Skip Navigation Links
L/L Research
Home
Library
Are you a wanderer?
About Us
Carla’s Niche
Podcast
Online Course
Search
E-mail L/L
Copyright Policy
Recent Updates

Now on Bring4th.org

Bring4th.org

Forums

Online Store

Seeker Connector

Gaia Meditation

Subscriptions

Links

Donate/Volunteer

Join Us

Facebook

Twitter

Tumblr

Instagram


Carla’s Niche

Carla’s Letter Tapes

CAVEAT: Warning! These letters have not been edited by Carla. Expect errors.

Letter to S

October 19, 1990

Dear S,

I didn’t mark your letter because I was only reading it through the first time and then I was going to tuck it under about twelve letters because I always take them in order, but for the second time, your questions are so much more interesting than the other mail that I have to answer which is full very very needy and sad questions like a homosexual in prison saying he’s been sticking sausages up his behind and is it right or wrong?

I’ll have to deal with that but I’d just as soon deal with you now in the nice morning sun on the last couple of days of an Indian Summer. It was down in the middle 30’s last night and the first frost is not far away. The trees have barely begun to turn as it has been so balmy. But I believe that the end is near as far as summer. We have the last rose thereof sitting in quiet splendor, attempting to unfurl in the uncertain sunlight of a weakening autumn glare. Beautiful beautiful chrysanthemums and some of our dahlias and Jim even cut some of the red salvia, which we usually don’t cut at all but he figured that the frost is probably going to get it before he comes home.

He’s off for a couple of days retreat—he’s a hermit and hasn’t been able to go down to Sugar Shack which is my name for the shack which by this time is one of the fanciest shacks you ever saw, with the very mild exception of having a bathroom separate from the house. My mother broke up housekeeping at a nine-room house and moved to a four-room apartment right at the right time for me to be able to get some furniture in that place. She had a rug and I had extra things for the walls because I love to put things on the walls. I think it’s very cosy to let your eye rest on something that has sentimental meaning to you.

So Jim is gone and I hope he’ll spend his time doing absolutely nothing, because he’s dog tired. But he’ll probably, knowing how much Jim loves to work, and that’s an unusual trait but he lives to work, he really loves to work, he’ll probably be cutting the grass one last time, sweeping out the cabin, and trying to get the third room started on its being painted, that sort of thing, and he’s also aiding and abetting a friend of ours that’s having just a miserable time at home. There are always two sides to every story and I can put no blame either way, but he’s certainly having a miserable time.

Your questions are wonderful, I really enjoy them. The substance of your question is so interesting and they are things I haven’t really thought of before. And for me, that’s the same kind of treat I guess that a chocolate sundae or a trip to the movies would be for somebody else. I sort of think as a sort of a hobby. When I was a little girl, no matter how small you were, you were allowed to speak without being interrupted at the table, as long as you were speaking clearly and had something to say on a subject and were making sense.

If you didn’t fulfill these criteria, no matter what your age, you were interrupted, ruthlessly, by a father, who was absolutely determined to perfect the art of debate. So I grew up learning to be a communicator, but I don’t think that’s what taught me to think. I think that the thinking is in the bone for me. I don’t think I needed any influence to think for myself. I’m just an anomaly. Most people just accept what people tell them. I never accept what people tell me without examining it closely—ever. I was just a different kind of person and so I think people are really sort of afraid to think. They might have to learn something new and then act on it. And that is a very scary thought for a lot of people. They want the structure to stay the way it is—they don’t want any uncomfortable changes and thinking is deadly to stagnation—it will remove you from stagnation and will make you feel uncomfortable.

It does many positive things as well, obviously, the transformation of the self equals the renewal of the planet, in that all things are one, and a thinking person has got an extremely valuable resource if you understand the nature of that resource.

The nature of the brain or mind is, I believe, basically the nature of the computer. You would know these things, I’m only guessing. And the computer, as I understand it, operates on a very simple mode: yes, no, yes, no. I think we do too. I think that we learn what survival means for us individually, and often get it quite wrong, because we’re making these decisions as a three year old or four year old, you know, “My mommy doesn’t like me, therefore, I must not likeable,” that kind of thing—the vaguely subconsciously, but really available to conscious analysis and balancing, is the knowledge that this is an old tape and you don’t need it any more.

If people are comfortable with the status quo then they will be automatically hostile and fearful of genuine authentic conscious thought.

So I am very appreciative of your ability to think also. I really don’t consider myself an intellectual because I don’t make choices by the use of my intellect. I believe that I have a much deeper wisdom that comes opening myself to intuition. That will make sense later in this tape—or more sense.

When I was talking about the “boob tube”, I certainly wasn’t talking about “Nova” or “Masterpiece Theater” or all the public TV stuff, or the all too infrequent assays of the major networks to offer some sort of cultural event. I know all that stuff, but I think even if you’re simply watching the very best of the very best, you are still furnishing your mind from outside in, and I think that whatever is hitting you needs to be given an equal time of simple contemplation, evaluating it against similar principles in other fields, or against some paradoxes that may well suggest a deeper spiritual truth being involved.

In other words, no matter how good the television is, it is not going to replace the conscious attempt to continue the evolution of human kind. Not knocking the good stuff on TV, just trying to put it in perspective.

[Rosaros?] says desire, imagination, and expectancy are the three rules to creating our own reality, and I would probably say, will and faith, desire is will; expectancy is faith; imagination is probably a word that I would link with the concept of consciousness itself, which I believe is endlessly creative, so that would equal the imagination. I have no quarrel at all with that statement—it’s a matter of semantics and there is no problem.

Now I saw most of the thirteen parts of “The Worlds Great Religions” and thought they were done—I can’t remember though the “box face” as they say in England that hosted the series, but it was extremely intelligent, I believe agnostic, and very open minded and produced a really landmark and excellent series—I liked it a lot.

I did not see “The Day the Universe Changed”—it must have been opposite something Jim likes, football or something like that. I thank you for your compliments on my verbal skills. As I said before I was certainly encouraged to brush them up at a right early age, but on the other hand, I think I had a head start. I spoke my first word at seven months and first sentence before I was one. And just to indicate the basic individualistic and not particularly dependent nature of even the nascence (inaudible) my first word, pointing to a lamp that had just been turned on, was “light”, with the “t” in everything—mother wrote that down with some disgruntlement in my baby book. My first sentence was “put me down”. (Laughs)

I have always been a rogue—an independent person, and there’s just not that I will allow from the outside to push me around. If I think it through and I think it’s right, then I’ll push myself, thank you very much.

