Intuitive Linked Communication (ILC)

Wednesday, November 6, 2024

5:40 a.m. I am suddenly struck with the idea of contacting Mr. Lincoln about what is going on, it has been so long. I was feeling my deep weariness and it put me in mind of him saying there was a core of tiredness in him, toward the end, that nothing could touch. And that reminded me of our conversations of nearly 20 years ago.

Mr. Lincoln, if this is appropriate, a few words on the deeper things going on in our country?

You will remember, they are all your countrymen. There isn’t one legitimate set of opinions and everything else error and wickedness.

Yes, I do know that. Learned it a while ago.

Some never do. But you are not wanting to counteract a feeling of despair, I know. You are wondering, where does this all lead?

I am. I take the politics of it to be only the surface phenomena. As usual, I’d want to know what is going on beneath the surface of things.

You know that already. Nothing has changed.

Since the last time we talked, you mean? I don’t remember how long ago it was, but a while.

Nothing has changed in the order of creation. The world still turns, and it turns despite us, and regardless of us – and yet it hinges on us. And that isn’t so easy for people to understand. They may see it one way, occasionally they are able to see it two ways, but in my experience, only few can see it from every side. It is like saying, God is personally interested in you, and God has other fish to fry, and God will grind you for your own good if need be. The three things seem to contradict each other, and people can’t make sense of it.

It’s all in how you look at things.

It is – but the other ways of looking at things are still valid. That’s the thing. Any way you look at a thing, there’s always another way you might look at it, and see it a little better, a little fuller.

Your specialty in life, seems to me.

If you can’t see the other fellow’s views the way he does, you can’t understand him. That doesn’t mean you’re going to agree with him, but at least you will know why you don’t agree, and how you don’t agree. If you don’t see things as he does, your opposition or even your support will have its flanks in the air, you won’t be rooted in anything, and you are likely to keep getting surprised.

So, all this polarization. My own metaphysics would say it reflects what we are as individuals, including a whole lot of unconsciousness.

Now if you will look at people’s reactions as individuals, you will see that no two people are reacting exactly the same. Some are outraged, some despondent, some scared, some indifferent. This isn’t because they do or do not understand the situation: It is a reflection of what they are. Are you all upset by the elections?

I can’t put much stock in any of it, for some reason. It doesn’t seem vital, the way it did for so much of my life. It feels all superficial and unknowable.

So you see, that is your reaction. That is what the election is to you. At other times in your life you would have been affected quite differently.

Oh yes. I wasted years of my life on politics, rooting for the team, believing that events followed the politicians rather than the other way around. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but I can’t believe in it anymore.

And perhaps that is a stage that many go through, putting their eggs in a political basket and worrying over the basket. Have you thought of politics as a displacement activity?

Surely not a phrase you ever heard in 3D life.

I have had time to learn a few things eavesdropping, you know.

Smiling too. Well, displacement activity? Meaning, keeping people busy while other things happen?

Yes, but not what you may think. Not a magician’s trick to pull the wool over your eyes while he does some sleight of hand. A way of channeling energies that exist and must be dealt with but perhaps cannot be dealt with so easily on their own terms.

I’m getting that you mean energy generated by life that may be discordant and might even be dangerous if not led into safer channels.

When politics breaks down, you get wars sometimes. When wars get out of control, you get an end of civilizations, sometimes, as happened in 1914 and 1939 and even in 1861. None of those wars could ever have left the societies involved as they had been.

I sort of remember us discussing that, a long time ago.

It is better to hash things out in all their ugliness than to let them simmer beneath the surface until they break out uncontrolled.

So, the anger and the fear and contempt and all that are actually being vented by campaigns, so that it acts as a safety valve?

Is it not obvious? Your politicians ride the wave, whatever it may be, persuading themselves that this expresses their deep belief, but you will notice how conveniently the belief changes in the face of any demonstration of a new wave. But nobody creates the wave. They may ride it, may encourage it, may fight it – they don’t create it. This is something vastly larger than human scale.

Yes, I see that. The astrology of the moment determines the mixture of forces in play. The combined psychology of all living humans determines what is at issue. The contemporary manifestations of these energies (culture, media, popular feeling, etc.) determines roughly what the bounds of the arena will be. We as individuals are way smaller-scale than that. That is the playhouse we step into, to do our best.

You can find the same sense of things in my speeches, if you know how to read them. But of course they were my words to my contemporaries. What else did I have to offer them?

I suppose you might have mentioned displacement activity. (Smiling.) I’m sure The Times of London would have commented in a learned fashion.

