10. Wide-ranging connection

Posted on by Frank DeMarco

Monday May 6, 2024

5:40 a.m. Stitching reality together?

That was probably a misleading way to put it. What we mean by it is that extensive and wide-ranging connections tend to coordinate the effects in one place of what occurs in another place, and of course the same with times. It isn’t as if ancient Egypt were something unconnected to your time, or either time to medieval England, etc.

You seem to be saying that what happens to the people of a given time affects the age itself.

This is language, causing difficulty by making an abstraction seem solid. The people are the age. Remember – though we have not said it here, we made it clear enough in other conversations – material reality is mind-stuff; it is not rocks in space the way it appears to 3D senses. In reality, the difference between a desk in a certain time-space and a person in that same time-space is mostly appearance. The desk is spun from thought no less than the person is. So the distinction that arises in your minds between “living people” and “inanimate objects” is mostly illusion.

I suppose this is why we can be mentally and emotionally affected by our physical surroundings. There is interaction between the human and the non-human, but at base they are the same, or anyway are close kin.

You see what happened just there? You got it, but then it seemed far-fetched, so you backed away from it. Yes, the same, not “close kin.” This stretches your accustomed way of thinking about yourself and the world (accustomed by life as interpreted through the senses), so the closer approximation seemed too abstract, theoretical, unlikely; you instinctively fell back on a less disruptive way of thinking about it.

That’s very interesting. I do see it.

But we don’t want to stray too far from our starting-place. Let’s begin again.

Each of you is composed of strands that may be considered to be individual lives, each of which is similarly composed of strands of other lives. Rather than the disconnected individuals you usually experience yourselves to be, you are actually branches of the human tree. This is less figurative than it sounds. You are not disconnected, and the things you connect to are not disconnected, so in what way could you be considered separate merely because you each have independence of motion, and have the ability within limits to choose your future development?

At the same time, hold in your minds the fact that the human-tree is itself not independent from its surroundings and we do not mean because you must breathe etc. It is not a merely physical connection – oxygen-breathers depending upon the air they breathe – but also a deeper connection, because the physical world is all one thing in the same way the metaphysical world is.

So you – anyone reading this – are an integral part of the human race, and thus an integral part of human existence on 3D Earth, — and this has implications worth pursuing.

  • You connect to all others. That means you affect each other, directly or less directly.
  • You extend through time (though you would likely say “across” time, as if it were a matter of spanning distance). Thus you affect each other in time as well as in space.
  • The mental world is the non-3D world of non-locality, fluidity of movement, relatively instant creation and re-creation, freedom from 3D constraints. And you in 3D bodies are also 3D minds. Hence, you play by two sets of rules, and can transcend either.
  • Your mental world tends to be heavily affected by what your 3D senses tell you, so you tend to invent rules for yourselves (thinking you are perceiving them) that narrow your focus and limit your possibilities.
  • Thus, you have the ability to grow into something superhuman; it is a matter of reconceptualizing what you are.

But with your senses reporting one set of rules of existence, and your intuitions reporting a different set, how you define yourself is less a matter of circumstance than of choice. The family and time you are born into will largely shape your sensory perceptions of the world.; your own composition (your strands) will react to that idea of life, sometimes agreeing with it, sometimes not. Thus you are in a position to choose. What do you want to believe about yourself? What do you want to believe the world is? How open are you to change, and to believe in change? How open are you to hope or despair, confidence or fear?

You could look at this two ways, and either way is somewhat true:

  1. All your non-3D connections – your strands immediately and, via those strands, all of humanity – act as a drag, as inertia, making it harder for you to become something different from what you experience yourself to be.
  2. Those same conditions act as support, holding you in their cradling arms, wishing you well, profiting from your advances and suffering from your losses.

As we say, it is your choice how to see it. Depending upon time and place and your own intent and ability, either condition is a better way to see it. But maybe three minutes later, the other looks more realistic.

It is always up to you.

Have you ever thought of life this way? If not, why not? Haven’t the world’s scriptures told you, you are all brothers and sisters? Didn’t Jesus quote scripture to say, “I tell you, you are gods”? Hasn’t the promise been given time after time, in many different ways? Haven’t the words of mystics reporting their own first-hand experiences told you all you need to know?

Once we get over thinking them special, which means, different.

Yes. That is a confusion, looking at result and jumping to the conclusion that the essence must have been different. People do that most particularly with the greatest success stories: Jesus, Gautama, etc. Well, it’s time to get over that. Once you know that what you experience follows from your intent, you have no ready-made excuse to settle for anything less than you desire.

Only, you don’t want to be making people feel guilty, or feel like failures.

No, of course not. But as you sometimes say, a good boot in the tail is sometimes helpful

Somebody said sometimes it helps and sometimes it just hurts.

We decline to be responsible for what people do or do not do with our words, once we have done our best to clarify our meaning. Our point remains:  You are not on your own, regardless what it looks like. You couldn’t be alone, by the nature of things.

