Thursday, September 27, 2018

1:20 a.m. Proceeding with questions.

From “Lake and Tree”:

[I have been waiting for a good invitation to ask. Often when I read or hear channeled material, I am thinking “yeah but…those are just a lot of words that are interesting maybe, if they are clear, but words don’t teach…right.” So my question is: If the otherside really wants to impart true higher understanding of the nature of reality, why create all the endless books, recordings, seminars and blogs when a few higher state experiences could get the job done in an oh so fuller and meaningful way? And why shouldn’t that experience simply be given to those who request it for the asking by the higher-self? It certain happens for a few in that way, even when they don’t ask sometimes. Why not for anyone who does asks?]

[TGU:] “Just a lot of words. Words don’t teach.” We beg to differ. Words do teach, but they can only teach those who can respond. We reiterate: Words are sparks, not bricks. They may lead a person to be able to break through to a new understanding, but they don’t do so in any mechanical fashion. If they did, memorization would be the key.

However, we realize that you are saying something more than this, and we will address the deeper objection/concern. But we continually need to return to remind people, words are to inspire, not to mechanically convince. No one ever came to more life by a process of logic, though for some logic may have helped clear the way.

Really, this is the answer to the question in full: Enlightenment is not conferred, but grasped. It is not given, but achieved. And really, the very word enlightenment is (or may be) misleading, as it implies a separation between this and the rest of life. All your life is a process of attaining and incorporating intuitive understandings that then become the basis for further development.

Now, the rest of this question requires an answer that may be taken to be harsh. It is not meant in that fashion, but it may easily appear so. if that is how it strikes you, we suggest that you go over it again (and again, if need be) until you can see it in a helpful rather than a chastising sense. We are not into chastisement.

“If the otherside really wants to impart true higher understanding of the nature of reality.” Is this phrasing meant to imply doubt that we in the non-3D truly want people in 3D to wake up more? Why in the world would we devote the effort of communicating all this, if our intent were not to assist? Do you think we are sadists, watching tortured animals? But if this is not your meaning, then pray tell, what is it?

Again, the emotional connotation of “an oh so fuller and meaningful way” appears to be sarcasm. Is that the intent? If so, what purpose does it serve? We would argue that it is a defensive strategy, one telling oneself, “I’m not willing to be fooled; I can see through all this.” But if so, there is a logical contradiction implied. If one addresses a corrupt or untrustworthy source, surely one should know better than to expect a meaningful and helpful answer. But if this is not the case, then what purpose is served?

Understand, we are not quibbling with the way anyone chooses to express a question. We are pointing out what may be unsuspected (unconscious) cross-currents. In short, we imagine an internal contradiction between interest in the source and deep skepticism of the process.

Be that as it may, the question is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of choice, awareness, and assistance. We return to the bird-in-the-egg analogy we used a while earlier. The effort of breaking out of the egg develops the muscles the bird will need if it is to be able to fly. Helping the bird out of the shell would not assist it, but cripple it. You can’t grasp a thing until you are ready, and readiness requires effort. You cannot produce something out of nothing; life is transformation, not merely magical arrival.

Arrival isn’t the right word, but I can’t find the right one, and I don’t want to hold things up.

Arrival, appearance, the idea is there. Life transforms, it doesn’t just magically produce out of nothing. Now, it is true, this is too flat a statement; there are nuances and seeming exceptions, but by and large it is accurate enough for this particular question.

Yes, a higher state experience is worth all the “books, recordings, seminars and blogs.” Only – how do you think one comes to be able to experience such a thing, but by preparation and work? It may be that much of the work has been done before you are born into this 3D life, so that, to all appearances, someone got a great gift out of the blue and without paying his dues, so to speak. But that is more a matter of appearances (or rather, of hidden causes) than of fact. You may rely upon it, regardless how it may appear, the universe plays fair. There is a logic behind the process of who draws the winning lottery ticket, so to speak.

The short and inadequate but perhaps productive answer to “Why not for anyone who does ask” is, the very asking is part of the necessary work. Sincerity of intent, perseverance in self-transformation, continual re-sculpting of one’s nature as faults are addressed – all this is not making the best of a bad situation, nor is it settling for second-best, nor, least of all, is it some kind of injustice.

As I think about the question in this light, I realize that I felt uncomfortable about its tone from the beginning, and now it reminds me of a discussion I had so many years ago – 20, maybe – on an old internet forum called the Voyagers Mailing List. People were saying, why weren’t Bob Monroe’s books, and tapes, and programs, free? And nothing I could explain about the needs of any organization made any impact: They wanted it; it promised self-development; it should be free, or it wasn’t fair.

And, on the surface, that wouldn’t be a bad argument. Fortunately, however, what people need is always within their reach – only, they must do the reaching. Viktor Frankl was deprived of everything, only to discover that his very cell, and starvation, and perpetual deliberate injustice and suffering, could be turned to account, provided he did the reaching.

Now again, our response may strike some as unsympathetic; we can only say that it is not.

Nearly 50 minutes. I guess, not time enough for a second question.

No, better come to each question fresh. Otherwise there will be an unnoticed tendency to elide.

Okay, well, thanks as always and see you next time.