Or The Times of New York. But seriously, it’s all in my state papers, between the lines. I said I never tried to steer events but to be guided by them. The one would have been beyond my strength, and the other was plenty. It seems to me the prudent course is to do your own proper work, to tackle each day as it comes, to remember to reflect, looking for larger meanings and subtle opportunities, and to trust in God. I was never a conventional Christian but I could tell that our affairs were somehow a working-out of something larger, and I didn’t and still don’t know any more appropriate way to say it than to call it God’s purpose here below. I know that grates on some people, but they are free to rephrase it however they like. It’s still the same reality: There’s something always being worked out, on a scale larger than human but somehow tied to human, and the individual- so tiny in the scales – yet is somehow important in the working-out.

Well, I feel it too, and couldn’t have put it that well. I suppose it is one more special case of All Is Well.

In my blackest days, I never knew a day when all was not well – but sometimes it required a copulate change of mood before I could see it. Obvious now.

I am always moved to say it just this way, don’t know why: God bless you, Mr. Lincoln. And thank you for this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday, November 5, 2024

4:35 a.m.  Reading Jeff Shaara’s Last Full Measure, purchased yesterday at 2^nd Chance Books. Why I am reading it through the night, I don’t know, but I am suddenly moved to interrupt that and do this instead. (At 11 p.m. I had wanted to continue on consciousness, but I got, “We would, but you cannot sustain it. Wait till you are again energized. It involves more than willingness.”)

So – consciousness. I got a sudden stab of insight that led me to put the book down, but of course by the time I got upstairs to my desk, it was gone. Presumably your filing system still functions? I get the feeling you haven’t really said what you want to say.

That’s true. If it were easy to convey, it would have been said – and heard – long ago, but as you will remember, Thoreau pointed out, it takes two to speak the truth, one to speak and one to hear. It is not enough to say something true in a way that you yourself understand it. It is necessary and not always possible to say it in a way that your auditor will hear. Since you never know if words mean the same to others as they do to you, some care is required, particularly since most people usually assume the words have only the meaning they themselves assign to them. That is, the words seem self-evident, so that any different meaning can only be fanciful or deceitful in nature.

How well I know it!

You know it, though, from both ends, because of course you are no exception to the rule of assuming you know what the other person means when you hear the words.

Hence the value of person-to-person contact, and non-3D to non-3D contact – of intuition complementing sensory data.

And hence the desirability of remembering that plodding has its valuable place in exposition. Since words cannot be pinned down to only one meaning, a second-best is to hedge them in by careful pointing out what is not intended. Bus as people see, it is a tedious process. Hence, first we plod, then later we condense, then sometimes we offer a symbol, a non-verbal equivalent.

So, consciousness –

It isn’t like we have forgotten!

But we don’t seem to get any farther forward, either.

A little plodding, as reminders:

• Consciousness is subtractive, in that reality is entirely consciousness, but no compound being can encompass it all.
• The rings of protection you have thrown around your conscious awareness are there not to torment you, nor frustrate you, but to foster and protect and nurture you.
• As you grow in – character, let’s call it – your ability to experience yourself grows, and so various defensive rings may be allowed to come down, widening your field.
• Every time you widen your field, effectively the world changes for you.
• Bruce Moen talked about belief-system crashes, and sometimes cascading belief-system crashes, resulting from one inexplicable experience or thought or realization too many. This is one way your world may change.
• Others experience an increase in consciousness gradually, like the sun rising peacefully in the morning.
• Some receive a jolt from the so-called outside world: an experience of psilocybin, peyote, LSD, whatever.
• Some receive a physically or mentally traumatic experience – an NDE, a debilitating stroke, a shattering loss – that forces them (enables them, as they sometimes realize) to experience the world – that is, experience themselves – differently.

There are a million ways you are led toward waking up. It happens all the time, even to those who think their lives are watching television and drinking beer. But not every opportunity is seized, and – perhaps this has not occurred to you – not every opportunity need be seized, even should be seized. The opportunities are inherent in your life of continuous choosing, and there are no wrong choices.

Perhaps you can see from this incomplete list of possibilities that the nature of someone’s “enlightenment” is going to be radically different depending upon how it comes. Trauma and gentle sunrise do not have the same flavor. And you should also remember that what you receive cannot be separated from what you are. It is the same thing. We repeat, for the sake of the studio audience: They are the same thing. What you are is what you get. If you cannot intuitively feel the truth of this, you have a few things yet to learn.

And I see that the same person may easily experience different modes of expansion at different times in his life.

Certainly. You are not who or what you were at 20, or 30, or 40, etc. Your life is not an endless repetition of the same song. If life offers anything beyond continuous change, it is diversity of experience.

