It didn’t sound like a question!
R: [laughs]
TGU: Well, why isn’t that true for where you are?
R: Well that is true –
TGU: All right.
R: – but there are a couple of concepts that seem like they don’t have a dual aspect. Love is one of them.
TGU: Well, now, Frank and Charles [a neighbor and close friend] were just this Sunday talking about perfect moments, and we managed to get clear to both of them, very clearly, that all moments are perfect, but they’re not all fun, they’re not all desirable, they’re not all pleasant. The universe is created in love and is enfolded in love, and cannot exist without love, but it’s not all pleasant or fun either, because – if you’ll remember what we said “a long time ago” – the pluses and the minuses balance out. If you want to have a universe of all pluses and no minuses, you can’t do it. It just can’t be done, not as it’s set up.
Therefore you’re going to have either mild polarity widely spread or sometimes really sharp polarities, where the pluses gather in one place and the minuses gather in another. And you may experience that as strife, or as complementarity, or as pleasing diversity. You could experience it in different ways, but it’s a great mistake to think that “all will be nice and love and light.” You’d be bored! We would too.
R: So a state in which duality does not exist wouldn’t be a state to be desired at all?
TGU: Well as far as we know, the only state that doesn’t involve dualities is beyond creation, and we don’t know what’s beyond creation. We said a while ago, all creation could be looked at as comprising pluses and minuses in equal amounts. Now, we may have said that in such a way that you took that to mean physical reality, but we didn’t mean that. We meant all creation. We don’t think it’s possible to have anything else. So. This actually should explain to you why there’s so much flux and change and play in the entire universe, not just in physical matter reality. You know, we have our pluses and minuses going on too. [pause] The difference may be that we’re not seeing them in time-slices as you are, and so to us it looks much more like a kaleidoscope with patterns to be enjoyed than it does like warfare, with victory to be won. You see? Once you fully know that you cannot have more pluses than minuses or more minuses than pluses, except locally, it takes the desperation out of things and it adds a certain amount of aesthetic satisfaction, shall we say. Then, you don’t mind playing the villain in the movie, either. Because you haven’t created the villainy, you see. All you’ve done is localize some minuses. And that enables someone else, somewhere else, to localize some pluses. We know this is going to seem cynical to your readers [chuckles] – but it’ll be good for them.
R: No, that’s all very interesting to me. I think I’ve been making the assumption that dualities are of this physical realm.
TGU: Yes, many people are making the same assumption. Now, you have dualities in the physical realm that don’t exist in the non-physical, strictly because they’re local to material. But there are other dualities, as we just said, that extend beyond the physical. And, may we say, if you’ll hark back a hundred years or so to the religious dogma of the Christians in your country, the unthinking ones thought of endless singing and playing harps in heaven? And Mark Twain made fun of the whole concept and pointed out how hideous it would be. They were trying to envision all pluses and no minuses. And he was pointing out that would not even be aesthetically pleasing. And in fact the concept of heaven and hell assumes a geographical split, although the spatial analogy is somewhat hidden, but there it is; it assumes a geographical split between all the pluses in one place and all the minuses in the other place. And that assumes that there wouldn’t be any interplay between them, they wouldn’t be swapping places. So it’s kind of a boring idea. [laughs] Now – sorry to complicate it – we want you to remember that “souls of a feather flock together,” and people at a certain vibratory level (which implies a certain mixture of pluses and minuses within them) do segregate out. So we’re just going to leave that in there for you to think about a little bit. On the one hand, we’re saying there are pluses and minuses and there’s movement all the time; it’s like a kaleidoscope. On the other hand, we’re saying, souls, people, monads, whatever, of a certain composition not only want to flock together, but really have no realistic choice, because they’re held there as though their specific gravity is holding them. We’re deliberately building in a contradiction for you to think about.
R: Thank you. [they laugh] Very much.
TGU: Well, we can talk about angels and harps! [they chuckle] If you prefer.
R: Well I don’t know whether to go on with that or not.
TGU: We’ll tell you this. It’s far preferable for people to be thinking about stuff even in getting so-called wrong answers, than to think they know when in fact they haven’t really thought about it. It’s better to be in perplexity than to be in a false satisfaction. Because the perplexity won’t last. At some point you’ll make sense of it. [pause] Maybe.
R: I was thinking that a resolution to the dualities is often to take the positives and negatives off the duality.
TGU: Well – thank you for mentioning this – we are using plus and minus in the electrical sense, only. We’re not meaning good or bad. We’re only trying to come up with a neutral description of polarity, that’s all – and perhaps your language isn’t neutral enough about plus and minus. [pause] Perhaps we could use blue and orange as colors on opposite ends of the scale. We would use red and green, except that wouldn’t work in your society [because people would make analogies to stoplights]. But we could say blue and orange instead of plus and minus if you wish.

