More Sayings from Thomas

Thursday, July 18, 2019

1:30 a.m. Saying 92 a:

Jesus said: Seek and you will find.

“Seek and you will find.” Perhaps the most encouraging single statement in scripture. That is a promise. It doesn’t say what to seek, or how to seek it; it concentrates on saying (I take it) “Have intent and pursue it, and you will not be left without answers.”

Perhaps in a broader sense, it says as well, What you see, you will find. It may be taken as a promise and also a caution.

“Be careful what you ask for; you might get it.”

Exactly. But this is not to downplay the promise. Now look at 92 b.

He said: In the past I did not answer the questions you asked. Now I am willing to answer, but you do not ask.

I take this to mean, at first you asked the wrong questions, or asked from the wrong standpoint, or in a wrong way, and so I could not answer without misleading you. (I admit, I take this from my own experience with TGU over the years.) And on a guess, I’d say Jesus is saying, “Now you could be asking better questions, but you don’t ask at all.” However, this is very much guesswork.

Look at the two in context, and in context of the saying before that, 91.

Saying 91 more or less said they couldn’t see what was right there in front of them. Then these two say, seek, and you will find, and why don’t you ask me now that I am willing to tell you.

It’s about perception.

Of course, but not perception in a vacuum: perception with intent, with a purpose. Go to 93, holding this in mind.

  1. Jesus said: Do not give holy things to dogs, for they might carry them off to the dung heap. Do not give pearls to pigs, for they might … [left unfinished].

It seems to say – looking at it in context as you suggest – that enhanced perception needs to be accompanied with enhanced judgment – enhanced discretion, perhaps we should say. And I get that the reason for the discretion may be that if one too openly says what one had learned, there is no shortage of people who will mock, or scoff, or argue, or in any way possible attempt to shake one’s assurance. There may be a fragility to new perceptions that must be kept in mind.

Yes, good. The reason for discretion is not always understood, but there it is: You don’t want to risk a valuable acquisition while it is vulnerable. And there is no telling how long that vulnerability may last. So, to 94.

Jesus said: Whoever seeks will find. Whoever knocks, it will be opened.

Another promise, another encouragement. It isn’t only that we can know, but that we can enter in to the greater life, if we have the intent.

So then proceed to 95, only keep in mind what these sayings have just promised.

  1. Jesus said: If you have some money, don’t lend it out at interest but give it to someone who will not return it to you.

“Pay it forward”?

Yes, only don’t leave it at that, lest it be considered a joke or a flippant remark.

We have become familiar with the concept of “paying it forward.” It means, in a way, live in faith and in gratitude. “Freely you have received; freely give.” Rather than worrying about repayment, give, and suggest to the recipient that s/he pay it in turn when someone else is in need. Well, it seems to me this saying may be saying just that, only instead of referring to money or physical resources, it may refer to what we have learned – what we have received from others or from life.

All right, then look at 96 in this context.

Jesus said: The Kingdom of the Father is like a woman who took a little leaven and concealed it in dough. She made large loaves of bread. He who has ears let him hear.

Simple enough. it takes only a little leaven to make large loaves. In effect, one multiplies what one has, greatly. If the kingdom of heaven is a state of being, one who has sought and found, who has knocked and entered, has the ability to expand not only his own life but those to whom he gives the secret. Only, no pearls before swine, so you have to keep your eyes and ears open; you have to discern.

You aren’t requiring much help this morning. What about 97?

  1. Jesus said: The Kingdom of the Father is like a woman who was carrying a jar full of grain. As she walked along a handle of her jar broke off and grain trickled out, but she didn’t notice. When she arrived in her house, she put the jar down and found it empty.

This is the inverse aspect, I’d say. If we lose our awareness – if we let it lapse, regardless of our good intentions – we may wind up with nothing. The woman in this saying is not described as careless or as in any way to blame for her misfortune except that she did not notice. And I can testify first-hand how easy it is to set out to hold one’s intent on something and wake up after a while to discover that one had fallen asleep and had lost any results that might have accrued if one had been able to remain awake and alert.

Saying 98 begins on a different tack, so perhaps we should pause here. Only half an hour’s work, but good work.

Yes indeed. Thank you.