You wouldn’t expect a person who had a mescaline-fueled awakening of the senses – as I did at age 24 – to experience further openings by other means (as I also did, and continue to do) that produce the same results, the same kinds of expansion.

Certainly not. Although, for some people, repetition of experience, progressive deepening of familiar grooves, may be quite appropriate. For you, no.

So what have you told us, here? Anything revolutionary?

What we gave you today will be quite revolutionary, for some. For others it will seem to be (will be) merely common sense, and the revolutionary aspects of seeing things this way will not be apparent. Some will shrug, being unaffected, and say, “Nothing new here.”

But they will be wrong.

Wrong, right – the words mean less than meets the eye. People find what they need when they’re ready for it. All is always well.

What I draw from this is that new sensations (peace, tranquility, assurance, whatever) may be enjoyed and need not be figured out.

Nothing wrong with figuring them out, if that’s what you do. But no, not necessary, either.

Well, I’m very grateful to have come to where I am. I couldn’t have done it alone.

OT1H, as Dana Redfield pointed out, “Nobody crosses alone.” OTOH, how could anyone ever be alone? You are individual and separate in a manner of speaking, only. You – we – “they” – are part of the All One Thing. Don’t you suppose that fact is going to come equipped with consequences?

I do, actually. Saying “alone” is mostly a manner of speaking. Yet, there is a sense in which we are alone. “Somewhat” alone, I guess.

Somewhat alone, in a world of 3D that is somewhat real, yes.

My thanks – and the thanks of others – for all of this. I suppose it amounts to thanking ourselves, and that – come to think of it – amounts to the thanking God for the day and the world that is at the heart of all true religions. Till next time, then.

 

Monday, November 4, 2024

2:40 a.m. You say we are at the ragged edges of an advance of consciousness, and don’t know what to do with them. This feels true but doesn’t yet explain causes or effects of anything. But I guess I’m not going to get this at the moment. Maybe later.

9 a.m. Proceed.

Your ideas of consciousness and awareness and higher consciousness and higher mind and greater access, etc., are skewed by unconscious assumptions. As usually, we mean not you alone but “you” plural.

In this case meaning everybody, or some of us on the quest, or what?

That is more complicated than may appear. Let’s just say, for the moment, that we are making a general statement of the state of affairs at the early 21^st century in the West and in those parts of the non-Western world most heavily affected by Western culture. That ought to be broad enough! But no statement can be universally applicable, you know.

All right.

We should do this in bullets, for the usual tactical reason: much to associate, little way to organize it initially, and some disadvantage in organizing it prematurely.

We can work better if I am not trying to discern or construct patterns as we go along.

Exactly: That tendency would close off avenues, because you would not see the relevance. Better to keep input open and sort it out later.

Or actually, usually, watch as it sorts itself out.

It must look like that. In reality you and we are both perceiving patterns as we go, and the way becomes clear. But as you feel (and rarely say), we too are often somewhat in the dark as we begin, only finding our orientation in the general drift.

That implies you are being guided by a higher or deeper intelligence.

Who is to say we are or are not? Try not to forget, “As above, so below.” It always applies; it is a fractal reality. Find the patterns, find the analogues, hence find the clues.

So, to it, and we’ll see how well we can do. We know where we want to wind up, but we don’t yet know how we will get there, or what we will include. Because we work at associating as we go, we too get surprised by the connections we make, and the paths such successive connections lead us on. You tend to give us more credit for pre-knowledge and therefore less credit for intelligent feeling-around, then we perhaps deserve.

• It is not really a matter of mental “states” meaning separate, divisible “locations.”
• You don’t move between layers, though it can feel like that.
• No ultimate divisions, remember, either between minds, or within minds. “All is one” means all is one, not “All is many but sometimes they cooperate.”
• No “old souls,” and “young souls” and all that, except in a certain context, and even then more notionally than really. It depends on what the word means, and people tend to slide over the problem if they even see it.
• So what is the difference – because there is a difference, you can feel it, and even before you feel it for the first time, you may intuit it: “There’s got to be more to life than this.”
• Why do your moods fluctuate? Why does your level of physical energy fluctuate? Why does your level of intellectual curiosity or ability to perceive, ability to reason, vary?

We are in 3D, and life is continual movement.

True, certainly. But does that clarify anything?

It seems to say the external world affects us, as clearly it does, even if you define the external world as the unknown part of ourselves.

Let us go very slowly here, for it may finally be the time when we can clear this up.

“This” being –?