I do love words and several guilt trips that I’m attempting to heal within myself have to do with professors of mine at college that felt personally betrayed because after I shared with them what they considered to be excellent—one was poetry, one was writing—just short fiction—another guy had me for The History of Literary Criticism, or something like that. Again, not too many people were using the old bean, and so I looked like I was an awfully good critic and I expect of the things having to do with words that I do, had I wished to be a critic, I would probably have been more successful in a worldly sense, than probably any other, because I have a devastatingly critical mind, the product of many many debates at the supper table.

Also the fact that I sort of think sideways and its very difficult for a person who is working from the intellect to move quite the way I do in thought simply because I am valuing signals I am getting; feelings, hunches, intuitions, where I’ve worked so many years to open up an avenue in myself. I’m certainly not going to waste what comes my way from within.

Basically I think that the intellect is an excellent workhorse, but you need to ride it or it will ride you—especially the more IQ points you have. I’ve often thought back in the days when I was pretty sad over disappointing so many people because I didn’t have one ambition in the whole world. I had probable careers as a concert pianist, as a ballet dancer, as a singer, all that stuff having to do with the language. The CIA wanted me because Russian was my foreign language. I have never had any worldly ambition except for wishing to raise six kids because I love kids. But that was not to be and I think of the people that I write to that are really needy are my kids, and I could not have been doing this work if I’d had children playing around me, that’s for sure.

I can see how you would conceive of language as notation, since, in black and white, that is what language is. There is, however, within the syntactic structure and grammar and inflection, if there is inflection, and conjugations, quite settled and realistic clues to the culture. Otherwise, all languages would be created of the same kind of primitive syntax, but, you see, that’s not so.

There are languages that have become other languages because they’ve gotten bastardized by various lingua fracas. Latin became French, and French hit Anglo Saxon head-on and became English and so forth, and we have a bunch of vaguely romance languages, very similar, simply because they’ve probably come from some other language somewhere down from Indo European that is a natural progression of people making sounds a little differently, then a little differently, just in the same way that somebody whispers something at the beginning of a long line and by the time that it gets to the end of the long line, it’s something else—you never get the same message at the end of the line that you started with. And I think that the history of language is just that.

My conservatism concerning language has to do with my feeling that someone, various some ones with a reason to care, need to be complaining bitterly and steadily about neologisms for which there is already a perfectly adequate word—especially neologisms that twist verbs into nouns and nouns into verbs and into adjectives and so forth.

Now, you are interested in the language of thought. Okay. Let’s talk about that.

There certainly is a language of thought—but it’s not a language—it has no notation. I have experienced it and I can tell you what I’ve experienced and I’ll tell you as carefully as I can.

When I first began channeling, I received perhaps three to five minutes of material tops. That’s all I heard, that’s all I got, and then the channeling would go to someone else. At that time we had maybe a dozen channels in the group—it was a much bigger, much different group. Let’s see, 1974, well, I had been listening to the channeling since 1962, but I started channeling in 1974, and it’s 1990, so I guess for sixteen years, I have been altering my own approach to channeling as I observed my own experience, but this is not the easiest way to learn because it’s difficult to be entirely objectively accurate about your own sensing of things, but since I am not a scientist I am not as afraid to use, I’ve heard the word “fuzzy logic” applied to computers and I think there’s something of that, whatever it means, in me. I respond well to that concept.

At any rate, as I began to improve my own tuning techniques; as I began to realize what a crowded universe it was, as I watched what happened when this and that and this and that happened, I kept changing my own techniques to become a purer channel and become a purer source. I’m not driven and I’m not ambitious, but I am a worker in the sense that I don’t stop thinking much; it’s too enjoyable. I do enjoy myself.

So each year I was getting a little bit more detail—it was as if, at first, I would get the lead sentence in a paragraph, and as time went on I could feel the pressure of more information before the next point and it took a lot of personal discipline to lay aside my concern about making a fool of myself because I really did want to know what subject they were talking about. I went through a long period where we simply didn’t have questions—we were just taking whatever they wanted to say.

But gradually, I began to get more and more of what you might call a paragraph. Now one ball (and please, Steve, don’t talk about this technique to anybody and don’t practice it yourself) of concept would be tossed into the head—it might be a picture of something—it might be the first word or the first sentence or the first phrase, but you didn’t know where it was going, but you just keep throwing those concept balls out as fast as you get them, clothing them in the best language that you can—in the most accurate language that you can, and lately I’ve come to find out that each concept is truly infinite; that it’s not just a ball that’s full—it’s an infinite ball that is a plenum and the concept is so rich in nuance that there is virtually no way to move it out of concept level into appropriate language structure.

As time has gone on I have found this to be more and more true—even when I’m channeling for an hour and then stopped, I know that I have made conscious decisions to leave out bunches more stuff which would have made everybody’s tail go to sleep, including mine, before we got finished.

So I believe there is a language of thought. I believe it contains the nuances, the biases, the richness that words do not contain, being finite, and I believe that is undoubtedly the way that we will communicate in higher densities because it is far more satisfactory and guaranteed to equal or be congruent with actual communication of an authentic type, rather than two people making stabs as working with words to explore concepts that do not have words. It’s just that we are stuck with using the language of third density.

Metaphysics—meta just means “beside” in Greek, but in this case it may also mean “beyond.” Now what I mean by that is I believe that the human mind/body/spirit complex, as Ra would say, has finished its evolution. Short of a genetic fiddling around to make a screw driver out of your little finger (laughs) or a pair of pliers out of your first finger and, let’s see, a couple of good blades, maybe have our thumb turn into a handkerchief and empty our pockets, by golly, I don’t think there’s much we can do with the body to make it better suited to its environment except start over since we’re poisoning our own environment and we’re doing ourselves in at this point. I’m just waiting for people to wake up and smell the coffee.