 

Love and life as seen from beyond 3D

[Here is an example of what may be done. Rich Spees, Joyce Johnson-Jones and I did Monroe’s Lifelines program in July 1995. Rich and Joyce recognized each other from — somewhen, somewhere. And so did he and I, and she and I, separately. With his permission, this which he sent me a dozen years ago after it happened.]

From Rich Spees

10/16/07 2:00 am

After reading the beginnings of Frank’s TMI novel, which is based on the relationship between Frank, Joyce and myself, I decided to see if I could make a journey to Joyce tonight. I settled down, made contact with my oversoul and told it what I had in mind and then headed off to my sacred garden. As I popped out of the tube that connects me in the physical with my sacred garden, I felt a presence and turned around to look up toward my house I have there, and there on the lanai, waving to me was dear Joyce. I went up to her and we embraced and just stood there for a time looking deeply into each others eyes, connecting on those levels one cannot even describe. What follows is our conversation.

R: I wasn’t expecting to meet up with you here, this is a very pleasant surprise.

J: That’s what I wanted, to surprise you.

R: And you did. How do you like my place?

J: [mischievous smile gesturing to the house] It needs a woman’s touch. It’s very peaceful, just as I would expect, none of the trappings of the physical world.

R: Yes, I suppose it does. I haven’t fleshed out the details of the house yet.

J: [another mischievous smile] And you probably never will.

R: I had started this journey hoping to find something out about our life together when you were Janie.

J: That is for another time.

R: Well, let’s just talk then, what should we talk about, any ideas?

J: Love and life.

R: Good topics, yours our mine or both?

J: Yours this time.

R: [pausing wondering where to start] I often wonder why it is I can’t really set goals for myself, why I seem more comfortable with just letting it happen. It’s like I don’t want to be bothered with all the BS.

J: You were never into the schedules and goals; your focus has always been on the master game as your friend Hank calls it. Learning the manipulation of physical matter never interested you and if you could have gotten to the master game without having to go through the rest of it you would have, but it’s part of the path so you did it. Your fascination though has always been with doing the inner work within the confines and limitations of the physical system.

R: Yeah and I guess I knew that, I just never really thought it through. I’m having a blast right now not having a “normal” job although I worry a little about having enough money so I don’t have to go back to work. I’m really enjoying photography and hope I can make it bring in a little money.

J: There’s your answer! Being out in nature has always been where you are most comfortable. People make you crazy with all the games and masks, the deceptions. You like nature because nature doesn’t deceive, there are no masks, no games. Nature is what she is, but you need people too. Strike the balance. Being drawn to shamanism should not surprise you at all. It’s win-win for you. You get to do the inner work with nature by your side. [laughs] I sometimes wonder if you would not rather be a tree.

R: You’re right again, and I knew that too. What about you, how are you doing? Have you picked up your ticket for another ride on the blue ball?

J: Yes, it’s in the works, but there are a few more things to take care of before I go.

R: You know Frank is writing a TMI novel based on the three of us don’t you?

J: Yes and it will be wonderful.

R: Any thoughts for Frank?

J: Yes, tell him to only write it when it’s bringing him joy. If it starts to feel like work, set it aside for a little while. The work of course will come later in the editing, but there can be joy in that as well.

R: Interesting that you mentioned “joy” twice just now.

J: [smile] Yes, on purpose.

R: It feels like time to go. You know you are always welcome in my sacred garden.

J: Yes, it’s time to go and you know you are always welcome in mine as well, Frank too of course.

R: I might not tell Frank that, he says in the book he is going to get the girl. Perhaps I’ll keep the invitation to your garden a secret.

J: I got news for you, you both get the girl. I’ll see you soon my love.

R: I love you and thank you so much.

How did you find this blog?

Talking with my brother about the post-Frank future of this blog, we concluded that it would be worthwhile to know the answers  to a couple of questions.  Please, if you would, respond to the first two questions. If you wish to respond to the others as well, great,  but the first two are the more important.

The questions:

  1. How did you find this blog?
  2. Why do you read it?

(Optional)

  1. What do you get out of reading it?
  2. What features or materials do you wish were here that isn’t?

 

Thomas, Sayings 88 through 91

Wednesday, July 17, 2019

5:10 a.m. More dreams. I forget what they were, but it is as if I am waking up again. High time.

Saying 88. At this rate, we’ll be through the entire Gospel of Thomas before too long. But as I thought, it will have taken all summer.

