Rita and TMI’s Professional Division meetings

Thursday, March 17, 2016
F: 2:50 a.m. Greetings, Miss Rita. Not only from me but from your many friends at the PD [TMI’s Professional Division]. You are well loved, and your messages are read with interest. I’m not sure we can continue just as if we’d never paused, but I’m willing to try. I’ve missed this. Do I need to re-read the later entries before we begin, to get back on track? I know you put us on pause, but what I don’t know is whether that means my own “having been elsewhere” will interfere.
R: What is more likely to interfere is your lack of sleep. Are you sure you are ready?
F: No, actually. I was having trouble breathing, so I took it as a sign. But I seem to be all right at the moment. Maybe I’ll try for another sleep cycle or two. I guess you can hit the remote.
4:20 a.m. Okay, let’s go. I brewed the coffee this time, so now we have to go. 
R: Well, it is good you come to it with enthusiasm, anyway. Scan our last couple of entries; it will make it easier to resume.
F: All right. Don’t go away.

Returning, and smiling. I re-read the entries from March 8 and 9, and of course developments at PD fit right in.
R: Should it surprise you?
F: I don’t know about “should,” but it did. One thing that happened – all the important things always appear in conversations, never in the program itself – was that we were talking about this material and I learned that Jane Coleman has a degree in theology! Not only that, but she is part of a group that meets regularly to discuss the early scriptures in light of the languages they were written in. (She learned the popular Greek of the day – koine, I think it is called, or something like that – in order to satisfy her curiosity by direct research.)
I told her I had been wishing I had spent years in researching the scriptures because I am sure that any people’s scriptures are discussing the way reality really is, according to people’s direct perceptions and experiences (originally), only it gets distorted by people editing it for various reasons. Not only political reasons, maybe not even primarily for political reasons, but because people who have not had the experience, or the transformation, but think that they had, “correct” what they cannot make sense of.
You know all this. Anyway, Jane offered to provide what she called an Excursus every so often – comparing what you and I have brought forth with scripture, or maybe I should say examining each in light of the other, and put it on the TMI Explorers list and on my blog. I am so pleased!
Also, come to think of it, I should mention an insight that came to me during a SAM exercise yesterday. Bob [Holbrook] sent us out to experience 3D and non-3D at the same time (not his words, but that is what it amounted to) and if that hasn’t been the theme of the work [here], I don’t know what has. Anyway, I got a thought I hadn’t ever happened to think before, though it is obvious enough in retrospect. The 3D experience of limitation is left behind, of course, when we leave 3D life – and this is experienced both as a plus and as a minus. I got a sense of those in non-3D being relieved to be out of that pressure – but also almost wistful for it. (Do Marines get nostalgia for boot camp, I wonder?)
R: There was more, building upon that.
F: So there was. Ghosts, ectoplasm, Jesus in the resurrected body after he died – all these, I got, are examples of the fact that those in non-3D can solidify into 3D and sometimes do, given enough energy and motivation. They can touch, and I remember your telling me of your lying in bed one time and experiencing Martin stroking your forearm.
R: And, you remember, after the guys talked to us one time about people remaining who they were and yet changing, I said that was my experience of Martin after he passed – Martin, but different.
F: I do, yes.
R: And there was one more thing you should record here. I know, of course, but all of this has been for the record, so to speak, and this should be added.
F: I had to look at my sketchy notes. Yes. I don’t remember the experience, but whatever it was reminded me of what I got from one of my Gateway experiences, so long ago, when I thought I was looking at the heavens, this immense field of stars – and then I realized that the field of stars had a wrinkle in it! So, I realized that I was looking at a backdrop. As soon as I realized that, a couple of guys rolled it up, moving from right to left, and I realized that I was in the basement of David Francis Hall, only with no doorway. In other words, no way to leave. This didn’t bring a sense of being trapped. Instead, what I got – as they unrolled the starry field back into place – was, “play here for now,” meaning, “you are in 3D for a purpose. Do whatever it is you want to do, but recognize that while you are in 3D, you remain subject to 3D limitations, and there’s nothing wrong with that.”
R: You might as well add your notes from Dick Werling’s talk. Not every session has to consist of me talking; gently guiding your thought is quite as effective sometimes – and of course, Frank, when I say that I don’t mean just you and me; that is one way guidance interacts with everybody, to the extent they allow themselves to be receptive to it.
F: All right, well here is what I jotted down from Dick’s talk, and I don’t remember how much was what he said and how much, if anything, was what he triggered. I didn’t realize I was taking notes for an audience.
This was his, I know: As we live, we incorporate more and more of the divine. As we transition, we release energies [I think the word was; hard to read scribbled entries] while retaining the knowledge. He said – and the image struck me – we release the “hooks” we have with other energies. He said that from Focus 27, it is clear that it was all a win / win, no matter how it appeared at the time. If that isn’t “all is well, all is always well,” I miss my guess. He also quoted someone’s near death experience, I think, because my note says “while my brain was dissolving, my soul was expanding.”
Okay, that misses most of my PD experience, but I didn’t sit down with the intent of giving a commentary. We’re seven pages into this and you haven’t gotten a word in edgewise.
R: Who is speaking (ostensibly) matters a lot less than what is being spoken.
F: Yes, it took me a good while, but I did learn that. So – your turn.
R: Perhaps you didn’t get the full implications of my previous sentence. It means, I have been active within your mental process in the course of your expression. We used to call it “holding the space,” and it is a part of the communication process, because the psychic atmosphere (call it) in which one lives delimits what one may think and therefore may express. An inhospitable atmosphere renders certain thoughts or expressions nearly impossible to convey.
F: I get that. And –?
R: Just continue to keep in mind that our theme is to give a sense of the non-3D world for those still in 3D. To do that, I have chosen to begin with the familiar and move to the less familiar, so I began with what happens as you “lose” the 3D world at first (until you reorient yourself from sensory to non-sensory perception) and rebalance your opinions on what happened, and who and what you were (and therefore are), and as you realize what your new conditions are. I emphasized that descriptions necessarily vary from one person to another because the person doing the describing is part of the portrait. And, I suggested that the differences in portraits could provide valuable hints. So we can proceed from here.
F: Okay. Say, I had the thought that Book III of Rita’s World, if there is a book III, might be titled “An Affectionate Farewell,” a la Mr. Lincoln’s address at Springfield as he left for Washington. Was that your prompting? Or, more to the point, what do you think of it?
R: It may or may not serve as a title; in either case it may serve as the theme. Dying people bid the 3D world an affectionate farewell, because they see that their time in 3D was valuable – the hard, the easy, the pleasant, the terrible – and they realize there isn’t any going back, and perhaps they are already missing it. There isn’t any going back, in the sense that nobody can ever step in the same river twice. Everything changes and passes away. For persistence you must set your sights on the non-3D. but, as you can see already, losing the 3D experience is a loss, as well as a gain.
F: But no sense clinging to the sliding board.
R: No sense and ultimately, no use. Still, people are where they are, and all paths or non-paths or wanderings or lostnesses are good.
F: That’s our hour, and a little more. Good to be back at work, Rita, and next time I expect you to be the entertainment, not the audience.
R: No harm in expecting, but that doesn’t mean you get what you expect, no matter how confidently you expect it. Life should have taught you that.
F: It did. It did. Okay, till next time, then, and thanks not only from me but from so many people who love you and are grateful for your insights. Till next time.