But I think by that time the earth will simply shrug and we’ll all be gone too. Well, “Tinkers to Evers to Chance” is basically what it will feel like right at the moment, I expect, whatever disaster occurs. There are several slated, almost guaranteed. Discounting the nuclear winter routine you’ve got your planet shifters and you’ve got your “this is the earthquake generation”, and these are all PhD guys, you’ve got Schumacker coming in with very carefully stated argument that the ice age is beginning—that we are going to be losing our trees because of weather changes and really cataclysmic things will occur.

If nothing else happens, we’ll still die. We know that. So whether apocalypse is public or private, we all have one ahead of us, and it isn’t what we think it is. I say that because I died once for just a few seconds, less than a minute. Why did I come back, you ask? Because I was told I hadn’t finished what I had to do.

Yes, our languages reflect our culture, and constitute a consensual reality, not just of supposed facts, but of supposed biases. This doesn’t necessarily mean that anybody has to take everything the culture gives to him, but you will find many many small but noticeable differences in the attitude and language and action between different cultures. What do they do with money? How do they respond to a party? If they have a choice to make of having the house paid off and going on a four-month vacation, which is it going to be?

There are cultural differences of some magnitude and we are, in any culture, crippled by that. I think perhaps the thing that is most damaging to men and women today, other than situational ethics, which almost precludes any concept of the true ideal for most people, is basically the way they use words, body language and so forth, not to communicate, but to persuade—to control—to manipulate—to do the least positive thing you can do to the words.

A paper once wanted to hire me—somewhere back east—they liked my work, I had been being published in the Career Journal book page, wanted me to write for them (I think it was Cincinnati), and I wrote two views for the same work (I don’t remember which work it was) but it was a piece of fiction—it had its good point and it had its bad points. In one of the reviews I explored the good points at some length and simply stated in one sentence, the less than good things, and let it go at that. I call that an appreciative review.

The other one I obeyed all the rules. I went for the throat; nailed the poor author on several unquestionable poverties in his sensibility, and then in passing mentioned that there were some redeeming qualities in the book and people might find it useful to read even though it wasn’t very well written. The sting of the critic was everywhere in that one. I wanted to see what they wanted. They wanted the mean one. So I turned the job down.

People’s desire to be together, to be close, has been so distorted by fear that language is used to offend or defend more often than it is used to bless or support or encourage.

Now you said they reflect third density illusion for the most part. I would say they reflect third density illusion entirely. I know that a lot of what we try to do with words reflects an attempt to move beyond the local, the provincial. But this is a local language and there simply aren’t successfully provocative words enough to communicate in any adequate way beyond this illusion.

So what we’re try to do, and I think what Ra was trying to do, was to lay out for those people who were willing to do some work because it’s work to read that material. And I’ve certainly been to the dictionary enough times with something—again and again. “Nimiety” was one of them and I finally understand what “nimiety” is.

Ra twisted and bent and worked that language the most carefully and the most successfully in attempting to create a cosmology which moved beyond the local and the illusory to some indication that there is a mystery and at least a lesser illusion and more clarified perspective beyond this existence, this life and this consciousness. Simply the thought that consciousness continues beyond death, for instances, is shall we say, a spiritual or cosmic concept.

But you’ll notice the limitation of the words—”death”. People are identifying with their bodies and they’re saying that they die. They don’t die. There is this wonderful, just devoted second density creature complete with instincts and the ability to survive and use tools, which has given its entire incarnation in order that our consciousnesses would have something to walk around in while we were experiencing this illusion.

So you see, even in saying there is life beyond death, there is no way to get enough of the nuances of what a small and pitiful and petty thing death is. It has been made out to be so grand—”Do not go gently into that dark night.” I’ll go—if nature says “check please” I’m on my way. I’m not that crazy about this illusion. I’ve been to McDonald’s enough, so I’m ready.

But you see what I’m trying to say. Even when we talk about things that, in our minds, are beyond this illusion, we still have to use the vocal language and …

(Reading) …you’re still talking about concepts—”they’re triggered by many things such as events in our experience …”

Actually, they’re not triggered by the events. And this is an important point. I do not believe they are triggered by the events themselves, but by our reaction to the events. A very simple reaction spread is the person taking the test. Okay? Because you’re dealing with the groves of academia, you know how the leaves fall. One person will psyche out the teacher to find out what kind of a test he’s going to give and with no feeling whatsoever for what he’s learning, will memorize by rote what the teacher wants him to memorize; write it down and two days later have forgotten it completely.

Another person faced with the same amount of work will simply do nothing until the last moment and then do the least possible because learning is not interesting to that person, the person is oriented more towards say, the gaining of money or power or some other delusion that spells happiness for that person. Don always used to say that happiness was not an objective.

Another person will learn the material but then may give the teacher a lot of what the teacher may consider to be discourteous backtalk, if the teacher is not really sure of himself, and simply cowl the teacher in which case the student is learning quite well. They may not do so well on the tests, because the teacher may well not agree with the student.

The only time I found this to be not true for me was when I had a very hostile teacher, but an honest one. He was a thorough going atheist—believed in no god whatsoever, and had the absolute gall common to so many scientists of discussing primordial oozes and evolution from chance—sure. I think to refute his point right off I think I said “we’re going in the mountains together and we climb and climb where no one has ever climbed before and we find something shiny and we pick it up and it’s a pocket watch. We pick it up and its keeping time. Did that happen by chance or was there a maker of that watch?”

Similarly, when you look at something that is infinity more complex than the balances and mechanisms necessary to keep a watch on time, we look at the smallest thing we can—we look at the most far away and largest imaginable things we can with astronomy and microbiology, nuclear physics and so forth, and of course, we simply must assume that there was a maker, because the balances are sophisticated and endlessly complicated—inexplicable to us—we still do not understand gravity at all.

He got the point. I then proceeded to work my way through the boiling caldron of mythology that erupted into Christianity along with other religions at that time period, by talking about the history of religion which I had gone over quite carefully, and I wrote a very good exam that disagreed with the man entirely, to the last jot and tittle, and he gave me an A. But that was the only time that ever happened to me.

Other times that I was in disagreement with the teacher—it would be my grade that would suffer because as far as the teacher was concerned, I was simply wrong headed and I was known as a very difficult student, which was really funny because my favorite professors thought I was a great student. We used to have extra tutorials and extra reading and I really liked to learn.