There are further implications which perhaps are obvious, but which we state for clarity: What assistance you receive depends on what you seek. If you prefer a downward course, you will have plenty of connections that will be glad to lead you that way.

That isn’t the best was to put that, but to say it carefully will require some space. Perhaps we will resume there next time. But what we are trying to get across here is that if your aspirations are high or low, you can connect to others who will accompany you upward or downward. The key is your intent, and since your strands will include disagreements, you may feel torn. It is the common human condition, after all, to be tempted. (You can be tempted by good as well as by evil.) It is always your choice, your intent, but it isn’t always easy to know what your intent is. That’s another possible starting-place.

Until next time, then.

Some very interesting stitching-together of concepts going on here. Our thanks as always.

 

9. The interaction of strands

Posted on by Frank DeMarco

Sunday, May 5, 2024

7:40 a.m. Strands across time?

Consider several statements as they interact:

  • The 3D conditions constrict experience to one time-space moment. This moment appears to be the only time that is real, the past being gone and the future not yet arrived.
  • This situation recurs repeatedly, one moment at a time, relentlessly, each one now being the real and all other moments being nonexistent.
  • Nonetheless, the mind can range not only into the past, but also the future, which ought not to be possible if future moments did not already exist.
  • You in your present moment are alive, but “you” means not a unit but a community of strands, which may be thought of as past lives.
  • You sometimes connect with living past moments and perhaps change them, perhaps are changed by them. This can only be done mentally, not physically, but it involves changes in the physical by way of the mental.
  • Those other moments are not statues or pictures: They remain alive, as they were when experienced. (This is difficult to state clearly. Simply: No moment dies. Nothing is preserved like a fly in amber.)
  • Ultimately, as we will show, everything is alive, no matter how it may appear. The world is made of life; there is nothing dead. Things appear dead when they cease to function at their highest level, but the materials of which they were made live, and whether you talk of radioactive waste or synthetic fibers or the granite that forms a mountain, at some level it is alive, because the world – the universe – reality – is not made up of some living and some dead things, but only of living.
  • Death may be said to come to a level of organization. But even a corpse is made up of living bits; there is nothing else. There is no molecule, no atom, no “subatomic particle” that is not alive, and how can living things combine to produce dead ones?

Now, if everything is alive – and we wish language provided an easy way to assure that people understood “everything” to mean not just every thing but every process, every energy, every aspect of 3D – if everything is alive, and everything connects, you can intuit that the possibility of communication is inherent.

Everything connects. It’s all alive. It interacts. Therefore – where are the boundaries?

In our preconceptions, presumably.

Exactly. The only hard and fast rules for what is possible are those you construct yourselves, though in doing so, you usually think you are deducing them, rather than creating them yourselves or accepting the creations of others.

So, consider. The life you really live is much more wide-ranging then you realize. Say you are a compound of five strands (to pick a number at random). Each of those strands was – is – a life in 3D “somewhen.” Each lives in its own 3D time and also in every time connected to whichever beings (like yourselves) employ it as a strand. Try to get a sense of the dizzying complications.

I get a sense of the impossibility of spelling it out.

Fortunately, that isn’t necessary. We can only provide hints, to spark people’s intuitive recognition, but that is all that is required.

Let me take a crack at it, then. I can name some strands: A Welsh journalist and psychic explorer, a young girl from Eastern Europe, a Transcendentalist trader who fought in the War of the Rebellion, a medieval Norman priest, an Egyptian priest from times we don’t know of. There’s five right there. They are what their lives made them, and yet one of the things in their lives is their cohabitation within me, which I imagine gives them access to each others’ worlds as well.

That should be enough to convey the idea. If different continents, different centuries, different lifestyles were not enough to separate them, where is separation except relatively? And if they, being part of you, are part of the incarnation you join into as a strand [that is, my “next life”], there is no “end of story.” Life goes on, recombination does on, accretion of experience goes on.

All of it feeding back into the non-3D.

From every source, remember. Not merely from you because you are in the present. They too are in the present! So, an event, a thought, a fantasy, a problem, gets reported from the viewpoint of every element participating in it. If Frank goes for a walk by the river, it is experienced by each strand up and down the chain. And this is true of all, which is why it is usually below the level of your conscious awareness: The mass of information would make experiencing it chaotic. And, after all, you are in onetime-space for a reason. You were not designed to experience everything at once.

Now, we caution those who read this, don’t start building “can’t” and “shouldn’t” into this. We are describing the baseline situation. Ordinarily you don’t experience the lives of your strands. Ordinarily you may not even be aware of them, or talk to them, or hear them. That doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t. Do what you want to do, go where you want to go, and don’t imagine us to be building fences around the permissible. As a matter of fact, every non-3D intervention such as ours is designed specifically to broaden your field of action, not constrict it.

That said, recognize how widely you already range! Do you think you will run out of new worlds to explore any time soon? And in the first-hand exploration of the newly found abilities is your future. We don’t say life is a school, but it does have one school-like aspect: You continually move to more complicated things as you master old ones. More complicated means more interesting, more difficult, usually both more painful and more life-enhancing. You never stay the same except when you wish to take a breather.

