Stitching 3D and non-3D: bounding conditions

Tuesday, November 5, 2019

3:15 a.m. So if sex is a force that originates beyond the 3D world –

Remember, now, we are interested in stitching together the two aspects of the one reality; sex, like gravity, is used as an example, more than for its own sake.

Yes, I got that, I think.

Well, sexual urges, pressure, motivation, suffuses the 3D world, but does not originate there, just as gravity is a universally experienced condition of 3D but does not originate there. So what does that imply?

As you have said, it’s all one world.

Yes, but, that being so, how does the fact that sex and gravity exist in non-3D manifest there?

I’m not sure that you have quite said that they do. You said they don’t originate here, or perhaps you said they don’t exists only here, or perhaps what you really mean to say is that anything that exists in 3D exists ipso facto as part of All-D, therefore is at least reflected in non-3D.

Let’s begin again. The underlying question is the interaction of vast impersonal forces with your 3D life. But remember, “your 3D life” is an over-simplification.

• The 3D world does not exist in isolation.
• The 3D is part of the All-D which includes the non-3D.
• Nothing examined in isolation can be entirely understood, even though the examination in isolation may be necessary as a practical measure.
• We have said that “good” and “evil” may be considered as moods, in that they are transitory phenomena.

And here I get stuck, thinking I ought to be able to remember more connections, and I guess not quite trusting you to continue.

Then, trust and see what happens. What will work better than that?

All right. Go, then.

Only let it free-wheel, and you will see.

Okay. That means, in practice, making a mark for a bullet and waiting for something to come up.

It has worked so far, has it not?

Yes, I guess it has.

When it stops working, try something else.

• Gravity must be more than a 3D-only phenomenon, because it is universal in 3D.

How’s that again?

A framework is not the enclosure. A universal is not among the variables it bounds.

I have read that there are places where gravity does strange things, impossible but well-attested things.

That does not mean it is not universally present as a bounding condition, but that even the boundary conditions are not as rigid as they usually appear, or as mental understanding might have them be. Time plays tricks sometimes, too, but does not cease to rule the 3D world.

• Similarly, love is a bounding condition of the 3D world. Love may be considered to be an equivalent of gravity.
• So may sex, in a different way. So may a few other constants, many of them reduced to scientific laws.

I heard “Boyle’s Law,” which has something to do with liquids or gases, I think. Why did I hear this?

Boyle’s, Kelvin’s, name it. Science has been doing a pretty thorough job of understanding the bounding conditions (and the physical results of bounding conditions), although thinking of them in a different way.

I don’t recall hearing of scientific examination of love, but the rest, yes.

There are other approaches to the examination of the bounding conditions than the approach that assumes dead matter and meaninglessness. Even within the Western tradition, what might be called Goethean science [i.e., science in the manner of Goethe] – sometimes thought of as mystical or poetical approaches, but every bit as scientific in method – examine things the Western materialist tradition cannot see because of its assumptions. You don’t need to go beyond Western science, in other words, to escape the materialist deadness at the core.

I get that Steiner’s approach was Goethean, but I don’t really know what this means.

Not your field, but those rooted in scientific disciplines and dedicated to scientific means of inquiry would find Steiner’s approach, and Goethe’s, not only comfortable but vastly stimulating.

• When you know the bounding conditions, you have a better idea of what influences the influences.

That is (I take it), what causes the things that influence us to manifest in the way they do.

Yes. Just as your physical universe is bounded immediately by earth’s atmosphere which it itself within the sun’s atmosphere, which in a way is a bubble within the vast ocean beyond it, so in other ways, what you experience is limited and shaped and enabled and distorted by the conditions of the world you experience it through.

• You cannot get out of the 3D test-tube to see what is beyond the 3D test-tube.
• Except, you also exist outside of it, so, to see beyond it, use the eyes that are not confined within it.

I thought that is what we are doing right now.

It is.

Then what is the admonition?

Do you always think of this communication as investigating 3D conditions from outside 3D? Or do you think of it sometimes as the non-3D commenting on the 3D?

Is there a difference?

Sure there is. It is the difference between trusting someone else and trusting yourself.

A little more on that?

If you regard “the guys” as other than yourself, your mental filters will channel your understanding in a different way than if you think of “the guys” as just a convenient way to think about another part of yourself. The reality doesn’t change, but the operating assumptions do, and it matters.

You have said from the beginning that in non-3D separation is not as absolute as it appears to be in 3D.

• Neither 3D nor non-3D is separate in the way that bodies in 3D space makes it appear.
• That is, you/we are somewhat separate, someone not
• Finding a way to mentally live with this distinction is an important qualifier, if you wish to transcend prior understandings.
• If you are not really separate from the 3D world, if you are not really separate within the non-3D world, well – go back to that definition of sin that resonates with you.

Yes. Sin as “missing the mark.”

Exactly. So, to see the attitudes and assumptions that are going to lead you to mistake the world, reality, the nature of yourselves, consider sins as indicators.

That certainly seems an abrupt turn.

Then hang on and try not to fall off.

• We alluded to vast impersonal forces, and vast personal forces, but have not yet been able to describe either. We have not forgotten, but it is the usual A and B.
• You have to know your goldfish bowl (and the nature of water) if you are going to be an enlightened goldfish. And you absolutely cannot understand it in its own terms.

Yes, we have to get beyond the goldfish bowl’s reality.

You have to see beyond it, given that in life you cannot get beyond it. But it does no good to look through non-3D eyes if you are going to continue to assume 3D conditions.

I see that.

Therefore, you will find it of use, probably, to have a firm understanding of the bounding conditions of 3D reality. And what have we been trying to get across, these 30 years, but that?

I begin to see it, though it is slippery and I expect I’ll lose it again. I’ll persevere if you will.

Of course you will. But the form of perseverance required is not mere willingness to transcribe, though we appreciate that, nor willingness to converse and even argue, though we appreciate that too. Now we need another level of perseverance, and here we meet and have met reluctance.

Oh, I know.

Partly you have pleaded inability. Partly you have been handicapping yourself by unconsciously clinging to travel notes rather than wiring up your discoveries. And partly you have been hoping to find others to do what really only you can do in the particular way we need it done.

I truly don’t know that I can do it.

How will you find out, save by doing it? Succeed or fail (whatever those words mean), you will be farther along than if you do not try.

In my defense (and I hear you saying, “not that you were accused”) I don’t see how I can summarize a picture that is continually being revised.

You could write another Interim Report, as you did with Muddy Tracks. It is always going to be an interim report, because there is always more day to dawn. But if you will think of your interim report as scaffolding, you may see the usefulness for others.

Yes, I suppose I can.

Well, a little longer session than usually, but I can continue if you wish.

Only this. Our mention of the list of sins is not a detour but a mention of a valuable resource in remembering the attitude that will enable people to escape the 3D trance. Look at the seven deadly sins as a list of distorting factors, rather than as someone’s arbitrary prohibitions, and see where that takes you.

All right: The list again, LEG CAPS or LEG CAPE. Lust, envy, gluttony, covetousness, anger, pride and sloth or ennui. Not that they lead to hell but that they do mis-lead.

Get stuck in any of them and you will not be able to transcend the 3D spell, because they will be binding you to the idea of 3D as reality.

Enough for the moment. Well done today.

You didn’t do so badly yourselves. Ourselves. Till next time.