We really are triggered from within our own concept matrix—basically our opinions of ourselves, our biases, our previously thought out processes of opinion and so forth, our previous catalyst that we have hopefully used to advantage. So the stimulus does not provoke the response because we are people with freewill, and we are various, and you cannot tell how a person is going to react.

Another way to make the slipperiness of the language more relevant—words do not have an absolute value and, of course, when we are trying to talk about the absolute, using relativistic words we’re in a lot of trouble. Basically, I think evolution is real and will continue, but

I see evolution of the body as having come to an end and continuing evolution as being a process of refining the personality, disciplining it, becoming willing to serve, rather than willful not to serve; willing to listen to greater wisdom from within rather than insisting on the fruits of our own intellectual ready assignation.

Don’t I complicate things? So, of course there is a purpose for every thought because it is by our reactions to these thoughts that we mirror to each other how we’re doing and how the other person is doing. When I speak to you, I’m mirroring to you about yourself and how I have conceived of you as I read the letter and how I’m relating to you as I correspond.

But more than that, I learn at the same time by putting things into words that I haven’t put into words before more of the nuances of my own use of catalyst and that is helpful to me and that is very much the reason that I am so in favor of people who really are thinking as opposed to learning by rote or whatever, because the learning process is impossible without feedback from other people. You can fool yourself forever, but you can’t fool somebody else forever.

So you really need discriminating people around you if you’re going to be satisfied as a thinking person, and I’m not talking about the MENSA kind of thinking—that’s game playing—I’m simply talking about as people live their lives and want to live the best lives they can, how does one go about it.

One of the great supports that we do have is each other and one of the great commandments of the New Testament is “Love your neighbor as yourself,” so basically, we are supposed to love each other, and that means support and not criticism, unless the person is asking for thoughts, and is not sensitive to criticism but merely sees it as another thought to consider.

Okay, I think I chewed that one enough. No I didn’t, here’s another one (reads) “thoughts exist, free of time and space—they are originated and controlled by our conscious self.” I disagree with that also.

I think that thoughts are originated and controlled, often by chance, if the person is used to thinking abstractly—sometimes from our conscious self, our higher self or somebody else, but I think that there is a truth that lies beyond our imagining, and that intimations of it come from very deeply and personal sources within us—the racial mind, the Jungian archetypical mind, and work their way up to the surface in a sort of reverse peristalsis, where you’re basically overflowing from time to time with too high a water level of thought—it overflows.

Where do they come from? They don’t come from anywhere, they just are. As you said, thoughts exist free of time and space, and that means anything we want to say about actual thoughts, as opposed to the processes of thinking that I’m going through right now—I’m talking about thought as in truthful thought, are simply not available to a person who is working with the consciousness of higher self, the other self, in other words, with some idea of a source, that is alive and has a pulse, and personal concern for us. I think all those things are true, but I think that the basic thoughts are simply there. And as we allow ourselves the freedom to move into the silence that meditation is and as we listen to that silence, as we simply sit with that, and realize that we are in the presence of the Creator, we may be dust, but we are in the presence of the Creator at all time, we begin to open that shuttle to eternity.

Okay, now, I’m done with that constellation of ideas, and of course I do see your meaning as that a language of thought.

Yes, I have read about the circles. It’s been happening for a long time in England—it’s been happening for a long time in the United States. I went out when Don was still doing actual case work on the UFOs and measured a couple with him, seen them. I don’t know what Q’uo would have to say about them that he hasn’t already said in general, which basically is that there are no positive actual vehicles flying around Earth today in our skies—they are all thoughtforms because they learned quite a while ago, according to them in the fifties, that it did absolutely no good to be taken to their leader (laughs).

Out of all the conspiracy theories one that crops up continually and one that I tend to believe more than disbelieve, because it would be very much in character with the man and very much in character with the people working under him, that Eisenhower was contacted and did have a (inaudible) one day that nobody could quite understand and was gone and somebody saw him out west somewhere and the skinny was he was speaking to some aliens.

Well, he got back to the White House, according to the conspiracy buffs, and was told by the National Security Council that it was absolutely impossible to let this thing out to the American people—panic, you know, the Orson Wells bit. The relationship between UFOs and people within the government is a subject I really like to avoid because that’s when they start bugging your phone.

I’ve had it. Every time we ever started working with Puharich they bugged our phone for at least a year afterwards, I guess thinking he’s going to call and give me something secret, which is damned unlikely, but it’s a mess because they don’t just bug the phone, they bug you. If you pick up the phone and start dialing too fast for them to get their equipment together, you can’t make the call until they’re ready—I don’t know what their problem is. I’d pick up the phone and say “gee I am really sorry guys, I’m going to have to talk with my mother here and I’m sorry you have to listen to this because it’s really boring, but I hope your wife and kids are doing fine—have a nice day.” And then I’d dial.

The funniest thing that happened the last time I was being bugged, and this was years ago in the 70’s some time. A good friend of mine who was also a musician had a great fondness for LSD, never had a bad trip, he must have had a beautiful soul. I don’t know anything much about all that stuff but it certainly didn’t seem to be hurting him any, but obviously it’s hurt a lot of people. But he was right smack dab in the middle of an LSD experience when he walked into my apartment one day in the afternoon wanting to go with my walk with me.

I had just begun exercising to work on my arthritis and he wanted to give me support because it helped to have company and somebody to talk to so you wouldn’t think about your aches and pains, so he said “Really? Your phone is bugged?” and I said yeah, so directly he walked to the telephone and began spewing out faster than I could ever have thought anything up, a completely random variety of letters and numbers and words.

My guess is they’re still trying to crack that code (laughs).

So basically, what I’m saying is they are undoubtedly one of two things: there is a kind of blight that makes a circular pattern and looks for all the world like a UFO sitting-down place, until you take it and look at it under the microscope and you can see that it has spoors, fungus, not objective evidence of UFOs.

There are others that are definitely UFO landings, but the landings these days are not very happy events for the most part, because the actual knock on them, they’re there in the flesh, so to speak, are not the white hats and I don’t believe they mean us any good. I also don’t believe they mean us any harm. I think they think their way is better than ours and basically, it’s a way of the pecking order and competition and the pecking order and the way that we know as the service to self path, which is also a way to serve God. It won’t work forever, but it works for fourth density.