More bullets, slightly different subject:

• Internal and external worlds. Non-3D and 3D components. Unconscious mind (that is, the part of the mind you are not conscious of) and conscious. “Altered states” and “ordinary reality.” All the same thing.
• Hence, external influences – the astrology of the moment; the interplay of others on the world-stage; interactions between “past” and “present” and “future” lives. Hereditary traits, lingering results of traumas, “unfinished business”: all part of you.
• You – we – are greater than can be described, because the descriptions are geared to separations which are only somewhat real, and at that, not very.
• “It’s all one thing” means, it’s all one thing. Emotionally, spiritually, physically, energetically, any way you can think to divide it, it is a false division, as the Buddha figured out. Make a distinction, make an error. Of course in practice, life is making distinctions: How can we write without distinguishing this word from that word, and choosing which to employ? But remember, it is only somewhat real. Keep coming back to that and it will keep reminding you not to get carried away, not to let yourself be blinded by appearances.

Now put these two sets of associations together and let’s see if we can come to greater clarity.

Me do it?

Yes. We’ll both know better how it struck you and what you did or did not misinterpret.

I get, no obstacles. Everything is connected, so any obstacles are – not of our own manufacture, exactly, but let’s say they exist with our unconscious connivance.

Very good. Unconscious connivance is a good way to look at it: It takes away victimhood, it reminds you of your own still unsuspected range of abilities (there is always more to do), and it hints, accurately, that the waking-up is part of a game. We mean “game” in the sense of an organized cooperative activity. Can you guess why?

I’d guess that the journey is the reward. Not that we’re correcting an initial error, necessarily, but that what we experience as we go along is itself worthwhile somehow.

We remind you, the purpose of the hamster wheel is not to deceive or frustrate the hamster, but, on the contrary, to let him joyously exercise his muscles.

So we are developing, somehow.

Oh, don’t you know it? Don’t you feel it in your bones? The poet that said, “Life is earnest, life is real, and the grave is not its goal” knew something, Hemingway’s later derision aside. You know that your 3D life is only a part of your life. You know that the things that happen are always opportunities. You know now – after many years when you could not have said so – that all is always well. It may be a vale of tears, but it is also a terrifically useful and effective hamster wheel, and its goal is not frustration, any more than it is the grave.

And the word “soul” needs looking at. People say “old soul, young soul” as if they knew what they were talking about. Before obsessing over the adjective, it would be well to have some understanding of the noun. Birthdays are 3D events, not non-3D events.

Now, to end this for the moment. Do you now see – or anyway suspect – what we mean by your being at the ragged edges of an advance in consciousness?

I think I do, actually. For whatever reason, accustomed ways of thinking are dissolving and I am finding that where I had experienced boundaries I now see doorways. I’m almost out of gas, but let me say this much, anyway. I am looking back at my life dispassionately, not cringing or hurting, not apologizing or regretting, but looking at things with interest, seeing past situations as algebraic problems I was enmeshed in, rather than I being either victim or villain. Somehow the drama has drained out of it; I’m seeing more clear.ly

And there’s more to be said on that subject. But meanwhile, good work today. If you hadn’t been able to stick with it, going slowly, we could not have done as much as we did.

You did fairly well yourself. Clearly I’ve been teaching you well.

We’re smiling too, but actually there is something in that – and of course, as usual this is not confined to you as an individual (so called) but to everybody.

Thanks for many years of cooperative rambling.

 

Sunday, November 3, 2024

2:15 a.m. (Standard time again). I had the feeling earlier that you wanted to talk, and I put it off till later. The extra hour caused by changing back from DST means I have slept as much as I am going to for a while, so let’s go. What is on your mind?

What is on your mind, is the question. You are experiencing the ragged edges of an advance in consciousness, and you don’t know what to do with them.

A primer: Clear your mind of active thought, holding an intent to communicate. Remember to not press, but allow. Follow anything that then arises. If you have once cleared your mind, things that arise will not be chatter but will be the matters of the immediate moment. And it is this process that is what we want to talk about, either in passing or at length, depending upon how we go.

Again: Clearing. Receptivity. Development of what appears.

Clearing. As we indicated earlier, the goal of meditation is not to leave you with a mind devoid of thought; it is to give you control over the association-machine by making you aware of its presence and characteristics. You want, not to kill the drunken monkey, but to get it sober. Thought-association is of course a valid method of mental functioning; you wouldn’t want to lose the ability to construct (or even to follow) chains of associations of ideas and sensations and memories. But ideally you will want to be able to experience this on your own terms.

Once you realize that this mental behavior even exists, you are better off, because this allows you for the first time to realize that most of the time you are not really present-tense so much as daydreaming. That is, you are in the present moment (there being no other place one could be) but you are not actively functioning, neither receiving nor constructing, but are being carried down an unending river, tossed by its currents, at its pace. It may be an interesting ride, even a fascinating ride, but it is not participation so much as spectatordom.