  1. Jesus said: The messengers are coming to you with the prophets, and they will give you what is properly yours. You then should give them what you have. Say to yourselves: “When will they come and take what is theirs?”

“The messengers are coming to you with the prophets, and they will give you what is properly yours.” Remembering the previous Saying’s purport –.

Saying 87, we decided, meant basically, Remember that you are on your own in this business. Not that there won’t be help or cooperation, but that your own working-out of your purpose is your own job, and can’t be delegated or assumed to be the responsibility of others.

Which is more, actually, than you had gleaned yesterday. Side-note, by the way: There is more than one way to “think about” these things. It doesn’t always have to be done consciously.

However, to the point: Now relate this explicitly to the first sentence of Saying 88.

Messenger is one name for angel. I don’t know if angel is what Jesus meant here, but maybe. It would mean we have assistance from non-3D – angels – and from 3D – prophecy. I could accept that meaning.

Then, continue. “You then should give them what you have.”

Meet assistance with sincerity and effort and open-handedness.

And the final line?

When will they come and take what is theirs? It sounds like a fair exchange, somehow. They – the messengers and prophets – give us what is “properly” ours. We in turn say to ourselves, when will they come and take what is theirs? So what is that? Us – 3D souls interacting with them? Something else?

Ask yourself, more deeply, what is theirs? What can Jesus have meant, that was important enough –and was understood to be important enough by the disciples – to be included in the book of sayings?

I think, they have helped us develop what we are; they are part of us as we are part of them; our lives are a process of choosing, shaping, creating out of a given starting-point. What else do we have to give but who we are? Ourselves, in other words.

Your personalities? Your essences? What?

I think our personalities are more like a role an actor is playing, than the actor’s life itself. The roles the actor played is a part of his life, as they are part of his career, but they are only his life secondarily, not primarily. Primarily, the actor is the man playing the role, not the other way around, no matter how it may appear to the theoretical audience or other members of the cast or even to the actor himself if he is really caught up in the role. So, who we are includes our personality, but does not consist of it; personality is only one aspect of who we are, and not the primary aspect except under 3D conditions. (Of course even in 3D it is not primary, but often it appears to be.)

So, to sum up in a word this saying that yesterday conveyed no meaning?

Angels and human instruments are available to help us; in return, we should be prepared to give the gift that is who we have chosen to be.

Good enough. This one too will repay further pondering. Next saying.

  1. Jesus said: Why wash the outside of the cup? Don’t you know that the one who made the inside also made the outside?

I could take this a couple of ways. It could mean, why wash only the outside of the cup, and it would counsel against hypocrisy at one extreme or at least undue concern for appearance at the expense of essence. Or it could mean, don’t think the outside is any less important, any less valuable, than the inside. I am inclined, at the moment, to think it may mean both.

And in each case, what would outside and inside signify?

At one level, us, our being, our 3D- and non-3D-ness. Our “subjective” and our “objective” life. Soul and body, say.

In which case the connection with the previous saying would be what?

Well, I guess, that what we have that we can offer is not only our thoughts and intentions and inner nature, but our words and actions and outer nature.

That’s well said, and as you can feel, it is more than you knew you knew.

Yes. I am always inclined to downplay appearances.

To undervalue the 3D world you live in, in fact.

Yes..

Well, having been alerted to the tendency, stop doing it. Do you not know that the world is not a patchwork of sacred sites, but is sacred? Nothing in 3D is less sacred than non-3D or anything else, regardless of appearance. How else could it be? Could anything in 3D be dead, when it is made of living being? This is one of the mistakes in perception that Jesus was out to correct: The world, not any one part of the world only, is sacred. Therefore attempts to separate it into “Holy Land” or “holy spots” or “holy buildings” only result in comparatively devaluing the rest.

The South Bronx, the nuclear waste repository sites, the sea of floating plastic, the dead or rather deadened areas created by human neglect or malfeasance or inadvertence are all as sacred at Mount Shasta or Glastonbury or what have you. It is exactly similar to the fact that the most vicious piece of malevolent human garbage is in fact a role being played by a method actor, and the actor is as much a valued member of the cast as those playing more sympathetic roles. Proceed.

Saying 90 is familiar to us from the synoptic gospels.