And this means, periodically you need to update your ideas of what is permissible for you. (You can’t generalize too much about others. Everyone else is moving too, and you get little more than glimpses of who, what, and where they are.) Old barriers dissolve, new difficulties arise. It is inherent in life.

What you may not have considered is the effect of your connection – via your component strands – across time and space, which is the same as saying across civilizations.

You affect them. They affect you. (How else could it be, given that you and they are the same organized being?) The interaction always occurs beneath your level of consciousness, as we said. But it is always possible to raise some specific part of it into consciousness. The chief requirement is your intent.

By the way, this is equally true on other ends of these chains of being. The medieval monk may bring your existence to mind; so may the injured soldier in his delirium. In those cases, as in yours, the major variable is how the contact is conceptualized. The Tower of Babel refers not only to the confusion of tongues at any given time. It also refers to the confusion of concepts that render men strangers to each other.

This will have to do for the moment.

It felt like a struggle a couple of times. Continuing with this next time?

Probably we will move on to how this stitches reality together, but, we’ll see what the moment brings.

Very well. Thanks as always.

 

8. Viewpoints and strands

Posted on by Frank DeMarco

Saturday, May 4, 2024

4:45 a.m. You said you might want to continue with our strands and their ongoing life.

At other times, we have gone into the way language gets between expression and meaning and understanding. The description of time provides a good example of the difficulty. How can there be only “the eternal now” and at the same time all these separate moments of space-time? How can every moment be alive even though it is not in your present? The ambiguities and false rigidities inherent in language make it difficulty, particularly when non-3D (non-sequential) realities must be described in 3D sequential logic. The only way we know to use with you is to describe around what cannot be clearly said, repeatedly, from different angles, until hopefully you have enough points of data for the overall shape to insinuate itself into your understanding. Other non-3D people, dealing with other 3D people, use different methods – paradox, poetic allusion, various tricks – to accomplish the same thing. In all cases, we are trying to get around the limitations inherent in sequential exposition. Naturally, direct mind-to-mind contact obviates much of this difficulty, which is why there really is no substitute for personal instruction, which blends unnoticed non-3D to non-3D communication with the words.

In the absence of personal instruction from one 3D individual to another, personal contact from one 3D individual to its non-3D component will convey direct understanding, but still there will be the problem of turning what is then known into a form that can be communicated to others.

If you were dependent upon 3D sequential exposition for your understanding of “the way things are,” how far do you suppose you would get? With the best intent and the clearest intellect and the widest learning, you would still be severely handicapped. Your conclusions would probably be very logical, very consistent – and would miss the mark widely. Fortunately, you are not restricted to 3D input only. However, if you do not recognize the extent to which you rely on non-3D input, your ability to employ such access is likely to be severely limited by your very logical but incorrect assumptions.

Thus, in examining your composition as it functions “between moments of time” (as it seems to you), it is necessary to clarify things that language distorts – using the same distorting language! Hence, your part in this, reader, is to deliberately intend to remain open to your own non-3D component to feed you understanding as we go along. This is a straightforward process and yet also one with inherent potential pitfalls. You have to do two things at once:

  • Absorb the material while testing it, sort of, with your non-3D knowing.
  • Watch that your preconceptions and preferences do not sneak in, disguised as intuitive knowing.

It can be done, but it doesn’t happen automatically. Every philosophical or religious teaching ever put forward has seen perversions of its meaning by people who thought they understood (if only because it “felt like” they understood it), but in fact were mingling these new understandings with their previous understanding.

Well, who could avoid doing that? Your gift is what you bring to the moment. But a certain vigilance on your part is prudent. It is so easy to receive a new orientation only in a way which leaves you comfortable in the place you started! That is putting new wine in old wineskins, and may not turn out well for you. However, as in all things, you do have your non-3D component to help you through difficulties. We mention the problem only so that you may have it in consciousness, where it is easier to deal with.

This may look to you like a long parenthesis, but in fact it bears directly on the question of the seemingly contradictory descriptions of time.

From a non-3D viewpoint, all times exist, and therefore all times are alive, because there is nothing dead anywhere. From your limited 3D viewpoint, the present moment (which is continually being exchanged, one for the next) is the only living moment, all others being “past” or “future” or perhaps theoretical, such as alternative time-lines.

You in 3D, being inherently also in non-3D mentally, can and often do experience time in either of the two ways. Therefore you conceptualize time in the two ways, which can lead to confusion. For our purposes, it is necessary that you conceptualize the non-3D’s vision as unhampered and the 3D’s as partial. To cling to 3D explanations is to forfeit the greater understanding that can come only from a different viewpoint added to your previous one.