These are very difficult times metaphysically, which one would expect, because the intensifying of people’s attempt to graduate both positive and negative paths means that the world’s polarizing. Some polarizing like our erstwhile ally Sadam Hussein, his shooting people down with the weapons we sold him. I haven’t figured anything out since before the Vietnam War—I’m lost here. Why are we over there? I’m mean, why weren’t we there before, or something. I realize the answer is always money, but I just wish I did know that.

(reads) Boston University Professor believes…that the universe is finite…whatever happened to the mobius ring…whatever happened to the red shift…how can you prove that a universe you don’t understand is finite…unless he can answer those questions…

A sharp definition of the universe—now that would be a question I would like to hear some channeling on and I will write that into the questions. My own personal feeling is that the universe is the macrocosm, which by its very nature, creates in descending order the smaller and smaller and smaller pieces of cosmos, until we come to ourselves as co-creators or as sub sub (inaudible) and then so far as we can realize that we are everyone, everything, every possibility, its all inside us, all knowledge, all wisdom—It’s our birthright. It is veiled from us in this illusion so we can make a very straightforward choice of how to serve the Creator.

But when we can give a sharp definition of ourselves I believe we shall also have a sharp definition of the Universe and visa versa, and I wish to heaven Don were still alive. It occurs to me in this regard that there’s a man, not one-tenth as brilliant as Don but he’s very familiar with Larsonian Physics, the reciprocal theory. Larsonian Physics is positive from the beginning as being theoretic physics which assumes a local geometry as holding true for this locality, and it also assumes that as its base assumption, velocity equals space over time or time over space. This posits a three-dimensional time and a three-dimensional space.

Don worked through every equation in Larsen’s first book, which I think was put out no later than 1971 though I think it was ten years earlier. The man is still alive though dwindling although undoubtedly his mind is still a giant. I could give you his address, too. I’ll give you Frank Myers’ address, he’s the one that’s very very interested in trying to put metaphysics and physics together, and perhaps might have something interesting to say, though I’ve not found him to be particularly sharp. He is certainly willing to think, and you just never know. He may have some insights because of a long study of Larsonian reciprocal theory physics that would be helpful.

I really do believe the difficulty with mathematics for dealing with eternity is that there are no eternal mathematics. Mathematics are all finite, unless one defines oneness as allness, in which case oneness becomes a plenum and then is more than simply the number one.

But until we are able to create conceptualization or models, hypothesis as to the possible nature of a more fundamental reality and therefore a more fundamental language of mathematics, that’s the same, we need to get the conceptualization in place and then people who are good with numbers can play around with it and come up with numbers.

Don thought that the Larsonian reciprocal theory of physics was probably fourth density physics. And there are many implications to there being three dimensions of time as well as three of space, which I am not at all capable of voicing in your language.

I’ll just leave you with those thoughts.

And I will write that we need a sharp definition of the universe and of course, I also believe in the infinity of the all also.

(Reading) “Is a fourth or fifth density entity visible to the third density?”

If it wishes to be. Normally it will not be visible because that will infringe upon the freewill of the entity—that’s one thing they’ve learned that it violates the rule of subjective proof. The entity may well have a camera—if you appear on a camera then that’s objective proof and then somebody’s got to go retrieve it so that personal proof is all that people have and consequently each person has to make their own decision.

To the third density entity ability to see the interpenetrating levels of higher or more densely filled with photons—the densities indicate the amount of light—how dense the light is, would be a real encroachment upon the freewill of the population of earth. It would basically destroy the power of the veil.

See, men are impatient—the Creator is not, and we do not have to be, it’s just the culture is so frenetic, we are used to being impatient because we have so much to do. But the Creator is perfectly willing to wait no matter how many cycles of 75,000 years it may take for somebody to quit pecking at the corn and start walking through the chicken wire to see what’s out there. Everybody’s got his moment and you just can’t hurry people. That’s why I don’t worry about saving the planet. One person at a time, thank you very much.

(Reading) “With regard to knowledge and the search for it, isn’t it entirely possible that the way this third density illusion is created will forever prevent us from knowing it completely, for example, not until fourth or fifth or even higher densities can one ever really know third density.”

It’s possible. My personal opinion is that although knowledge of the mystery recedes infinitely before us until eventually we become the mystery and are unable to come answer the phone because we’ve lost our identity for the time being having given it completely to love itself. I would say that the knowledge of the truth of what we have made of this illusion, this incarnation, that truth is available immediately after this incarnation, because, you see, there is the Christ within us, as the whole universe is within us.

It remains an honest question in my mind if there is anything outside of myself, or if this is not for all of us a completely subjective universe. But that’s another direction, I don’t want to shoot off in a bunch of other directions and frustrate you with not following through on my logic here.

Because the Christ within us, the Creator within us, is who judges us and what judges us concerning the lessons posed by us before this incarnation for us to work on and how well we intended to do and how well we did, and how pure we were, how nice we were, how full of love in general. These things, especially the degree and amount of our service are known because they will be judged by us.

Now when we have achieved a graduated status, we are given—this is just simply by looking at the violet ray chakra on top of the head—it’s like a spiritual thermometer—I’ve never been able to see a doggone thing. I’ve been told by Confederation people that it is quite indicative of the basic—it’s sort of like, I cannot remember the term for it, but I was Speed School Librarian—Speed Scientific School being an engineering school at the University of _____ for a year. I think it was called “spectography” something like that—at any rate it took any substance, I guess it was any metallic substance and showed by different colors throughout the spectrum the various elements that were in it—and that’s sort of what the Violet Ray reminds me of in the way it’s described as being used.

At any rate, if a person has the right to move on or feels that he does and so do those guides that he has, then there is a deeper judgment, but it is still completely without bias, as I understand it. It is simply a walk, and each step is a place which is somewhat more dense with light. Of course it gets brighter and brighter and brighter.

Now this light is not a photon, a dead thing, an inert unconscious mote—this is alive, capable of healing; this is metaphysical and limitless light as well as the photon. The light that we think of is just the light that we can measure with existing instrumentation. You can’t measure the consciousness of light—that it has that creative ability.