As we say, there’s nothing inherently wrong with this, but it is far better to be aware of what you are doing. You paid for the ride – why not take it with eyes open?

Receptivity. Once you have learned to discern the difference between being carried automatically downstream and paddling, or at least steering, you see how new opportunities arise. Let’s look at why this is so.

I’d guess it is that stillness – an absence of the continuing torrent of thoughts-that-generate-thoughts – allows quieter, more profound associations, rooted in the moment, to assert themselves.

You are in the right direction, but it should be said more carefully, because this is not as obvious as it appears to you in this moment, and may become distressingly vague to you later if not tied in.

I get that you are right, but it does seem obvious at the moment.

To some it will be, to some not. Think of it in terms of momentum. (This is analogy, remember, and must not be pushed too far.) If you travel at great speed, your ability to even notice, let alone deal with, your passing surroundings is vastly less than when you drift by slowly, or are at rest. In effect, you have less time at your disposal to look at anything. It is a trade-off, and again, not in itself a disadvantage. Sometimes you want to be traveling at speed, associating things ordinarily far removed from one another. But when you slow down, you regain the ability to see at greater depth of connection, greater detail.

And we can hear fainter voices.

And you can hear fainter voices, yes. It is the difference between a cocktail party and a quiet tete-a-tete. Neither is an absolute, but they are very different, offering very different possibilities.

You cannot come to the third state, the ability to develop what you hear, unless you first can hear it! And you cannot recognize the difference between being carried in a stream of associations and consciously choosing which connections to make, until you have recognized by experience that there is a real difference between the two.

So, first comes clearing. Even if you have been communicating consciously for decades, you will want to clear. This requires no ritual, nothing special, merely the awareness that your intent at the moment is a sort of heightened receptivity to the things of the moment; that is, to the thoughts and feelings and perceptions that are particularly acute at that moment. This gives focus.

Receptivity follows clearing. (And there need be no perception of separation between the two; they are, after all, inherently part of the same state.) Once you learn the trick of being actively receptive, you regain your freedom of choice.

Then comes the question of what you do with the input you are now allowing.

Interesting, I just got an example of this. I had to pause  and as I did I realized, people that I respected (Ed Carter, for one) told me right along that I needed to slow down, but I was proceeding at the speed that was normal to me, and I was even proud of that speed. It wasn’t so much that I disregarded the advice; I had no idea how to put it into effect, and I suppose nobody ever realized that I didn’t know how to slow down. That’s why you had me put down our talks in penmanship rather than typing, I know; it slowed me down.

And gradually you had the conscious experience to traveling more slowly, and then could deliberately adopt that speed if you wished, without sacrificing the lightning-speed imparted by intuition whenever that was appropriate. But you had to experience the difference, not merely hear about it.

Yes, and this happened just now, when I was interrupted. I realized, less speed may allow greater depth. If I could write twice as fast, or if I were dictating into a machine, the quality of whatever I got would be different. I would lose some of the advantage of going slowly.

You see us use bullets sometimes: It is a way of using a sort of shorthand to preserve relationships among far-flung items that offers the possibility of later, slower, development.

Development. Anything may be developed farther, but not everything need be, nor even deserves to be. It is a matter of choices. But that is the point here, isn’t it? Your life is choice. Your greater ability to choose is one more aspect of the life more abundantly that we wish you to be able to claim and to live.

I see it. Thanks as always.

 

Friday, October 25, 2024

3:10 a.m. Jon – I assume it was you – last Friday you said a fascinating subject to investigate would be the interrelation between the merely 3D aspects and the non-3D aspects of being human. Can we address that?

You usually say your 3D or non-3D component, and that is one good way to describe separation within unity, or, let’s say, relative separation, relative polarity, within a structure.

The guys told me long ago that the main difference between us and them is the terrain we exist in.

That was suited to your ability to understand. With what came over time, honing your perceptions and clarifying your analogies, you came to see that no 3D being is a unity except when considered within 3D, and even then, only to superficial analysis.

Yes. Compound beings produced as the result of endless generations of physical gene-sharing cannot be all one thing. You are what your parents were, in a sense, only you are more like a compromise between mother’s heritage and father’s. and each of them was a compromise between a prior set of mated characteristic and so on back forever.

But of course that merely describes the physical heredity, which is the universe of possibilities you were given, your physical endowment.

As you should understand by now, “physical” includes mental, and any 3D life is a combination of 3D physical possibilities that define the arena the non-3D characteristics must match if there is to be a live birth.

I rake it you just said that the physical makeup we are given must match the characteristics allowed in by the “weather” – the astrological characteristics of the given birth day.

