Thursday, October 11, 2018
5.35 a.m. Ambition and competition. More to be said on the subject? (Yes, there is always more to be said on any subject, I realize.) [Pause] Or – not? Anybody home? Or should I do something else?
You might reread Imagine Yourself Well, to prepare for your webinar.
If you say so, okay. I’ve sort of lost our thread anyway.
Should that be a surprise?
Maybe I will try to get into better contact with my juice. A lot of typing may have gotten me disconnected.
Disconnection is always a problem over time. It is a prime drawback to 3D living. At the same time, connection is a prime way to retain connection. That is, it is either a vicious or a virtuous cycle.
Sure, I can see that. I take it you’d like to spell that out a little. Or would you like me to do it?
3D is continuously variable, by its nature. Non-3D is immune to the pressure of continuously-moving time in the way that 3D is subject to. So, each has its advantages and disadvantages, but if you maintain a foot in each world (so to speak), you maximize the advantages and minimize the disadvantages.
Sure. 3D offers concentration, intensity. Non-3D offers interconnection, continuity.
By the same token, 3D “offers” gaps in continuity (distraction), distorted perspective, and wild excursions in unpredictable directions including many a dead-end. Non-3D “offers” endless discursions, lack of single-mindedness, cloudiness of thinking. Each has the defects of its qualities.
Hence the value of remaining connected; our minds centered in non-3D, with all its connections, but operating via the brain in 3D, with its intensity.
Correct – but note Paul Brunton’s caveat about meditation as a means of maintaining connection.
I can’t quite remember what the reasoning was, but I know it reinforced what I have always thought, that meditation as a technique in and of itself could become merely a diversion and a very alluring distraction from real work.
You should know. That is what the state of mind produced by endless reading does. Feeling not of this world (because one’s attention is elsewhere) is not the same as being not of this world. That is, yes, the feeling of connection is desirable in and of itself insofar as the only alternative is perception of 3D limitations as absolutes. But that feeling in itself can do nothing more than that. To become productive, one needs to couple a sense of connection with a physical goal.
“Physical” wasn’t right, I know. What’s the right word?
“Tangible,” perhaps. Defined; definite; practical (in the sense of bounded rather than merely fuzzy and vague).
By which, I take it, you don’t mean politics or economics or something 3D-world-oriented in the career sense.
You care to straighten out that sentence, or rather the thought behind it?
It did come out kind of garbled, didn’t it? I mean, when we think of practical goals, we think in terms of achievement and the symbols of achievement: money, fame, influence; our effect on the society we live in. At least, I do. And I gather that this isn’t what you are meaning.
That’s right. It isn’t. but what we have to say is out of favor.
Well, I’m used to that. Go ahead.
Living one’s life with integrity, affecting those around oneself – parents, spouse, children, neighbors, employers or employees, bus drivers, store clerks, office workers, bums. That is very much 3D, and one’s relations with one’s neighbors (in the largest sense) is every bit as inescapably part of one’s life’s purpose as any greater scheme or even reality of achievement. The fact that it isn’t noticed doesn’t make it less central.
The housewife and mother.
Exactly. The husband and breadwinner. No prizes for either, but look around you to see what happens to a society that no longer values them as the core of social health and happiness. As individuals, they don’t have to be brilliant or even particularly smart or well informed. They may be dumb intellectually, as they are dumb in the other sense of the word: voiceless. But they are the blood cells in society’s corpus. And, at another scale, they are individual eyes on the world from the non-3D.
Our point here is not political, though it has political ramifications. It is this: Every person on Earth is an ambassador from the non-3D, and files regular reports. That’s what they are supposed to be! That’s what they are supposed to do! It isn’t as if those who don’t become the more specialized tools are a waste of time. How could anyone be famous, if everyone were? How could anyone excel in any direction, good or bad, if everyone else were manifesting just the same qualities?
Looked at in that less distorted way, perhaps you can see that getting into touch with your eternal self, your spiritual essence, your non-3D extension, your divine guidance – call it what you will – is desirable but in and of itself, does nothing. And, in fact, may lead to serious errors of self-delusion, inflation, arrogance, etc. What’s the use of doing an hour of yoga and then snubbing the next person you deal with, or treating him or her as if you were put on Earth to be master, and they servant? What is the use of meditating every day and then being less able to deal with the everyday world around you?
Gandhi (for instance) loved meditation; it didn’t prevent him from freeing India from British rule. Not that any of you is necessarily called to do “great” things, but that you are called to express in your life what you feel in your meditation. Life is not one or two grand gestures or sublime achievements. It is an endless string of moments that offer opportunities to choose to express one’s best or not; one’s essence or not; one’s positive influence or not.
