Saturday, May 28, 2016
F: 8:20 a.m. Round three. In this corner, still punching, the representative of 3D. And in your corner, Miss Rita?
R: I’m in your corner. We’re not only “all in this together,” in a sense there is only one of us, so who does that leave to be in the opposite corner?
The point, as you gathered, is that everything – hence, every body, and everybody – interconnect. We’re all one thing, and that doesn’t mean only all humans. But since “al is one” doesn’t give much to chew on, we are in the habit of considering relative divisions. Indeed, that is a prime attribute and purpose of 3D, to give greater definition to what are only relative differences.
So now look at the three interrelated parts we have been considering and, remembering that we are all one and that time and space are (among other things) for the purpose of exaggerating distinctions, tell me how you see things now.
F: All right. I don’t see anything to invalidate the multiplex cinema – or rather multiplex-virtual-reality-theater – analogy. I see 3D life – each soul – as relatively separate in that each has its own reality-program it is interacting with, but absolutely interconnected because tied back to the same non-3D larger being of which they were created. I see each life with its own possibilities and constrictions, enriched by the conscious and / or (usually) unconscious inter-connections between lives. And I see each soul’s starting-place independent from any other soul’s activity, so that it isn’t exactly a matter of life taking up where another left off, but more like each one being created by the larger being for the purpose and according to specs known to the larger being but not necessarily to any of the souls involved. That’s about as far as I can get.
R: Very well. Not wrong as far as it goes. There are many aspects of the situation not yet considered – as, for instance, what is meant by someone experiencing a “last life” in a series. That leaves open the question of the relative separation of souls within the overall unity of the larger being.
F: And if I’m not mistaken, we’ve been told that the many larger beings in turn form part of a yet larger being.
R: Which is beyond our observation, but as above, so below.
F: Enough for now?
R: Enough, and I think we should both be very pleased with ourselves. You will see, looking back, that the process got you renewed mental energy that kept you going and therefore allowed me continued access.
F: We don’t usually think of it that way. We usually think of access as going from 3D to non-3D.
R: Well, now you know to take a look at that assumption.
F: All right. It’s getting toward nine o-clock, and it will be a while before I get all this typed in and sent. Thanks for all of it, and I imagine there will be follow-up questions, objections, etc.
R: That’s what we’re here for.
F: Yes it is. Okay, till next time.
On the topic of “last life”.
“R: Very well. Not wrong as far as it goes. There are many aspects of the situation not yet considered – as, for instance, what is meant by someone experiencing a “last life” in a series. That leaves open the question of the relative separation of souls within the overall unity of the larger being.”
The topic referred to here as “last life” has been of very high interest to me for more than a year, and I have found considerable discussion on the subject in another site. I have also asked my “guys” about it. For the sake of brevity, I will try to summarize what I understand about it as well as some of the ramifications.
The general concept is consistent with what Rita has said so far: that a number of versions of us may experience 3D life simultaneously as perceived in non-3D. Independent of 3D time, however, there is a “first” and “last” 3D life (likely one in every one of the 3D realities—such as ET realities—that are engaged in), designated such in conjunction with the greater being in order to initiate the overall 3D experience and conclude it.
The “last” life signals to all the active 3D lives in progress that the greater being of which they are a part is disengaging from 3D and “moving on” to other experience. When this occurs, each version must choose to either also disengage, or “fragment”, which is essentially to form a “new” greater being and remain engaged in 3D.
This could be what Katelyn experienced with her Chinese life counterpart.
Admittedly, my interest piqued in this because I believe that I am such a “last life”. Rightly or wrongly, I do exhibit many of the characteristics of such a person: an inherent restlessness, no desire to “live another life”, a strong desire to understand everything possible about reality, a desire to make the speediest possible transition, including beginning parts of the process before death.
Not everyone having these characteristics would be a “last life”, and not everyone who is designated as the “last life” is aware of it.
To me this implies certain characteristics that to date may not have been explicitly stated:
a) That the 3D soul producing process is “managed” primarily at the region of consciousness that has been referred to as the greater being.
b) That in general we are not of the same greater being, but that at a minimum each greater being engaged in 3D is managing more than one life.
c) That there is significant freedom of choice by greater beings as to how they evolve, and that they maintain their own identity independent of other greater beings and the rest of greater consciousness.
d) The we have a say as to whether we remain “active” with 3D or not, when our greater being chooses to disengage.
A reference on the subject can be found at the following site:
http://www.eliasforum.org/digests/essence_focus2.html
It is quite extensive, and not nearly as easy reading or as comprehensible as Frank and Rita. Also, there is of course different nomenclature. The “last life” is called a “final focus”, and the greater being is referred to as “essence”. It is quite consistent with all of the Seth material as well. It rambles and is repetitive. But, like Frank’s material, it resonates with me, and Katelyn and Uri might find it helpful.
John
I think you are on to something here, but I can’t do more than skim it, until I get the rest of what Rita began today. Front-loading is a terrific problem for me, although sometimes (paradoxically) it saves time. Keep at this, though: It seems clear you are bringing in valuable material. In fact, I’ll post this separately.
The three sessions are very helpful in getting at still-hidden assumptions I hold about separate, simultaneous, and strands (didn’t realize it would be alliteration!). When Rita answered the question of knowledge carrying over from one life to another with a direct “no,” lights went on for me. Thanks so much for this. Quite a marathon morning for you, Frank.
If you get insights from time to time, I hope you will share them with the rest of us.
By my count this is your 150th dialog (session?) with Rita. It’s been wonderful. Thank you.
I had no idea. That’s quite a body of material building up, a little at a time. Oh my aching finger-bones! 🙂