From Rita, March 2015, not yet published:
Put it this way. As I have said before, the non-3D in compound beings may not be 3D, but it exists within duality. That is, merely because it is not confined to the specialized conditions of the 3D dimensions, that does not mean that it somehow escapes duality. To imagine that as possible, you would have to re-impose the idea (silently, probably; unnoticed) of “this side” and “the other side”; in other words, two different realms. But this is one reality. How could 3D exist in duality and non-3D not? It is only in the expression that they vary. I must keep coming back to this, which you will remember was one of the very first things I said in this series of communications. If you miss this, or miss its implications, or allow yourselves to return to more accustomed formulations, you miss it all.
So. Yes, antithetical values all exist. Duality means balance. They exist in 3D and they exist in non-3D, and to try to determine which expression is most important, most real, or even which was prior, is futility. It is a set of meaningless questions based on a confusion of terms that assume that rules and conditions are different between 3D and non-3D in terms of the existence or non-existence of duality and its effects.

From My Joint Mind:
The last deep experience you had (“remember” might be a better word) at the center surprised you as to how peaceful it was. It was not just quiet, but seemingly all forces of any kind were absent, and your soul was suspended and floating there. Yet amid the calm you could sense the presence of your whole being.
You had felt the love before, but never that depth of peace, and it was unexpected compared to your current experience in the body. Life in the body is at its best ordered chaos in a world of duality. You are, in part, a world of duality yourself.
In our world of duality we differentiate, we contrast, we spread out everything we can in time and space to develop and apply perspective. We imbed ourselves into the midst of good and evil, right and wrong, comfortable and uncomfortable and those forces play on us every moment of the day. Our dualistic experiences create strong emotions and we have to constantly choose our attitude. It is a stark contrast to peace at the center.
At the center, all differentiated reality is present, yet it appears as a nothingness, a void. Everything becomes equivalent to nothing. It is realized that this stretches your mind beyond your language because when you think of nothing, or a void, it implies the absence of everything; and when you think of the presence of everything, you think of the noisy clatter of the world in and around you.
But here’s what exists with the presence of EVERY conceivable dualistic condition and experience: a perfect balance. At the center of everything, held within a perfect balance, is a “peace beyond all understanding”. This is a peace far beyond a restful afternoon in a hammock; far beyond a truce in wartime; and far beyond “Peace on Earth”. The presence of all light in balance is perfect blackness. At the center “there is all time and no time; all space and no space”. (Quoted phrases are from TMI Explorer Tape 19, as they are the best expression of the thoughts I was getting. See added explanation below.)
This does not mean that the center lacks energy. Just the opposite. At the center, there is a continuous force of creation, of healing power and unconditional love beyond measure, a “God-like energy expressing itself as divine love light”, so great that even the tiniest sense of it is overwhelming.
No experience can manifest while maintaining balance at the center without duality resulting. Duality is a consequence of creating while simultaneously keeping perfect balance and its associated peace. Since consciousness is ever creating, there cannot be any sustained balance or absolute peace in any sub portion of the created, only in the totality of the core.
We rarely sense the center. In particular physical life is designed to develop ever new “off center” perspectives. Amid the chaos of differentiated existence we form our selves, and we become a soul among all souls. Perfect peace cannot exist in living the created.
But we are also spirit, and at our center and at the center of everyone and everything is spirit, in-balance with perfect peace and love.
End

Additional input on “All time, and no time”:
Existence in “all time” means that we do not lose the past, nor do we have to wait for a future. The past and the present exist as they have been brought into reality so far and we can jump around from time to time (pardon the pun) from the ever-present and experience (both of) them.
But we are not moved moment to moment like you are so we have “no time” pushing or pulling us. You have a timeline and are making constant choices along that timeline. We don’t have “a” timeline. We have them all, and we aren’t “walking” one and making choices like you are.
Additional input on “All space and no space”
In your objective reality it seems that something is distant from you because it takes you time to get there, or you simply can’t reach out and touch it. But what if you were there instantaneously, faster than the speed of light, just by thinking about it. BANG! You’re there! If that was always true of anywhere you wanted to be, what meaning has distance? Everything would coexist in the same place. What meaning would a mile have? Or any measure of distance? That’s the condition of all space and no space.
Via John