By all means read biographies of inspiring individuals if you wish. Watch movies that produce encouragement of certain virtues. Engage in yoga or meditation to remember your connection. But at the end of the day, the point is, how are you living? What are you feeling, and what are you doing with those feelings? It isn’t only a matter of how will others be affected by your time in the world, but of how will you be affected by your time in the world.
We’d recommend that you (all) give this question some serious thought, recursively, not merely a brief notice on a fast scan of the page. It is as important as anything we have said yet.
Okay. I take it that’s your sign-off. Thanks for all this.
[Saturday, January 14, 2006]
7 a.m. Always, it seems, I wake up with a slight sense of depression. Can’t blame that on having to go to work! Can’t blame it on having to live with someone else that I’m out of harmony with! Probably could blame it on the usual apprehension that is the background to my life – but that doesn’t solve or even explain anything.
Yesterday, entering into the computer notes on health and healing, I came to that stretch where I recorded being sick. The only time I’ve ever done so here, probably. It does have a cumulative impact, just reading it! It makes me aware that I wake up today, for instance, not sick and not having been sick. And it puts light on my whole life.
Well, I’d like a companionable chat. Which of my friends shall I talk with today?
You call me Joseph. [The Egyptian.]
Yes. Welcome, friend. You know that one of my friends this life was startled that I was so respectful of you.
This is because he does not understand what he observes, in this case. Your reverence, I am well aware, is not for me as an individual – as your civilization always puts it – but for what my state of being represents for you. In reverencing me you are reverencing that part of yourself, and this is as it should be. I recognize this, of course, having the advantage of the inside position (if you will forgive a mild joke). Like Gordon, I would not approve of your giving reverence to an individual rather than to the qualities and to the achievement of embodying those qualities. Not all will understand these words, but some will.
I lived long before the time of Jesus, but of course I see Jesus as in the same line of being – does he not follow in our line of thought and practice? Did he not learn our secrets and participate in our secret communities of the like-minded? “Like-minded” might be better said “like-ensouled,” or even “like-idealed.” You don’t really have an equivalent in your time and place, or if you do, you don’t have it handy.
Anent that –
Perhaps I may assist you in the question to access to specific knowledge. You are aware that we on this side are in the habit of using what you know, in expressing our thought. It would do little good for me to come through to you in Egyptian thought-patterns, let alone Egyptian individual words, let alone Egyptian language.
But it is not merely for your ease of understanding. It is also because we use what is at hand. Thus, you have a vocabulary; you have accustomed lines of thought; you have specialized knowledge; you have your own life-experiences; in short, you have– that is, you are – a bundle of qualities and experiences that resonate more closely to some things than to others. Why should we not use what is closest and works easiest?
There may be specific reasons why not, at any particular time. But in general – by default, as you say – we use what is at hand. You know history and have very definite ideas, insights, prejudices, preferences. Why should we attempt to speak to you in terms of engineering or physics? If there is a specific reason, it may be done, well or badly – but in the absence of a specific reason to go far afield, why would we do it, when our purpose is to communicate?
Consider at its simplest the question of words. You have an extensive vocabulary, and you employ it not as display but as a precision tool and sometimes as an aesthetically pleasing expression of who and what you are. If you had no such command of words, do you think we would be unable to communicate? Conversely, since you do have such a command of words – in other words since this is part of your essence – why should we not speak to where you are? Or should we spit tobacco juice and employ grunts?
I am well aware that you don’t expect to discuss communication when you talk to me, but after all communication is part of everyone’s life.
Yes. I see that. Thank you for that. I got, too, that you were saying (without saying) that you use what is nearest before moving to what is not so near, even within the same person’s range.
Of course. I’m not particularly interested in finding examples at the moment, given that you understand, but could if you wish, for the sake of others who may read this.
No, I agree with you – there are other things I am more interested in talking about.
Joseph, I often awaken with a sense of depression. Why is that? I remember as a boy that every day was a new day. If a school day perhaps it wasn’t anything I was particularly looking forward to, but a day was a day, almost a new gift to be opened. Sometimes I have that attitude still, and sometimes I face each day with – well, not with dread, and not even with guilt at wasting the previous day (although that is closer to it, I guess) but – well, with some depression. It takes a slight effort to begin. What is that about, and, naturally, what do you suggest?
It would be easier for your people if people in general did not prettify and posture and pretend. As you were somewhat relieved to see that Thomas Merton’s life was hard, so others would be relieved to see the problems people have. Your morning depression is not unique to you! Any more than excessive sleeping or lack of enough sleep is unique to those who suffer them. Even what seem to be “individual” problems – there is that word again – common to a given thread or combination of threads. Thus, the more honest anyone is, the less isolated feel all those who come into contact with the expression of being.