  1. Jesus said: Come to me. My yoke is easy. My mastery is gentle, and you will find rest for yourselves.

Look at this familiar saying in light of its predecessor in order. See if that does not produce at least one new nuance.

Perhaps in context it means – beyond what is obvious – that it is restful to be who we really are. Or, to put it better, that it is a strain to live as if we were divided, and an easing of the strain to live united, inside and outside in alignment.

Again, worth looking at from time to time. Saying 91.

  1. They said to him: Tell us who you are so that we can believe in you. He replied: You analyze the appearance of the sky and the earth, but you don’t recognize what is right in front of you, and you don’t know the nature of the present time.

I take this to mean, It is easier to judge (to weigh) the 3D world by appearance and in light of experience than it is to see what you aren’t used to seeing, or don’t know how to recognize.

And, “you don’t know the nature of the present time”?

That sounds like us. Maybe it’s always that way? You expect things to go on as you think they always have, and you don’t see that it isn’t so.

There is another meaning.

Yes, I see it now you mention it. They weren’t looking at the 3D world in light of what he had been showing them. They were still caught up in appearances, to large degree.

Always a concern. Very good work, very easy, was it not? We may resume at another time.

Okay. Our thanks, as always. That isn’t just an empty phrase.

Sometimes it is, though. Sincerity rests upon consciousness, which varies.

Till next time, as you said.

 

TGU – Getting out of our own way

September 11, 2007

Und so, my friends. This has the look of a long planned setup. The only book I (more or less) completed, and it becomes the key, finally, after I give up.

[This referred to my projected book Imagine Yourself Well, which Hampton Roads had just committed to publishing. In the event, however, we were unable to agree on terms.]

After you give up one way of seeing or structuring things. You know that somehow this had become a straitjacket, but you still don’t know quite how, because so much of the associations involved are unconscious.

What changed is that suddenly you were willing to be practical, to write what would sell, to realize fully that not one book buying new freedom was the way, but a series of books maintaining you in freedom.

Yet this is only part of it. Also – you are going to write what you know (at whatever level you know it) rather than trying to write more than you know, which would be a form of lying if that weren’t impossible for you.

You are now focused on writing what you are an expert on – can there be anything more appropriate, or easier? And you aren’t now focused on saving the world or on expressing your own experience blow-by-blow, but something in between.

Expressing your point of view – as a point of view, not as the truth or – worse – The Truth – is something you knew many, many years ago, but never absorbed into what was already a calcified dream.

Yes, I see it now: giving up the dream as it was somehow allowed it to be updated from where I am now, and it was back within seconds (so to speak) because it was never wrong in the first place, only calcified.

Yes. And this applies to other things in your life, and in anyone’s life. If you have held a dream for so long – and is deferred, and deferred until you sicken of disappointment and despair – there is a reason why it is deferred. The Ford Maddox Ford book The Good Soldier asks “Why can’t people have what they want?” And we would answer, “They can. They always get what they want, depending on who `they’ refers to, and what `want’ means in context.”

That is almost clear but not quite.

The version of you that formulated that dream passed away long ago – but the dream latched onto your continuing form. The `want’ attached to it similarly was obsolete – it does not match your state of being – but did not pass away.

Once again? Another try?

You have often joked about it, how lucky people are that they don’t live the life that their teenage selves would have envisioned. Yet in some ways you do, you all do. This is one more advantage of increased consciousness; it allows you to update your files, your vision of possibilities, your preferred outcomes. Indeed, it all but forces that, by the disconnect between the consciousness and its non-expression in the life one lives.

I think this idea is either so subtle or matches so ill my conscious categories of thought, that it is not coming through very clearly to me. I keep feeling that there is a knob to turn that will suddenly bring it into focus.

Perhaps. An other analogy, then. [Drawing of four stick figures, each labeled:] You at age 20. You at age 30. You at age 50. You at age 60, etc.

For each age there is a corresponding body of self-image, call it. You see yourself, think of yourself, experience yourself, differently. This is not merely internally but of course externally.

Well, you must change to meet the changes.

If you at age 50 retain the idea of yourself that you have at age 30, or anticipate the idea of yourself that you have at age 60 (as you as a boy anticipated you as an old man) you do not fit comfortably where you are.

If the idea is sexual, it can cause problems – the puer aeternis [the boy who won’t grow up] for instance. If physical (i.e. the body as an ideal) this can cause problems from over-stressing it trying to make it function as if it were as it once was. If mental, it can be a problem of rigidity, of inability to adapt. If emotional, the same.