Sometimes fully mature embryos have to wait several days before they can be born into the world. Sometimes they must come in earlier than the normal nine months, as the changing situation allows.

What you should think of now – if only as a thought-experiment – is that just as you are a compromise between your mother’s and your father’s genetic possibilities, so you are a compromise between your physical and your non-physical heritages, each considered as a unit. In effect, you experience a tug of war between what you call body and spirit. It may express in many ways, but it is always there, a second form of duality.

And just as your physical heredity comes from so many bifurcated genetic strands, so your non-physical heredity comes from more than one strand.

This is why your lives are so complicated. (Well, this is one more reason why.)

I’m hearing, “The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.”

You have all experienced that. It is the human condition to be self-divided, indecisive, at cross-purposes, just as it is to be single-minded, decisive, with unblurred focus.

And I see you are not defining emotions as part of us.

Emotions, as I have said before, and others before me, are the interface between the acknowledged, known “you” and the unacknowledged you that you experience as “other.” So in that sense they are not you, yet they are your inseparable companions.

I’m hearing a new way to look at ourselves. Our mind is part of us, our emotions are with us but not of us.

They can be difficult to control. When is your mind difficult to control?

I experience quite a lot of difficulty controlling my body. I have come to see it as quite distinct from “me.” But I don’t suppose I could fairly say that my body is with me but not of me.

You could if you chose to look at it that way. Listen, the big thing is how you (anyone, of course) experience your life. If your body doesn’t trouble you, you tend to identify it with you. If your emotions or your mind don’t trouble you, similarly you just assume they are “you” and not “other.” But when faced with illness or any condition you cannot wish away, you are very likely to see that you are not your body. It can be less obvious until noticed, but the same may be said of your mental processes. Only when they are somewhat out of your control for whatever reason may you realize, “That isn’t me, it is at least partly autonomous.” And emotions, as I say, aren’t really a part of you or anyone, but may be mistaken to be a part of you.

Now look at the resulting situation. You have:

• Avatar-level mind, that believes it more or less knows who and what it is.
• 3D body systems working cooperatively, usually working well with mind, leading to an unconscious assumption of identity.
• Emotions generated by the interplay between known and unknown, often seen as between “self” and “other.”
• A non-3D mental environment unhampered by continuous coordination between mind and body, and not susceptible to emotion (because there is nothing in non-3D conditions to generate the “self” v. “other” perceptions that generate the emotions).

Why should anybody expect these four elements to function smoothly and flawlessly? Or to say it more clearly: Why would anyone expect life to be all sweetness and light? That is a baby’s dream. You’ll need a lot more integration before you get them all working smoothly together, and there’s no use thinking it is somebody’s fault (even your own) that life is what it is and not what you imagine it ought to be.

Some damned fool of a philosopher defined man as “a bourgeois compromise.” I take that to be somebody complaining that the world isn’t what he wanted it to be, and neither are we.

That discontent is also part of the human condition and – as your guys are always saying – “and nothing wrong with it.” But there is discontent and discontent. The discontent that is aspiration and impatience is one thing. The discontent that thinks it is smarter than the universe, better than God, as you put it, is something else. The one is a spur, the other is discouragement.

Now, you might give some thought to the practical implications of seeing the human condition this way. It may lead you to see your dilemmas and problems and possibilities quite differently.

Enough for now.

Theme?

“Man as compromise,” maybe, or “Redefining again,” or even “Why humans are so divided.” Something on that order.

It’ll come to me, I’m sure. Our thanks for all this.

 

Friday October 18, 2024

5:20 a.m. I liked our little chat about the individual’s opportunities and constraints. I hope people find it valuable in clearing up ambiguities in our situation that – until then – had been unclear to me. But I expect you have more on the subject. In fact, I expect you will always have more on any subject.

There is always more on anything, yes, for anyone willing to listen and assimilate. You may take that as a promise, and a hopeful one.

I do. I started to make a joke about google searches and AI chats, and realized, hmm, there are analogies.

Yes. New opportunities arise in many parallel ways when the times begin to allow new ways of being to manifest. One group may develop ILC for direct contact, another AI or other technological means to provide the same kind of expansion of possibilities, others may concentrate on telepathy or remote viewing or simple improvements in communications skills. It all flows together to produce, in effect, a new type of person who lives in a new type of culture. You have seen it many times throughout history and of course before your recorded history. It is one way in which the non-3D’s windows into the 3D world alter and provide new types of data. It is a continuing process – sometimes fast, sometimes slow – of change of the individual and of the individual’s environment and of the group and group’s environment, and so on and so forth, as one climbs or descends the chain of being.

I almost gather that you mean that animals – and even plants and minerals? – change over time, not only humans.

