The interpenetration of minds (3)

Thursday, December 23, 2021

5:30 a.m. Gentlemen, part three, presumably, and I’m anxious to hear it. BTW I notice that yesterday you left a thread hanging. In your iteration of the ways we perceive, you said, “3D reasoning (we’ll explain in a minute).”

So we did. We were citing it as a complement to 3D senses, non-3D intuition, and data from all other sources. By “3D reasoning,” we mean, reasoning taking into account the rules of the 3D world you inhabit.

Which means, if I read you right, whatever set of rules seem to apply to our lives, which depends upon where we are. Magical beings do not experience the world in the same way sleepers do, nor those in the middle. And I guess this wouldn’t have been clear at the time you were making your list, so does that mean you deferred consideration deliberately?

No, it was, call it, a happy accident. But your understanding of our meaning is correct, and it is correct to say that before our discussion you might have required a longer exposition to see the point.

You made a point of saying that none of our input was one-way flow. Do you mean, inter alia, that the nature of the input depends upon where other 3D persons were? That is, depends upon how they experienced the rules of their world as experienced? I suppose it would have to.

Yes, and take the next step: How they experience the world – known to you or mostly not – may be altered as a result of how you change. They are integrally connected to you, obviously, if you are integrally connected to them. So if you alter the nature of what they are connected to, must this not influence them?

If it were not for my experience of healing Joe Smallwood’s back on the fourth of July, 1863 his time, I would find it harder to credit this as being more than just words.

It wasn’t the healing of his back that was the main impact, though, you see. It was being contacted by a powerful being, per se, that changed his world in a way only reinforced by the fact that his physical healing offered testimony that the encounter had been real and not fantasy or fever or wishful thinking.

Yes, I see that. When we’re experienced an angelic visitation – which is how I think he interpreted it – your life pretty nearly has to change, and you would have to be an awful goober to resist what had happened, in favor of your own previous ideas of the limits of what is possible.

People do, of course. Inertia can be as powerful as a miraculous occurrence. How someone will react is as variable as anything else.

So let’s move beyond that one experience that you remember, and realize that in all your lives there are many other experiences that you may not remember, or may remember in other contexts (that is, with other explanations). You very calmly did an exercise in a Monroe program that you felt had changed you, but you aren’t associating that with this, until now that we associate it for you.

That’s true. In some program they had us do a tape with the purpose of sending a helpful message to our younger self. I wound up sending an urgent message, or, I mean, a message of great emotional importance, to my 10-year-old self (or thereabouts), telling him not to give up, that things would work out, that all was well, though I didn’t put it in those words nor did I even think in those terms at the time. That was many years ago – probably 25, anyway, – so I don’t remember either the exercise or my message exactly, but that was the gist of it. As you say, an intervention (from the boy’s point of view) from elsewhen.

We mention this experience because, though it was done matter-of-factly, this too was a deliberate intervention by your conscious self that took for granted relatively magical abilities, and took them for granted rightly. It didn’t matter how you thought of yourself habitually, at those two moments, you expressed a tiny bit of your magical potential.

And if I get you correctly, you are as much as saying, we all do it every so often, to greater or less degree, whether or not we are aware of it.

Yes. You do it and you receive it, on an on-going basis. That’s our point. And one aspect of having “life more abundantly” is being ever more aware of such interconnections.

Our lives are already more magical than we necessarily realize.

Yes, and we’re going to interject a word of clarification that may or may not go down well. Quote Thoreau.

“There is nowhere any excuse for despondency. Always there is life, which, rightly lived, implies a divine satisfaction.” I used that as an epigraph on my Master’s thesis 50 years ago.

Yet you don’t or didn’t and perhaps may not again always believe it, always feel it.

Perhaps one doesn’t always feel one’s life is being “rightly lived.”

Our point exactly.

Say more on that?

You – anyone – could make that sentence a touchstone. When you are feeling despondent, it is not evidence that you are experiencing something that is wrong with life, but that something is wrong with the way that you are living your life.

Nothing to argue with, there.

But there was a time when it would have seemed merely wishful thinking. Here’s a rule of thumb: If you want to measure where you are on the scale of awareness, that is somewhere between sleeping your way through life (at one end) to magical being (at the other end), check what you believe and what you feel and what your experience.

Triangulate, in other words.

It really is a shame you never wrote about Thoreau and Emerson, for there is everything there anyone could need, only made to seem a bit archaic by the mere passage of time.

“Do not abuse your life or call it hard names. It is not as bad as you are.” I may have mangled this one slightly, but that’s the gist of it.

You have held on to what someone said (and have held it all these years) because you sensed a truth in it: that the 19^th century was Emerson’s, the 20^th Thoreau’s, and the 21a^st will be Alcott’s.

Yes, I can’t remember who wrote that, but it did make an impression.

But someone needs to make it so.

Since you cite this in the context of interconnection among minds, I presume you are saying something specific.

You had an intense experience of your mind flowing with Hemingway’s, over a period of more than a decade. So you know that it can happen. You have had many conversations with ex-3D humans from their 3D-individual perspectives. Again, you know, now; you don’t have to settle for belief. Generalizing from these experiences, you can see that you all, unpredictably, may connect with others in productive and life-enhancing ways, such as your brother molding ceramics along with a stone-age artist, or your friend Jane writing a novel about the ancient Near East in cooperation with people of that time (which she may or may not experience as separate from her own mind, depending upon time and mood). That is, you are all part of all-that-is, obviously. You are individual, obviously. It is the living both halves of the polarity simultaneously that is the skill to be learned, the new world to be living in.

This session didn’t go at all in the direction I thought it might, not that that’s anything unprecedented.

There’s time. This is not a simple nor a constricted topic.

So next time (4), I suppose.

Unless something intervenes. Whatever it is, it will be appropriate for the moment, of course. How could it not be? Trees don’t grow in the wrong place.

I get that you mean, not “Every tree grows in a nurturing place,” but “There are no accidents.”

Yes. Things express the moment they appear in. How could they not?

Till next time, then, and thanks as always.