But if it is a fixed idea, you can have the curious situation of the self having outstripped the idea. In other words, neither the physical nor mental nor emotional body is retarded or warped (so to speak) by inability to adapt – yet one or more of the bodies may be so firmly coupled to a fixed idea as to be prevented from freely manifesting. And there you were.

Did you have something in mind for the diagram we began?

Yes, but abandoned it. It would require more work to get it through before you understood the idea than to try to give the idea in words.

[Insert diagram]

If four bodies (this is an analogy, remember, using your accustomed concepts) at a given age functions at their appropriate level, you have harmony. (A)

If not, one can lag (B.) or lead (C.) or perhaps a mixture of lagging and leading (D.).

It isn’t very clear now but you can clean it up, knowing what we want to indicate. Well, if something lags it lags for a reason. If it leads, it leads for a reason. By this we mean, it was caused, we don’t necessarily mean, for a set purpose. A fixed idea can retard one of the bodies – usually the mental or emotional but it could be the physical or energetic, for ideas have consequences in how one lives.

Now if a fixed idea does not retard one of the bodies – yet nonetheless remains fixed where it does not by nature belong, it cannot manifest which can mean that it becomes even more fixed because experiences cannot modify it (make it more realistic). In such case, the discomfort must grow until the idea is abandoned.

But – as you just saw – abandoning the fixed idea means letting it loose. What is appropriate in it what is possible, what is still desired by the present-moment you, then can manifest, stripped automatically of aspects that do not belong.

We need only get out of our own way.

That is usually the case. This is just a new (to you) variant of the problem.

Thanks as always.

Thomas, sayings 86 and 87

Tuesday, July 16, 2019

5 a.m. Saying 86?

  1. Jesus said: Foxes have holes and birds have nests, but the son of man has no place to lay down his head and rest.

Everybody has heard the saying, and presumably everybody thinks they know what it means. But I don’t think Jesus was complaining about being homeless. I think he was saying, This is not my place of rest, and it won’t be yours. I’d be interested in your take on “the son of man.” I have sometimes thought it meant “the descendant of humans,” the next step, so to speak. But I have no real idea.

Not quite The Son of God, is it?

That’s my point. From everything Jesus said, I get that he was emphasizing his kinship to us, not his essential difference. If he was essentially different, what lesson could his life be for anyone? But if he was our elder brother, so to speak, the one who had gotten farther along on the path of experience, his life would have everything to do with ours.

Yes, as encouragement, as a way to life more abundant. But what of Ouspensky’s argument that the life of Jesus was one long demonstration and teaching of the life of initiates, the few for whom the esoteric path is possible?

Jesus never said only a few can do it; he said only a few would do it, which I take to mean would want to, would be willing to pay the price. But I don’t know, of course.

Ouspensky was not wrong in differentiating between the idea that everybody would evolve – the common idea of a somewhat mechanical evolution – and the idea that only a few at any one time are ready and willing. But to stick to one point. Yes, Jesus was always saying 1) I am a man too, and 2) what I am you can become, only 3) the way to become what I am is strait and narrow – “strait” as in, a tight passage; “narrow” as in one with very little leeway.

So what about the comparison between his journey and the lives of animals?

Think of it as the difference between the natural order of things, ruled by territory and instinct and commonly understood behavior and rules of behavior (instinct, again), and a life lived consciously. To live awake is to live without the constraints of an ordered, bounded, existence. This has its particular features, some of which are convenient and some not. One thing such a life has is relatively unbounded possibilities. But another is relatively unbounded comforting limitations.

I think I garbled that. You mean, I think, lack of restriction is also lack of the kind of comfort that comes when you don’t have to do the work of choosing.

More or less. The burden of greater consciousness is not for everybody. For some the disadvantages will outweigh the advantages. That’s one reason why relatively few at a time are ever both willing and able.

Yes, and I get the sense that you, and I, differ from Ouspensky in that he seems to think that few people will ever be able to move on, as opposed to few at any given moment, whether that moment is a year or a lifetime.

Perhaps he was speaking for a different audience at a different time, which was, you must realize, more than eight decades in the past from 2019. In your day things move so rapidly as to erase the past before the ink has dried. It makes it hard to retain perspective even for those who are paying attention.