To remain unchanged in a changed situation would be to change relatively. There is no way to remain unchanged in a fluid life that is (we remind you) only somewhat real in 3D terms.

So how do rocks change as the times do?

Wouldn’t it be easier to begin rather closer to home?

Fine. On one end, angels, on the other end, animals. How do they change?

You realize, the question as posed invites only general answers, and that is just as well, you being what you are. Someone more versed in theology (on one end) or in biology (on the other end) would be able to receive answers in some detail.

I’ll call that to people’s attention. Maybe someone will take up the challenge. But for your run-of-the-mill liberal arts types, what do you have to say?

Perhaps you can see, as soon as it is stated, that the divine is going to change in terms of its interaction with 3D humans, as you do. Again, the situation changes (because one end of the relationship changes) and so even if angels, as you are calling them, were to remain unchanged in themselves, they would change relative to the changed element they are now interacting with.

They can reveal new aspects of themselves?

You as avatars are now better able to see complexities you did not see previously.

That sounds reasonable. And animals?

Perhaps animals are better able to express characteristics that could not be expressed before. But this is a trickier subject than you realize, and requires much more thought than the malleability of angels (non-3D beings not compound) that you intuited pretty quickly.

• There is a mental environment for all species, suspected or not.
• This “soup” has limitations, that is, boundaries in what its nature allows its component creatures.
• The soup changes with the larger atmosphere it lives in. We are not referring, here, to gaseous envelopes, but to the overall conditions in which you live. An equivalent would be the heliosphere in which all Earth exists. No one can escape it, and why would you want to, other than sheer curiosity?
• That atmosphere changes over time. What we are calling astrological influences affect everything, not merely human or even biological life.
• Thus, it changes in response to regular processes. The universe isn’t winging it; the planets and stars don’t move erratically or by whim, as far as you are concerned. This gives life a certain predictability in its unceasing changes.
• A part of the invisible atmosphere in which everything lives is – everything else! This is a huge concept that should not be merely acknowledged and forgotten. It is the key to many things.

I get that this leads to: As we change, we affect animals and they change.

And it is a reciprocal process.

Hmm.

Well, did you expect to change others and not be changed? Consider your pets and how you interact with them. Cats, dogs, chickens, pigs, horses, birds, otters – whatever people have had for pets has led to interaction between human and animal mind. Can it have left either unaffected?

This may be disguised because the human may nor recognize changes in the animal mind, either as individual or as part of its species – and the human is certainly not prone to recognizing the animal’s reciprocal effect. (Instead, he likely attributes it to himself. “I really like horses and so they bring out certain emotions in me.,” rather than “We affect each other and change each other.”)

Over time, this mutual influencing can only cumulate, of course. Cats and dogs and certain birds are different because of their long relationship with humans. Do you think the humans are unchanged?

I have always thought that pets are essential for children, so that they can learn that love restrains tooth and claw.

That is true on the negative end of the scale of influencing. But how much more important is the nurturing of empathy and trust and stewardship. However, this is all more direct and observable than what we refer to.

Well, I see that. Continue, then.

The very mental air you breathe, so to speak, is a shared atmosphere. Whatever else lives among you affects you, know it or not, as you affect them, whether they or you know it. Remember, it’s all one thing. This is another example of the fact that everything is part of the whole, not merely in an ecological sense (though of course that is true), and not as an abstraction (though that is also true) but as a day-by-day reality.

Should you regard this as a limiting factor? Should you somehow fear it? Only if you fear life. The fact is, this is one more example of how much more magically interrelated life is, despite the materialist fairy tales that say all is separate and may be comprehended in isolation.

And, you’re saying, what is true of the celestial and animal kingdoms is true as well of the plant and mineral kingdoms.

Yes, and of course not just in relation to humans, but in relation to everything. It is easy to overlook that, given that you are naturally centering on the human reality. Minerals affect animals and plants and human – can they not affect the celestials?

Hard to see how, but I’ll take your word for it.

Nonsense. What are the peculiar aspects of crystals or other minerals, if not manifestations of minerals affecting the celestial realm.

In terms of us.

What else could you possibly perceive? Everything you examine, you see in connection with human existence. It’s only because being human means being half celestial that you see more than strictly material phenomena, but whatever you do see, you see from your 3D/non-3D platform.

So I see the possibility of quite an extensive investigation here, one that doesn’t require new data as much as new interpretation of existing data.

That is what we have been telling you. You will retain some of your existing ways of seeing things, and you will discard some, and you will take up things forgotten or discarded previously, and this is how the new civilization will form. It is how new civilizations always form.

Mineral, plant, animal, celestial influences on humans, and vice versa.