From our viewpoint, life looks like this:

  • A 3D human is a soul composed of various strands learning to live together as a new unit.
  • Each of these strands may be seen as a past soul, with all its experiences, its willed changes, its values.
  • Consciousness within the 3D life is not unitary any more than the strands are unitary. It is the product of cooperation and contention among the strands.
  • Such ongoing relating among the strands may change the new soul. It may also change the older souls, the strands.
  • The “present moment” is the only place that changes can take place. From any 3D perspective, there is only one (changing) present moment, hence only one time that offers promise, offers life.
  • Yet in reality, every moment is a living present-moment, for all viewpoints are the result of perspective, and in the absence of limitations there can be no one-and-only perspective.
  • Therefore, you see, every thing, every when, every “past” or “future” moment, is alive and changing. Everything affects and is affected by everything.
  • And therefore, every moment is potentially a fulcrum from which to change everything past or present. If this sounds wildly unstable, remember that every other moment is also a fulcrum, and the result is a form of inertia. It takes a lot to revolutionize anything, let alone everything. But
  • Everything is alive. Every moment, every “thing.” It may or may not seem that way to you, but if you meditate on it, it may come clearer. There is nothing dead. How could there be? There is only change (when viewed from a limited 3D-moment).

We know that is a lot to take in, and the more awake you are to the implications, the more is involved. But it is important that you take in as much at a time as possible. Real comprehension comes not as a slow product of logical analysis but as a sudden connection of what you are consciously centering on to what your non-3D can tell you. It is a combination of sequence and gestalt. The greater the number of things in mind, the greater the potential “Aha!”

That will be misinterpreted, I’m afraid. I know you don’t mean that a process of memorization is involved, but people may semi-consciously move that way.

When we say keeping a great number of things in mind, we mean, considering various bullet-points together, as opposed to considering any lesser number of them. However, each person will have  different amount of things that can be absorbed at once, and of course different non-3D input. Honest intent is the key. Given that, the rest will follow.

And there’s your hour. We have scarcely begun on the influence of strands across time, and have not yet begun on their part in stitching together 3D reality, but (within 3D sequential exposition!), one thing at a time.

Well, our thanks as always.

 

7. Mental and physical

Posted on by Frank DeMarco

Friday, May 3, 2024

4:30 a.m. The mental life connects; the physical life separates.

That isn’t quite the way to put it, though it is what we said. Phrased more carefully, it would say, the physical circumstances lead you through the experience of isolation, but your mental life, carefully observed, provides you the evidence of continual connection that otherwise might not be noticed, not indeed believed.

It may seem to be a paradox. As always, any paradox may be resolved by considering the elements comprising it from a higher or deeper level. Here, the paradox resolves easily. (In fact, many will not even see it as paradox, seeing the resolution instinctively.) It is mostly an example of separation of function. A matter of specialization, one might say.

Your mental world functions from (connects you to) the non-3D from which you emerged. It continuously provides you access to abilities and perspectives you could not achieve if you were confined mentally, as you are physically, to 3D conditions. This is why some people discover liberation in meditation or prayer or any discipline that frees them from 3D sequential thinking.

Your physical existence in a separate body lives by very different rules, in very different conditions. This is not poor design, nor the result of bad choices, nor punishment, nor accident. Your 3D life is designed to place you in 3D conditions of seeming isolation in one time-space moment at a time. An illusion of separation is a part of that isolation. It functions as it is supposed to function.

However – and if you are reading this, you almost definitely know this from personal experience – this illusion of separation, of isolation, may be overcome by a realization of a deeper unbreakable connection, and that realization will certainly change your experience of 3D. The same conditions that provided a painful isolation now support a very different situation, in which physical confinement to one time-space moment may be connected to mental awareness of connection, to provide the best of both worlds.

You understand? At one level of consciousness, the phrase “All is one” will be seen to contradict everyday experience. How can all be one when conflict and cross-purposes and painful isolation are so evident? But then you achieve a higher or deeper awareness, and you see, you experience, that in fact both halves of the seeming contradiction are one.

When that occurs, you perhaps restate the situation in your mind as “Life is all one thing in its origins and in its non-3D manifestation, and it appears in 3D as separated elements because of 3D conditions.” Later perhaps you restate it more concisely. “Diversity in unity,” perhaps, or “Unity disguised by an appearance of multiplicity.” Any rephrasing is going to distort the fundamental understanding, because selection in 3D always does that. Sequential exposition – which is what language is, after all – cannot present all aspects at once, and even if it is able to list every single attribute of a situation, it cannot help but imply a hierarchy of importance even by the order in which things are listed, or by the length at which various things are discussed. With this in mind, you see the value of holding an image, or a feeling or a memory, so as to preserve your connection to the reality behind such statements as “All is one” or “All is well.”

We are tempted to digress, and perhaps it is as well to make note: The saying “All is well, all is always well” is so contrary to everyday experience in 3D that it can only be accepted provisionally (that is, on faith that it will prove true), or recast as a pious wish, or denied outright. If your being assents to it, it does so not on logical grounds, nor exactly in defiance of logic, but because something within you recognizes the truth of it. Of course, that may be said of anything we say, but it is particularly true for statements that seem to contradict experience so flatly.