You want to be a saint. Is not this ambition at the heart of the comparisons you draw? To put it more neutrally, you want to encourage certain developments and discourage others; you wish to “set your scale” entirely at virtue and nowhere concede to nature’s opposite which is not vice but lack of that virtue. (Side-trail: In short, lack of thrift needn’t be extravagance or even waste but perhaps mere carelessness. Thrift is a virtue; having your attention elsewhere is not necessarily a vice. A big subject, perhaps for some other time – unless you particularly want to follow this.)
If you let the sense of the unaccomplished weigh down your mornings, you poison your days and do no thing to make more likely a day of better achievement. This, regarding achievement in kind, in deed. It holds even for thought, in so far as thought is a creation rather than a free gift. And if you allow yourself to be crushed by the weight of your knowledge of your shortcomings in your own eyes, how does this encourage you to make greater efforts?
Judge not! Lest ye be judged. This applies not merely to judging others – though that is its initial application – but to judging oneself, for – as you say regarding others, and truly – “you never have the data.” You do not have that data regarding yourself any more than regarding others.
Startling idea? Well, consider. Others you judge from appearance plus your conjectures as to their motives, their inner being, their inner composition. Yourself you judge from your observation of your inner being, and conjecture as to effects and other appearance. You are not equipped to adequately judge your own being any better than you are to judge others – and you are not equipped to judge them, at all! Of course in practice a lot of rough estimating goes on, and needs to go on – but calculating forces and effects is not the same thing as weighing souls. No one is capable of doing that while operating blinded on your side of the veil.
Leave judgments to Anubis, or the recording angel, or St. Peter, or however you conceive the function. In actual fact you will find no harsher judges than each of you on yourself. And that judgment is totally misplaced. It is, shall we say, a misguided attempt to steer an airplane by approving or disapproving of its motion in any particular direction. It is not a matter of approving but of deciding and deciding and deciding. If you don’t like where you are going, move the stick! Don’t wail over your sins (we are not here implying that you do) and don’t despair that you are not better (and here we are not implying, but observing, that this you do).
Every new day is a gift. Yes, and every night. Do you think the gift was given by mistake to the wrong recipient? Do you think you are wasting something that another could make better use of? It isn’t a question of scarcity, nor of comparison. This is your day, for your use; the whole universe in effect is held in existence so that you may choose.
Since you cannot help but choose, even if only by default – why not choose gladly and thankfully? There is no one who is not an integral part of the scheme to things – and no one would could not be seen (with eyes sufficiently discerning) as specially blessed. The beggar in the street is blessed. The sick are blessed – how many times have you experienced the truth of this! The crippled, the dammed, the imprisoned – even those imprisoned in their own hells of hatred and rage and ferocious self-seeking – are blessed. Those who cannot understand this should not strain themselves attempting to do so. Those who already know it may shrug and agree. It is said for those to whom it will be a revolution, an new day.
So do you always talk merely of trivia?
We smile. Now, let us connect a couple of dots. When is it Joseph and when is it “the guys” and what makes for the shift and what if anything does the shift imply.
Yes. Now my attention just wandered. Fatigue merely, or something else?
Sometimes you just get tired. Nothing to worry about. If you get tired, stop. Nothing much is lost.
Well, it is an important question and I’d like to get the answer, but I’ve been doing this for more than an hour and I think I need a break. Maybe I’ll type this in and come back after a while. Joseph – my brother – thank you for the communication.
In your efforts to bring more light, we are still serving Ra. Thank you for continuing the work.
2 p.m. All right, friends, I move the previous question. What’s up?
The question was one of identity and choice. When is it one, when another, and what causes the shift?
Well now, you see – as always it as at least partly a matter of definition. When you came to this work – “in another century” as you like to say – you had vague ideas but strong ones. Indeed, strong partly because vague. The less conscious, the less control, of course. Now as you have more time to experience and reflect, you see that some perplexities are overcome and perhaps others added or substituted.
In response to (and in agreement with) Jane Coleman’s comment, this, that I copied and taped into my journal sometime in 2017:
I have loved America and American history since before I can remember, but honestly, some of it makes painful reading, especially when you have to read of good things deliberately destroyed by the fears and prejudices of others. Eventually, some of what was lost can be regained, but think of all those wasted years! And today (at least since 1994, when a deliberately obstructionist Republican majority was elected to the House of Representatives in reaction to Bill Clinton’s first two years) we are in the trough of one of those spells of reaction that undo the good and reinforce the malicious.
But even in bad times, some good things survive, and serve as models.