More than that. There is also the interrelation between the merely 3D aspects of being human and the non-3D. There’s a major subject right there.

Well, it’s all fascinating. I hope I’ll be able to get it all when I go over, and not have to wait for people to piece it all out here. Today’s theme?

“Interrelations”?

Maybe. Thanks for all this.

 

Thursday, October 17, 2024

12:50 a.m. So now you have had an experience with how quickly and easily a new technique will be adopted when people are ready for it.

Yes. I was surprised how well it was accepted in yesterday’s meeting. I was not surprised so much by success in the small group on Tuesday, but I thought there might be resistance or – oh, I don’t know, call it a lack of resonance – in the larger group. But there wasn’t.

You and others have noted the fact, but it may be worth repeating here: You couldn’t have done this if you hadn’t been working together for so long. Some things don’t required long lead-times, but some do. The gradual coming together of an accustomed group mind brought you to mutual trust, expectation of success, and experience of new ways of being.

It is a far cry from the gloom-and-doom about contemporary politics and society.

Actually, there is a linkage, though it is not obvious.

Pray tell.

The fall of Rome took a long, long time, and every day of that slow decline provided implicit encouragement for people to readjust their ideas about what was important, what was meaningful. Bad times often deepen people, individually and, sometimes, in large numbers, though to use the word “collectively” would be misleading.

In that. awakening is never a collective process.

That’s right. It may happen in large numbers sometimes, but it can only be an individual process. Except –

Yes, the same thought came to me. I guess that’s today’s theme, assuming I don’t run out of gas?

Well, it could be. It’s worth pursuing.

Oddly, as soon as I say “assuming I don’t run out of gas,” I feel tired. Perhaps the prospect of so much work – an hour’s connecting and thinking – daunts?

Quite possibly. No reason you can’t sketch the problem (so you won’t forget it later) and defer attacking it.

There is an interaction between “individual” and “collective” mental activity, rooted in the fact that we are only somewhat individual and only somewhat all one mind. It may be that the differences in manifestation are dependent upon the difference in conceptualizing what and who we are.

And I think I will defer making the effort to expound until later, as I can see I will need a certain amount of energy to actually think along with you.

Later is fine.

6:55 a.m. To resume. Awakening is always an individual thing, and yet, it isn’t immune from “outside” influences. There is a lot involved here. You take it? With bullets, perhaps?

Bullets are always a convenient way to pick off aspects one by one without needing to restate them logically. That can always be done later, though sometimes the mere process of enumerating will make relationships obvious.

• In any aspect of life, what we are calling astrological aspects are involved, because the nature of a given time bounds and limits the kind of energies that can manifest, and somewhat shapes how they can manifest. This is not determinant, but it does set limits to possibilities.
• This applies to physical manifestations such as earthquakes, but it also applies to other kinds of physical manifestations (not always thought of as physical) such as brainstorms, or prevalent manias, or widespread or individual ways of seeing things.
• You as individual increase your personal scope of action and manifestation chiefly by deciding which “you” you care to manifest at any given moment. Different aspects of “you” will mesh with different aspects of what seems to you “external” reality.
• In a sense, “You create your own reality.” This does not mean, you shape the world others will experience. It means, you choose indirectly what you will be able to experience.
• But clearly, this is not true in itself without modification by other things that are also true. Just as necessity and free will balance each other, so “you” and “not-you.”

I take that to mean, simply, we are not omnipotent any more than omniscient; we are the center of our world but not of other people’s world; we are part of the 3D world, not all of it. Obvious facts, all of them, but needing to be kept in mind.

Yes, but there are other equally central truths:

• It’s all one thing. 3D life is only somewhat real. It is always now. This has consequences:
  • There is no truly separate “you,” only a relatively separate you.
  • Life is not mechanistic and as determined by physical laws as it appears to be.
  • There is no dead (fixed) past any more than there is dead (fixed) matter, despite appearances.
• In short, in important ways, everything is always in flux, and you all (and for that matter, obviously, we all) continually interact at many levels.
• Therefore – can you see why “therefore”? – your possibilities for self-transcendence are continual, and are dependent upon your own intent, and yet find less or more favorable times to manifest. In short, some times are propitious for growth, other times, less so.
• Another therefore: You are each dependent upon no one for your growth, and yet you each may help others and may be helped.

And this is all you need, but it needs mulling over. It won’t all come clear in an instant, even though at first reading, many will think they got it. Some thought at different levels (what you would call conscious or unconscious) will reveal unexpected connections which will be different for each, because each is embedded in a different mental matrix.

Call it, “Individual and collective progress,” perhaps.

Thanks as ever.