How is everything always well? Phrase your understanding and we will assent or dissent or modify.

I’d say that the 3D can never be understood as a unity by logic based in sensory experience. Judging it by how it appears, we see joy and we see suffering, but we do not see an underlying unity, just as when we look at a family or any group from a 3D level, we see diversity and conflict and cooperation, but never unity. It is only as we look at life from a non-3D perspective that we see that the diversity proceeds from the fact that our consciousness of underlying unity is split by 3D conditions chopping life into time-slices and space-slices. This being so, it is clear that the appearance of diversity has to be rooted in one non-divisible underlying unity that we can mentally see but cannot physically experience.

Yes, that is a good summary. Your senses report on the world at any one time-space moment; your intuitions report on the underlying unity of time, and of space, and of life.

How could something that is one thing be self-contradictory? How could it be random? How could it be chaos, or divided into opposites such as good and evil, knowledge and ignorance, etc.? It may easily, almost inevitably, seem that way, when perceived at the level of consciousness that 3D conditions encourage, but beneath this appearance is the reality, and your deeper selves, your higher selves, will show you that, once you quiet your 3D logic and its insistence on presenting evidence of diversity.

So to return to the main point, not yet quite made: Your mental/physical outlook determines the nature of the world you live in. this does not – could not – depend upon the action or inaction of anyone else. It doesn’t and couldn’t depend upon political or economic or societal events of any kind. (Well, in one sense it may be said to depend upon physical externals, but only in one sense. To the degree that anyone allows external evidence – “the news” or ideology or religion or scientism – to shape their understanding, then yes, it could be said that only certain conditions allow people to get to the point where they can see the underlying reality, because it will keep them from doing the meditation or yoga or prayer or whatever that will quiet the sequential chatter and allow the deeper wisdom to emerge. But even this caveat depends upon sequential logic, you see. It assumes a lack of coherence in the interaction between the individual and its external circumstances.)

Do you really think that most people are precluded from achieving such contact until the world is at peace, or everybody learns to think alike, or all the stoplights across America turn green at the same moment? Such – slightly exaggerated here for emphasis – is 3D logic, saying, “This is how the real world is, as opposed to your pleasant fairy tale of unity and all being well.”

But if the life you experience may change as a result of a change within you – a decision to concentrate on the perception of underlying unity, rather than the appearance of chaotic diversity – what a hopeful fact! It is within your ability to choose how to see the world, how to see life. Your choice, no one else’s. Your choice, and it is not dependent upon wars and rumors or wars, nor upon the next election for city council. Your choice, and it need not wait for supportive others, and need not first clear out non-supportive others.

Could there be a more promising situation than to know that the life you live rests upon your own decisions, your own efforts? Jesus didn’t say, “I have come that you may have life more abundantly, once we’ve cleared the Romans out of here.” He said, “The poor you have always with you,” meaning not that this is a good thing, but in effect saying, “Don’t wait until social conditions are perfect (in your opinion); work on yourself now.” Or perhaps we should say more carefully, not “work on yourself” (which implies a long process) but “Decide now to be what you want to be.” This does not rest on results, but on your acquiring a surer basis to life.

Now, this is enough for today, and because it makes it easier for you to begin again, we’ll say that next time we may (or may not) begin with the effects on your lives of the fact that you are composed of strands – other Ives – which continue to live as you are living, even though from your vantage-point they are not in the living “present moment.”

This is wonderful material, and we are grateful for it. I am, particularly, given that I had thought we were done.

6. The roots of choice

Posted on by Frank DeMarco

Thursday, May 2, 2024

4:15 a.m. So, to continue. Not sure how to proceed.

Relax the reins; let us worry about exposition. Remember, you can always shuffle the resulting passages if need be.

Let’s talk about choice as it can and cannot be manifested in 3D life. You will remember, we have said that providing the possibility of choice is the very reason for the existence of 3D conditions. By forcing your consciousness to concentrate on one time and space, 3D conditions provide the ability and the de facto necessity of choice. But what does it really mean, to choose? If human life were the relatively unitary, relatively separated thing it appears to be, choice would be nearly impossible, for it would involve changing the result of so many conditions that brought you to where you were.

But you are not what you appear to be, and therefore neither is choice. Because you are not the solitary individual units you appear to be, change involves not change of what you are, but change of emphasis among the many strands that you comprise. It is easier to change relative emphasis than it would be to bring in new elements.

This isn’t coming our clearly yet.

No. We see we will have to move to a more remote starting-point. Leet’s look at what a soul is, and which ways it can be considered to be continuing from a prior point and which ways it can be considered new in each incarnation. That will show how it is that choice represents a choosing among elements rather than an introduction of new elements. It will also show how different theological tenets arose from people seeing one but not other aspects of the human condition.

To do this, we will need to make certain flat statements of fact that the reader will have to accept or reject or hold in suspension, depending entirely upon whether the statements resonate. We remind people, there’s nothing wrong with accepting an idea provisionally and then later changing your mind if need be. Exposition is our part; judgment is the reader’s part.