When the person stands on a step and then tries to take another step and it’s too bright for him, he goes back and stands on that step that he’s on. He does not know at that point whether he’s passed into fourth density light. All he knows is that this is where he’s comfortable. Now that will either be third density or fourth density—it’s as simply as that.

There is some resistance right at the edge between each discrete density and so there is sort of a meniscus that if you really are going to be uncomfortable in that light you’re going to have trouble even getting there, pushing past that sort of surface tautness of the illusion as a person. This says to the person: “you’d better do a little more studying before your ten-minute quiz.”

So, the answer, as far as I’m concerned is, we will never understand the mystery—we will simply become it, but we will understand our illusion as we evaluate our effectiveness in learning the lessons we gave ourselves to learn while we were working here. I think of myself basically as an old soldier.

My weapons are far different from those of war because this is a soldier of love and peace and one does well to study the techniques of Christ’s divinity such as Jesus, although I would probably include Gandhi—certainly Krishna, Zoroaster, all the interesting concepts which overlap and create this great root system of mythology that is very archetypical.

(Reading) “Mathematicians, like artists, can create new mathematics ad infinitum, but a biologist who studies frogs would seem to be limited to a finite domain.”

Yes, I think that’s quite true unless you want to measure the reactions of a wild frog versus (Side 2 of tape ends)…

Natural science is not necessarily stuck with finity if they wish to study the evolution of consciousness in lower animals. This is not something that has ever been encouraged by anybody for various reasons: food, how many people want to eat their pet or something that they could make a loving relationship with that seems to give them a kind of personhood. You remember “The Secret Life of Plants” where a plant would sense its owners’ pain from miles away.

In other words, we could devise hypotheses and do experimentation given there was an acceptance of the basic consideration that these things are not only finite animals but are souls involved as much as every mountain and every drop of water in the process of evaluation. Not just the evolution of the body, not just the evolution of the mind—but the evolution of consciousness; the realization of Self as “I Am”, which was the Hebrew name for God.

This is not to say that we are God; this is to say we are made of God. There was nothing else for him to work with: God and freewill. So what we’re working to do in this third density is tame freewill and allow the love that’s within us to furnish us with what we need of wisdom, compassion, mercy, or whatever needs to be grasped.

However, I do agree with you that whereas the notation of natural science is definitely local, the notation of mathematics, just like the notation of music is pure—it is, shall we say, the metaphysical equivalent of tonal, a musical term.

<(Reading) “The reason the scientists may have an infinite journey in their quest for knowledge about this earth…”

Well, they certainly, if they want to observe the phenomenon with an objective mind, can discover hundreds and thousands of instances of inexplicable phenomenon occurring. You’re familiar with the kind of thing—something that is impossible, and I can’t remember the kinds of things that have been found because phenomenon has never been my interest and the mystery beyond all phenomenon is what interests me, so I just sort of ruthlessly go past that, but it simply can’t be explained and it’s fossilized and it’s carbon dated to be as old as the rock that it’s in. But how did it get there?

There are people that have made a lifetime out of gathering this kind of crazy information, the most famous being Charles Fort so the phenomenon are called “Fortean Phenomenon” because he was the one that collected these impossible bits of information first, and I think any scientist one way or the other is going to have to come to grips with a mystery that lies beyond what they can teach and a very grey area beyond what seems to be empirically so, of those things that we think might be so because of various reasons, opinions, documents, whatever.

But none of us, I don’t think, understands anything in third density. All we need to understand is that there is a choice to make and we have to make it blindly, and that is the essence of faith, “hope in things unseen” is the biblical quotation. “Blessed are those that have not seen, yet they believe.” I would prefer to say they live a life of faith.

Now this thought closes the gap between agnostics and religious people, because when you are looking at a mystery, you may choose various ways of looking at that mystery and you can, if you wish, presume to think of the beginnings of Creation in many ways that are alternatives to the way that I’ve described, and each way of thinking about the self and the nature of the journey and so forth, will carry with it its own burdens and its own rewards, and nothing is known so everyone has a life in the dark—a life in the shadow of death, we’re born with a life sentence.

I don’t know why that doesn’t occur to people that we have such a little time here and all we’re really asked to do by any of the world religions is to love each other—the ones that speak of a one God and don’t get into holy wars, that is. I don’t trust the old testament or the Muslim holy wars of the Koran because I believe them to be accounts of actual entities external to earth, but not the Creator, who mixed in and did some rather destructive messing around here on earth that resulted in a quarantine that’s been in effect ever since.

(Reading) “… man’s knowledge, x-axis is the time line, y-axis, man’s accumulated knowledge. Everyone seems to agree that this plot was fairly flat for centuries but within the last century…”

Okay, now I’m supposed to accept that without argument for a minute, okay, I will, for a minute. “What will this plot look like for the next, say, fifty years.?”

Well, the plot goes off the graph. We’ve so far overshot ourselves in the area of toy making, if you want to call powerful weapons of destruction toys; gadgetry—it is so far ahead of our maturity and our ability to use these things that it almost doesn’t bear speaking about. Prime example: 30 years ago, when they were starting to build nuclear power plants, my dad was a chemical engineer and he was the head of part of one project involving one of the very first, and he was gone a lot and we talked about it, and he told me at the time that it wasn’t the best solution as far as he was concerned, that he really thought that we had a much better chance with fusion than with fission and that it looked to him that it was simply a matter of time and effort to create a fusion reactor that would work and that would be extraordinarily safer in various ways, which, of course, I do not understand.

Nobody waited because Americans wanted their power now. Yesterday. Impatience, you see, doesn’t serve you well in the metaphysical search, so we’ve just gotten so spiritually far behind, we are out of balance in the extreme. As I said, I’m waiting for the earth to just shrug us off like fleas. That’s fine, because then we’ll go on the next experience, and we’re not talking about anything scary here, we’re just talking about dying to this particular illusion and I’ve had enough McDonalds, I really have.

I wouldn’t want to leave before my work here was done, but I certainly will not regret dying. I would only regret dying if I weren’t still trying to help and I sure don’t want to leave here until my work is done—whatever it is.