I’ve noticed.

You’ve noticed sometimes. Saying 87, then.

  1. Jesus said: Wretched is a body depending on a body, and wretched is a soul depending on these two.

On a guess, I’d say this means, if you think the 3D world is all there is, God help you, and if your 3D/non-3D point of view still thinks the 3D is all there is, even worse.

Look more carefully, and slower.

Okay. I suppose it might mean, if you are dependent upon someone or something else, it isn’t a good situation, and if you are a soul dependent upon a 3D mind that is dependent upon someone or something else, same thing.

Bear in mind the previous saying.

Well, it seems to go along with it. If you can’t live on your own – if you have to have the support of society, family, all the attachments that life commonly brings – you won’t be able to be your true self, which is the only self that can attain what he calls the kingdom of heaven. That doesn’t mean you can’t have them, but that you can not be dependent upon them in a certain way; can not prefer them to your own inner requirements.

Close enough, but this one will repay further thought by different individuals who come to it, because each will have a slightly different slant, a slightly different need, that will inform it.

And that’s enough for this morning, I take it. The next Saying is opaque to me, which usually means it requires a fresh start. So we’ll see you next time, unless you have anything to add here.

No, be well and remember that you can have life more abundant and it is not a matter of waiting until death sets you free, for after death you will still be you, only in different terrain, as we have said more than once.

 

TGU – changing our state of being

August 30, 2007

So – what will I do with myself?

In general! Who’s up today?

No one? Very well, I need someone who can help me, first with my eyes.

You must not forget that your eyes like every part of you are metaphysical (so to speak) as well as physical. If there is too much pressure within the eye, damaging the optic nerve – as there is – what does that say of your life otherwise?

Too much pressure to see, injuring my ability to see?

Not quite. Too much pressure within the eye, regardless of intent –

Hmmm. Too much internal pressure. No, I don’t quite get it. More?

The eye is fashioned and shaped a certain way, for its function. Variations from the optimal shape beyond tolerance impede the effectiveness of the organ. Variances beyond that begin to affect function.

And so –?

And so if you are shaped in such a way as to be seriously different from the norm, your normal may not be the “normal” for everyone else; indeed it scarcely could be. But nonetheless it exists. That is, you have a normal point, from which you stray only at a cost.

Yes. And so –?

Your state of being affects your state of being! That’s the only way we can think of to make clear to you that you are regarding as unconnected what in fact is identical but seemingly different. Your state of being – your emotional, mental, energetic life, your accustomed somewhat consciously selected way of existing – affects your state of being – your physical apparatus and functioning.

You know this in one context, or why did you cling to the irrational certainty that you could move away from asthma (which is how we would see it) and why did you notice the connection, a while ago, between you watching a cynical and depressing movie and you’re becoming ill?

Yet this is to see the episodic nature of things and not the continuing nature. In other words if you can interrupt – prevent – cure – an asthma attack, why not cure on-going problems such as, oh, congestive heart failure and its associated causes? Yet if you can do that (regardless of outside agents) why not even longer-term problems? But these problems may require that you live differently. Is that so surprising?

Diet, you mean?

Inspiration – intake – in all senses of the word. And exhalation – release – in all senses of the word. As you cannot only breathe in and not out physically (that is, with the lungs) so you cannot breathe in meta-physically and not breathe out. You have brought in – but you must combine what you have brought in with your essence, and exhale it again transformed. This is health.

My life is very unbalanced.

Your awareness of the imbalance fluctuates but you are learning.

What need I do that I can do?

If it is needed, it is possible. Evident, surely.

Maybe. I’ll concede it, anyway.

Nothing that you need do will be second-nature to you, or you would be doing it already. So it involves change that won’t be totally comfortable.

I see that. As in [Hermann Hesse’s novel] Steppenwolf.

Yes, very much. Could you follow that example?

I don’t know.

An honest answer.

Well, so, like what?

Reach out again. [Meaning, connect with another person. Enter another relationship.]

Oh no!

See?

I thought I’d demonstrated pretty well that this was a dead-end path.

No, you refused or were unable to actually tread the path. You stopped at a gas pump in California.

Yes. But I don’t know if I really want to go that route again. And if I did it would have so many consequences –

It is for you to choose – but your present route has consequences too.