So:

Into the making of a 3D human, many things contribute. The physical heredity has its analogue in what we may call the spiritual heredity. The two shed light upon each other and (as we shall show sooner or later) interpenetrate.

A 3D being created via sexual reproduction is necessarily a compound being, not a unitary one. This should be evident. One’s father’s line provides certain characteristics; one’s mother’s line provides certain characteristics. The resulting child is a compound of the two lines, every child different not only because of circumstances including time and place, but primarily because the possibilities for inheritance from both lines are so numerous, no two people (other than identical twins) are likely to share them all. And this is true all the way back along each parent’s line, and all the way forward along the lines contributed to by each descendant.

Thus, physically you contain characteristics taken from  each of two lines, each of which lines is composed of countless individuals who were equally composed. In short, you are the latest in a long series of mixtures, a very complex result that can be considered individual only in that you each live in separate bodies.

This is so, physically. It is equally so spiritually. When the spiritual (the non-3D) elements came together in the new baby, they too were the result of mixtures going back to the beginning of human life. (And farther, but we will not concern ourselves with that at this time. The exposition is complicated enough as it is!)

Some people believe in reincarnation, the return to 3D of souls that have lived there before. Others believe that each new body receives (or contains, let’s say) a new soul. Both are correct as far as they go, and neither goes far enough, because each considers the 3D human is if it were a unit, when in fact it is a compound.

Reincarnation is valid, in that the same elements live again. It is not valid, in that it is not the case of one unit dying to 3D and being reborn to 3D. If you were units, it would have to be one way or the other: Either the unit came back or it did not. Thus, reincarnation would be true or it would not.

Individual souls being created for each 3D incarnation, similarly, is valid and not valid, depending on how you look at it. When you see that each new soul is a combination of souls that have lived before, you see that yes it is new, in that that particular combination never existed together before, and no it is not new, in that the elements that comprise it are not new. As in so many things, it is all in what factors you include as you consider the matter.

So we propose this scheme, which is somewhat simplified but is accurate enough to be going on with.

  • The human body is a compound, not a unit. It may be said to be a collection of characteristics that have to learn to live together. This is true physically and also spiritually.
  • Physically, the characteristics from either line are so manifold that there is little possibility they will all mesh smoothly. In greater or lesser degree, what one piece needs, another piece may suffer from. Hence, illness, incapacity. Hence also, certain remarkable seemingly superhuman abilities.
  • Spiritually, the same. You are composed of many strands of – shall we call it non-3D DNA? If several different combinations of previous lives go into the making of a new 3D consciousness, you may expect conflict, cooperation, and overlap among them, just as in the inherited physical characteristics.
  • In a sense, it could be said that both body and soul enter this life with unfinished business. By this we mean, not a conscious agenda, but a vector arising out of what the elements in combination create. Your life is a drama, you might say, and both in physical and spiritual terms, it involves the conflict and cooperation of elements that have come from different places, have different needs, have different aptitudes.

Does this clarify our description of life as choice? You know this by your experience. You live the conflict and cooperation of your constituent elements every moment. You choose among available options, all of which are equally you. It isn’t a matter of changing what you are, it is closer to changing the order of precedence of your various constituent elements.

You may ask, “Why?” Why is life this way? Life is often painful, or boring, or liberating, or ecstatically joyful – or any other possible state of being – but does it mean anything more than the passing of time?

Recognize that some questions cannot be answered too soon, or they get falsified by lack of context. But keep the question in mind; it will give point to further exposition. For now, consider the idea that you are not a unit in any sense but as a separate body. Your physical and nonphysical composition is a combination; your mental life is not separate –

In fact, that is where we should resume, with the fact that your mental life connects you, even as your physical life separates you. This should follow logically from the fact that the mental functions in non-3D; you would expect it to follow different rules and exhibit different characteristics. However, the idea may not be obvious until stated. We will go into it next time, probably.

Wonderful. Our thanks, today, as always.

 

5. The cosmic weather

Posted on by Frank DeMarco

Wednesday, May 1, 2024

4:45 a.m. Rereading the four previous entries is both encouraging and daunting. OT1H, a sense that the material is flowing. OTOH, what a mass of material to hold in mind together! But I will assume that you will provide a logical exposition. I am trying not to press, trusting.

Trust is always good, subject to later verification. “Later” verification, note. You can’t verify as you go along, any more than you can analyze while perceiving. First absorb the material, then pick it apart if you feel the need.

Now, we sketched a vision of time as continuing to exist before you move through a given moment and after you have moved on to the next moment. We are tempted to discuss what is called the Akashic Record, a concept we see as widely misunderstood. The misunderstanding stems from a small and seemingly insignificant distortion, but although it is small, it may not be so easy to demonstrate.

We will attempt an analogy with ordinary 3D life as experienced, and see if it illustrates our point. Just as “The map is not the territory,” so “The memory is not the experience.” Or, let’s say, the individual memory is not the same thing as an objective record.