So, I think that basically what happens to the plot is it goes off the graph and starts over, because we’re so constipated with power that we cannot understand how to use, that somebody’s going to have to do something with one of the toys—it’s human nature, or the earth itself will simply adjust itself to the new area of space and time that it is cycling into. I don’t believe that we’ve ever been in this area of space before and I expect to hear a lot about sub nuclear particles and the possibility of anti-matter and stuff like that—things going fast than the speed of light, or appear to simply because we’re moving into a different density.

I would say that the space continuum itself would perhaps even to the instrumentation we have now, show some differences, and it already is. I hear things like one of the little particular I’ve heard named “Charm” and I thought: how nice (laughs).

Now the question, “Can we expect that a single individual’s ability to generate knowledge can grow exponentially?”.

I would say, it depends on the individual. Some individuals manage to remake the whole topography of a subject in such a way that everybody looks at it in a new way. I think Hubbell did that. I think Stephen Hawkins did—I read his “Brief History of Time” and was impressed with the rich imagination of his thought. I would say nothing is impossible, but we certainly can’t expect every individual to become more intelligent in the same exponential pattern as technology itself. I’m not going to say “knowledge”, but technology itself and our ability to manipulate and grow, as I said, I see it has going out of control pretty soon, probably in the next century. Maybe not. I could be so wrong.

Now, back to the x-axis and the y-axis—here’s another x-axis and y-axis—still consider the x-axis as the timeline, but consider the y-axis, and I’m assuming this is the vertical axis, that one is the present moment’s intersection with eternity. Each present moment also contained infinity, eternity, forever. We have within us the ability to stand on the present moment at all times on the timeline—each time is the present moment—and to move that y-axis along with us so that we keep ourselves not thinking the shallow, linear timeline mundane thoughts about the chores we must do and the “shoulds” and “musts” of our lives and the vary distasteful chores that often overwhelm the tasteful ones, or we can choose to keep reminding ourselves of the resonance of the present moment—of the enormous scope, the infinity of the present moment.

So we are not simply denizens, at any time, of this illusion alone, we are also, if we simply are aware of it, citizens of eternity. Now, we are very ineffectual citizens of eternity until we find out who we are. The beginning of finding out who we are is to decide how we feel about ourselves, how we feel about the Creator, what relationship we want to the Creator, what relationships we want with humankind, how we feel about service, basically, the range of sophomoric questions, until we get to the heart of who we are, and that’s something we feel passionately about.

Most people don’t have much passion. This century is not noted for doing much besides quelling it. Passion is scary, just like new knowledge. People don’t want to upset anything for the most part.

Today, that is the x-axis and the y-axis of our possible experience. We may choose a complete awareness of the x-axis only; we may choose, as to many hermits and holy people, to live on the vertical axis only, and have no worldly connections—that’s especially possible in protected monasteries or in countries where holy men are taken care of as a matter of course.

Must be terribly confusing to holy men with three or four incarnations under their belts to come to earth and have to get a job on Wall Street or something like that. Or we can choose to remain conscious of the wonderful resonance and infinite meaning of the present moment while dealing as competently and as compassionately as possible with the illusion, and I think that’s probably the stance that I would prefer myself. I’m sure I don’t hit it all that often.

Now what happens to knowledge—the totality of man’s knowledge with that x-axis and y-axis. That totality of knowledge is on the y-axis, but it is not the y-axis, in my opinion. In my opinion that y-axis is simply eternity, and from the eternal part of ourselves comes the growing feeling of resonance as we allow the concept, if it rings of truth for us, to be seated within our consciousness, so that it occurs to us—I like to tell people in the Christian prayer group whenever you hear a sudden sound—the bell at the end of the period, the clock striking, the doorbell, the telephone, a bird singing, somebody slamming a book in the library—anything like that—to say the word “Jesus”.

Now this is not a long prayer—it takes more time to explain it than to do it. But it moves you back on the y-axis. Introduces a completely alien concept to the x-axis (“we’re talking about groceries here” “No, we’re talking about groceries with Jesus”—laughs). To you, I wouldn’t use the word “Jesus” because I don’t feel Jesus is the only Christ—he just happens to be the one I’ve chosen—everyone can choose their own—I just like that man’s story so much that I don’t feel like I need much else. So everyone can pick their own way as long as they know there is a way, a path, a journey, and it seems to be a process because we’re on a timeline but in actuality, it is the bringing of eternity, the y-axis, into our present moment, that creates progress along the path.

So you can say, basically, it’s a path with no distance, since it takes place in the present moment. Now there’s a mathematical concept for you. You can tell I’m not a mathematician or I probably couldn’t have thought that up.

(Reading) “Perhaps we shall start over again, this third density story, on another planet.”

Well, if we don’t make graduation, that is surely what we will do, and a very benign fate it is, if you consider that there’s been good and bad in our lives and that it’s been pretty much a fun trip. I wouldn’t have missed it for the world.

(Reading) “The growth of knowledge would seem to have to slow down.”

No, the growth of knowledge needs to be transformed by a new definition of what knowledge consists in, and when we understand in fourth density, which is the density of understanding, where the knowledge actually is; that is, inside us, we will be much less reluctant to make ourselves vulnerable to one another, because if we’ve graduated fourth density positive, we have absolutely no wish to put down anybody else—we’re as interested in listening as we are in talking. All we want to do is help, or at least be harmless. That’s the worst I want to be is harmless. I would prefer to have a positive effect.

So people will have another shot at learning how to be a society that works harmoniously together, which is the next step before forming a social memory complex with those of like minds. But you see, you have to discover in this density that you do have a mind, and we do have our choices, and the choices are pretty clear cut. We even have instincts that tell us—and no one can deny the instinct of morality or that it exists without reference to an overriding societal matrix of taboo and acceptability, because all peoples known, either through paleontology, or archeology, or written or oral history, any people on this planet, has had the concept of good and bad, right and wrong, and the choice between them.

So in the Ra Material I think the most helpful thing it does is give us a clearer idea of this “right/wrong” business. It’s not that “this is right and that is wrong” it is “what do you want for yourself?” Do you want to control other people and therefore glorify God by aggrandizing the self? It’s a pathway. It’s a very difficult one—I wouldn’t recommend it and certainly think it’s distasteful. Or do we want to learn to cooperate more and more, to experience oneness with people more and more, to forgive and be forgiven, to love and be loved, and to serve the Creator as old soldiers coming together, because to serve the Creator is always radiant and always giving away with no expectations in return, just like the sun.