We are not thinking of lies, nor of incomplete or inaccurate recollection, nor even of the construction of narrative using inadequate tools. What is at issue is not any inadequacy of individual recall. Instead, we are discussing the difference between, say, any careful individual’s record of the day’s weather, on the one hand, and the graphs and charts produced by scientific instrumentation, on the other. The latter form of recording is one degree less subjective than the former.

Think of it this way: The Akashic Record is not decided upon, at whatever level of reality. It isn’t like the concept of a recording angel, taking notes. It is automatically produced, it is the image of each moment. It is that moment, in a sense, and ultimately is a compilation of all such moments.

You see the distinction? The record is the shadow of the event, you might say. Or, the record is the event when seen from any other moment of space-time. In that sense (only) the Akashic Record appears as such only when viewed from the 3D. From within the non-3D, there is no distinction between “now” and “then.” Therefore there is no distinction between “now” and the other times that in 3D you see as available on the Akashic Record. That record is a 3D construct, making sense of what otherwise would not make sense in a context that assumes that “past” moments no longer exist.

You see? Someone in 3D, viewing any other moment, may accurately be said to be reading the Akashic Record. But it would be more accurate to say that they were reading, not the record, but the reality, because all those moments continue be as alive in potential as your present moment. A mere static record could not contain the possibility of choice, but – as we will show – just that possibility does exist in every moment. The world doesn’t freeze just because your time moved on to another moment, any more than Detroit freezes when you move to Cleveland. Life continues, whether or not you in 3D are in a position to observe it.

And this provides a segue into other topics, for everything connects. You should remember as we go that many things said in one context will have to be clarified – in effect, revised – when considered in other contexts. This is not because of slipshod exposition, but because different facts reveal different facets depending upon the viewing point. Thus, we are going to discuss choice, but later we will discuss the community nature of what seem like individuals, and what we say now will be understood differently then. This is a drawback of language (sequential exposition) and cannot be avoided. However, it can be kept in mind, which will result in a helpful attitude of readiness for revision, as opposed to thinking in absolutes.

So, choice. Remember that to us, the 3D is a crucible, concentrating you in one moment, one space, one set of circumstances at a time. Now remember the image of your sun and planet pulling you smoothly through space, and envision each such moment as being also a particular bit of space. That is, planetary motion moves you from one moment to the next (as you see it) by moving you from one bit of “space” to the next.

Each bit of space, each moment, has its own particular set of qualities. It is emphatically not true that one moment of time is the same as any other (much less every other), and it is equally untrue that one bit of space has the same qualities, the same effect, as any other. Careful analysis of your experience will tell you this. And this is why such arts as astrology and geomancy work. Once understand the underlying principles, and the working-out in practice follows. (Of course, in the absence of the theoretical background, such arts will necessarily seem to be superstition or fantasy.)

Every moment of time having its own nature, it follows that some things will be easier at one time, harder at another. This is another reason why astrological correlations were studied and codified: They provided predictions for the cosmic weather one will sail through, and when.

Notice, too, that your lives are the interaction of cosmic weather (in effect, the external world) with your own psychic makeup (the internal weather). Rough water for some will be smooth sailing for others. The difference is not in the times, nor in the individual makeup, but in the interaction of the two.

Now whether you are in a smooth patch or a stormy one, you still have the ability to choose. That is, after all, the point of 3D, to provide the continuing ability to choose among possibilities that are available. Each past choice has brought you to your present moment; each choice from here will bring you to your next choice. (Bear in mind, one valid choice is to continue as is. Choice doesn’t have to mean change of direction. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn’t.)

But what exactly does it mean, to choose? The answer may seem obvious, but if you look carefully at the question, it will reveal aspects that may not be immediately obvious.

You are what you are. The possibilities of the moment are what they are. Where is the ability to choose? Haven’t your past actions determined your present, and therefore your future? Isn’t free will an illusion, when  stacked up against cause and effect? It may easily seem that way. And if what you know were the total of what is, you would have to conclude just that.

That isn’t clear.

No. let’s try again. Your present and past and future may be made to seem predetermined by feats of logic honestly intended and carefully constructed. But logic is only as strong as its weakest link, and there is more than one weak link in the chain. For one thing, you as individuals are vastly more like communities than you realize, and none of your constituent elements ever gets to fully express itself. By a change in emphasis among them, you may seem to change, and that change of emphasis depends not upon (external) circumstances, but upon an effort of will, of intent. Hence even if everything external led toward one predicted result, the actual event is likely to surprise you. In effect, you are many people, and you have many possible futures. It is not that simple, of course, but we are well past your usual hour, and it would be as well to pause here.

Interesting. I seemed to perceive your choosing which rocks to step on as you crossed the river this morning.

An unrecognized difficulty of this kind of communication is that we cannot give you anything without breaking it down for sequential exposition. But, enough gets through to justify the effort.

Well, thanks for making that effort. Next time.

 

4, Time-space as a crucible

Posted on by Frank DeMarco

Tuesday, April 30, 2024

2:40 a.m. Very well, the continued existence of each moment of time.

This is a fundamental concept that differs from the accepted “common sense” idea of what goes on. Once absorb this concept and many things open up to reinterpretation. Those for whom it does not resonate will be unlikely to agree with much that will follow.

The difference is this: Instead of the commonly accepted idea that moments of time are created, exist briefly, then cease to exist, we tell you that this is true only as seen from within 3D, because 3D is necessarily experienced as if that way. Outside 3D – that is, outside time-space – reality does not exist as a moving platform. Instead, reality is every moment of time existing as it always did exist, not created, not destroyed. In 3D, you are conveyed from one moment to the next; Outside of 3D, you may go where you please, and it is all there, just as you experience in your minds alone while still in 3D.

You may wish to think of it this way: When the universe is created, it is created entire. Every possible moment exists, immediately, and if you had no way to filter out most of it, you could never make sense of what would be an overwhelming chaos of impressions. That is what 3D does; that is what the body and its brains do: They filter out all but a small manageable slice of reality.

You may wish to think of all moments of time in the same way you do all “moments” of space. There is the vast territory, and you traverse it, one step at a time. The movement of the planet through space carries you smoothly in rhythmic patters, vast spirals through space, and each bit of space is a bit of time.

This is either obvious to you or counter-intuitive, or a confused idea, so we will have to restate it for the sake of the stragglers.

What you experience as time is actually a property of space, as encountered by the earth’s movement through what you may call All-Space-All-Time. You cannot get away from your local movement even if you travel to the moon: After all, your entire solar system is only a tiny, tiny dot in the whole fabric. So you do not experience one such moment while your neighbor experiences another (excepting trivial differences) because you and your neighbor cannot help stand side by side. The qualities of the space-time moments you are being carried through may be very different – will be very different – from those experienced in other galaxies, but of course you cannot know this experientially, only, at best, conceptually.

You may get a faint echo of this reality by considering your experience of geography in 3D. The African desert and the Siberian steppe and the Brazilian rain forest are vastly different from each other, just as they are all vastly different from the deep Atlantic or the heights of Everest. In 3D you can travel in space, so you can experience these differences if you wish to. Well, in non-3D you can experience the similar differences in time.

For those this hasn’t lost:

The 3D world is a focusing device that makes possible things that could not be done otherwise. You live in one time, one space. The world you live on carries you from one moment of time to the next, never returning, never skipping, and you say “time passes.” The time factor is constant even if you move in space from one place to another. You do not – by flying from one continent to another, say – escape the narrow confines of the moment. You can’t fly into yesterday or into tomorrow. (Your flight may last until tomorrow, but wherever you are, whatever you do, you are carried through time smoothly, just like everyone else, necessarily.)

But because you are carried from one bit of time to the next, and then the next, that doesn’t mean that the bit you left ceases to exist, nor that the bit you move to does not exist until you get there. It will seem like that, but that is the difference between a concept – an interpretation – and the experience itself.

This will make sense of certain anomalies that have been noticed. The relativity of time and space, for instance. The possibility of precognition and retrocognition. Accurate and inaccurate prophecy. (Sometimes the mind sees what is coming; sometimes it sees what might have come but won’t. It can be hard to know the difference.)

As we say, the constrictions of the framework of 3D existence make certain things possible. They may be summarized as the ability to concentrate experience into one crucible. You live moment to moment, necessarily. Although your mind may range backwards and forwards, your bodies are held to what is in effect the eternal present-moment, and therefore must deal with life that way.

There is a tremendous advantage to experiencing life in so concentrated a form. It allows you, forces you, to decide from moment to moment. Your entire life may be regarded as one long succession of choices. This is because your lives are experienced in the way they are experienced. If you were released from the constraints of the time-space crucible, your perspective would vastly widen, and you would become aware (again) of so much that you cannot be aware of in 3D for sheer lack of ability to process overwhelming mountains of data.

And of course, this liberation is exactly what you experience when you drop the body at the end of your 3D life.

Now, you may think, “If what follows 3D life is a release from 3D constrictions, why not go now? What is the advantage of staying?” The answer is simple: The qualities that constrict also concentrate; the things you experience as painful or boring have the qualities of their defects (to turn the old phrase on its head). What is seen as disadvantage in one light will be seen as advantage in a different light. The hard work that goes into learning a trade or organizing some specialized knowledge pays off in increased capacity.

When you leave 3D, you will exult in your new freedom – but you will also see that certain things that had been possible (mostly pertaining to the shaping of your essential character by a process of continual choosing) are not possible outside of that crucible. So, it isn’t all gain, dropping the body. Like any journey, there are losses that accompany the gains.

But anyway, think about this way of seeing reality and see if it resonates with you. Those who learn to see time and space in this new relation gain the ability to see their life differently.

That must do for the moment.

Next topic?

Again, try not to anticipate. But the matter of choice is one likely possibility.

Our thanks for all this, as always.