I don’t think we’re going to be on another planet of third density—I expect you’re a wanderer—if you’re not a wanderer then you’re a graduate. People don’t ask these questions if they’re not ready for more than this world has to offer.

Those are my thoughts on that. I can’t remember what I said about money, but I have the same job as your wife, Sandy (it looks like—the one obvious thing that intelligence does is the same thing that astigmatism does—if it looks like something that is unreadable, you’ll make something out of it—the brain refuses to accept nonsense and will force a sign it can ‘t read into something, even if it’s wrong. I’ve always thought that was funny about the brain. It is determined to make sense, even though a lot of things don’t.)

I do all those things—banker—the financial officer/investment broker thing is jobbed off because of my temperament, but I do keep a firm thumb on the family finances—we have a fixed income which figures out to be about $300 less than we have to spend to live—I don’t know how we do it, but we will just not take anything from the principle of the trust, because that’s Don’s money—well he left it to me but I feel that his life’s work is left with that and we’re using the income from the interest of the trust, but to take away from the trust itself is unacceptable.

Thank you for your modest donation, which you probably don’t know anything about since you never think about money—just kidding.

Please don’t feel sorry about my medical difficulties. They are my opportunity and I give thanks daily for them, because if I did not have this condition almost literally nailing me down, I would just be working very hard—volunteering wherever I saw a need. I’m a hands on person by nature, I love people. I honestly think that if I could be around hospice people, for instance, if I could be there for them, the people I have connected with could die in a much easier way—I’m a good person to hang out with when things are getting really rough because I don’t stop giving love because a person is (inaudible)—realize that there are some stages of life that are messier than others, and AIDS especially I see as the leprosy of the day and the biggest example of what could be caused by a total lack of love and compassion.

I honestly believe that an anti-toxin will be found and there will be some sort of medical/chemical way of dealing with it. But I also believe that enough love would heal probably 5-10% of the people at least. It just depends how sensitive they were to that.

So, I thank you very much. I have never had much physical energy at all, very low in physical energy—I was born with a birth defect and things sort of went from bad to worse—I’m definitely not up to factory specs at this time, nor have I been since my birth. I have dim eyes, I have dim ears (laughs) and two kidney failures, twelve arthritis operations, there have definitely been some alterations to the physical vehicle which are, in worldly terms, degenerative, and continuing to accelerate in their degeneration.

That’s just the way the old ball bounces. My mind and my spirit have always carried me and I don’t expect that to stop—I don’t expect that to change. Of course, I could always change, but I think there’s something quite fundamental about the amount of energy that I have—none of it is physical—I have a very well-coordinated body, for instance. I would almost go so far as to say extremely well-coordinated. Back before various parts of me started looking funny and not working so well, I was on the swimming team. I couldn’t participate in any of the actual meets because my kidney doctor was afraid I’d set off my kidneys again.

But he said it was okay for me to do the sprints with the team. Well, our team was winning everything in the city that year, and I was beating everybody at the sprints, but I never stretched, I just swam. My energy isn’t physical, so what happens to my body, considering that I started out with a dead body at the age of fifteen, I think my body is just fantastic. I really do appreciate the healing that you’ve done and feel it in my very soul and heart. I am very thankful for you and for your kind thoughts, and I really am free—not from the pain, but from any kind of suffering. There isn’t any need for me to suffer—it isn’t “my pain”—it’s just like a houseguest that came to stay and one tries to be as courteous as possible—even if they talk too much. I will admit that sometimes pain does talk too much.

(Reading) “Special note to Jim.” Okay, I’ll be sure he reads this.

Thank you for your extremely fun letter—it’s been a really nifty morning because of you and I sure hope I haven’t talked your ear off. Things are coming along pretty swimmingly here, as I said, it’s probably one of the last days of Indian Summer—the trees are still almost completely green and the sky is an incandescent blue that you only see in the autumn when the leaves are just starting to turn and winter pale and icy follows. Not much excuse for winter, as far as I’m concerned, except it’s a nice little breather before Christmas and I like Christmas.

We are doing our normal schedule of speaking on Thursdays to the two people who are learning to channel—we’re very careful about whom we accept now, and the Sunday night meditations. I am going to be writing on a book which will probably not be published in my lifetime—I think it’s a good project anyway—that’s in case I get discovered at some point. You know how the strangest people get discovered and then people want to things with bibliographies about discovered people. Well, I don’t want to do that…(inaudible)…life as a series of events, as much as I am interested in my life as I remember it, because in the differences between my memory and the actual reality, lie my own personal myths. That faith, which I’ve allowed to grow and encouraged to grow within myself in order to live a certain kind of life to create certain purified emotions, to become as radiant a being as possible not in and of myself, but as a channel for an infinite source of love and light which comes through me.

So, I’d sort of like to take a look at that, especially if anybody ever does one of those factual things about me, because it’s interesting to see just where you changed life to myth, although it would be more according to your own needs. Presumption is everything, fact is subjective.

In November, three channels are going to get together, Pat Rodegast who channels “Emmanuel”, Barbara Brodsky who hasn’t been published yet but is a very good channel. I thought it would make a very interesting book if three contacts, three different kinds of entities—one spirit plane, one just an old friend who stayed to help because Barbara had done something for him several lifetimes ago to save his life, so the differences are so often emphasized and the similarities in positive channeling so often ignored in favor of one prophesy over another—who’s right?. Is the word going to end in 2011 or 2001? Come on, nobody outside of this illusion can count past one.

And also, because they all have a good sense of humor which obviously is a part of spiritual maturity. It’s very dry—it doesn’t hurt anybody, but I’m sure you’ve caught it in Ra. Every contact expresses itself in a different manner but they really are delightful and I think it should be a book that does show solidarity of positive thought and perhaps it will take some of the steam out of people’s constant determination to say “well, this one’s wrong—this one’s right.”

  Skip Navigation LinksL/L Research Carla’s Niche Letter Tapes October 19, 1990

Copyright © 2017 L/L Research