Letter to S

Dear S,

I break all the rules for your concern, S. You have such interesting letters and I thank you for them—they’re a present to me. You’re not a needy person, you’re actually thinking, and I’m not sure that can be taught. People try to teach people to think it’s a matter of preference, what you were born like and not too many people were born to think about things. Most people confuse “thinking” about things with “worrying” about things, or being obsessed by things, which isn’t the case at all. I have had various tracks of my mind on certain questions for years. They’re too important to ignore as far as I’m concerned, but they do not have easy answers.

Of the things that I have considered in my time, the only one that completely baffles me and seems to have baffled everybody else. My thinking on economics has been going on since I’ve become aware of the link between economics and the war, which is something I put together when I first studied world history in high school. Every time I asked myself “why?” The answer was either money or religious fanaticism. The last couple have been quite distasteful because even though there is a lot being said about the Creator in regard to the Middle East, that isn’t it at all—as far as I can tell it’s money. Arghhhh! I’m nowhere with economics and I have been working on that for years.

I don’t believe I would be considered completely normal and people might even feel psychologically that I was possessed with too much thinking, I really don’t know what other response I could have to being. To me, it’s not “I think, therefore I am,” it’s “I am, therefore I think.” That’s what consciousness is. One doesn’t have to use it to be curious, but it’s certainly my instinct.

You remind me of days that I have not had since I left the groves of academia. I was on tract to be a PhD something or other, but somebody told me I didn’t know what the real world was like so I tore up a Four Foundation Fellowship and a Rhodes Scholar Fellowship and something else that had money to go and do stuff—get a PhD—I’d gotten several offers, and I turned them all down and went to work in a bar.

So I think. And that is one of my most basic characteristics. So you are that extremely unusual but probably to your students that very precious entity (to some of your students who like to think if you have any) who does think, is not afraid to think and reason and look at things and who spends time listening rather than being on a one-way street of the talk show approach to lectures where there are no questions, where things go according to a menu—you’re in the top game and you give a talk show and dazzle everybody, or if you’re a plodder, get through the material thoroughly and the bell rings and that’s it.

I suspect you’re the kind of that gets a treat by questions and has interesting dialogues or triologues (if that is a word) with one or two students that are thinking and asking questions and there are certainly always questions.

And of course my specialty are the questions that basically are more important in the asking than in the answering as far as the work that we’re here to do on planet earth. The first thing we need to do is become aware of our situation.

My mike noise has improved, I have invented the holder that I now wear around my neck all the time. I had a lucky piece that Jim found for me—it’s an Indian good medicine rock, a very small rock, probably a half inch in diameter. This is Indian land—this was all sacred land to the Indians so I honor it—Jim found it on our land at Avalon and it occurred to me to put a safety pin—solutions are so simple. Think of the simplest solution, even though sometimes it doesn’t come to you right away. You slide the safety pin up, stick the mike in and slide the safety pin down and you’ve got it made. I haven’t had any complaints but then again I’ve only figured this out for a couple of weeks, so I do hope that it is an improvement of mike sound.

Just to put you in context, it’s still Indian summer here. The leaves have probably fallen off most of the trees but there are trees that are still hanging on to them. Jim is chopping up leaves with the lawn mower which we can use to “feed” the meadow. We do not have a lawn—we have wild flowers, we have crab grass and dandelions and that’s the way I want it—I don’t see any point in having a carpet outside, give me nature please. Just cut it short enough so we don’t attract field mice in the house.

I am going to first of all apologize. You were owed an apology because your ear must fall off when I answer one of your very concise letters with a lot of talk. Were I able to still use the typewriter and were I able to still hold a pen, I would try to do you the favor of writing you a legible letter. When I am writing on paper so I have a feedback system which tells me what I’ve just said, what the paragraph look like and what the paragraph before that looks like, I’m able to invoke a denseness or density of material that is still pretty lucid. It’s a style that most people outside of Arts and Letters do not like at all, so anything that I write from now on I discovered this in time to write the Channeling Handbook on tape, that what I consider to be a bunch of blather as compared to my writing style comes across to people as far more understandable because I suppose there’s less density of information and more expansion of the flavor of the author in a personal way rather than in a stylistic way.

So I would rather write you so that you didn’t have to spend all the time you have to spend listening but I’m sorry about that—my hand is absolutely out. We sang a “Making Music” concert for PBS this morning on the life of young Mozart—before Amadeus, the movie, and I sang my little heart out and then I sang again in church and afternoon rehearsal and my right side is completely out because of the turning of the pages—I have to turn the pages unless you put them on a continuous scroll or something.

You are a busy man. Thanks for the transcript. I do not know if you beat him to the punch. I will lay it out for Jim to take a look at as I am laying out the crop circles deal. Actually, there have been circles reported in the British Isle quite substantially by whole villages of people for generations—for centuries. In the middle ages until quite recently people believed that the fairies made them. I’m trying to think of the book—I think it was John Keel wrote—where he links together a lot of Fortean type phenomena folklore and phenomena connected with the UFOs—a fascinating book. If I come across it again, I’ll let you know. If I can find it I’ll put it on at the end of the tape.

I really do thank you for the transcript. I don’t believe I ever channel punctuation marks so I’m glad for people to add the punctuation marks which make it more readable for them. You seem to be unusually humble about your writing skills. I wonder if you are not being unnecessarily humble. You seem to write very economically. Thank you very much for it. If K hasn’t gotten to it, it will save her whatever time you’ve put into it.

You are very welcome that we took this question to meditation—I know when I see a question and don’t want to answer myself. A lot of things I can answer myself and I don’t go to channeling, although I do think I am channeling in a certain sense of things in that I do prepare for working with letters by a prayer for guidance and am probably able to gain access to a more creative or different point of view than the close up pecking at the corn frame of mind. I think what I do is look through the chicken wire rather than go after the corn.

I don’t have an opinion about the crop patterns—I know that they’re real and I’ve seen them ever since I started doing research for Don. I don’t think it’s mold or some kind of disease of the grass because I’ve seen those and it is as simple as taking a sample of the grass and giving it to a biologist who is perfectly able to locate the disease that caused it. I think the circle is a very important thing and I’ll get into that later.

Okay (reading) “the time/space of the brothers and sisters of sorrow…”

“The brothers and sisters of sorrow” is another term used to denote what has always been called “The Confederation of Planets in Service to the Infinite Creator” (or the “One Infinite Creator” depending on the channel and the contact). They are brothers and sisters of sorrow because they have heard our sorrow and come to serve a sorrowing planet, much as we would send emergency people into a situation which cannot be dealt with by normal people, but who have to find a special person.

But I wouldn’t say they are religious missionaries—I would say they are more like the Peace Corps where in the Peace Corps the call that is felt is largely the poverty of the lack of good water supply, the ability to teach very simple skills which will give them food, very very service to others stuff. I think that they came simply because of a spiritual version of that kind of starvation and lack or metaphysical version I should say, though the word “metaphysical” means several different things depending on who is using it and it really is losing its purity of meaning in the classical English.

So the “Brothers and Sisters of Sorrow” is another word for the “Confederation of Planets in Service of the One Infinite Creator.”

This last Sunday meditation they described themselves through me as members of the “Confederation of Angels and Planets in Service of the Infinite Creator” nodding to fact, of which I’ve suspected for years, that people we perceive as angelic presences in old stories have chosen a different persona for the 20th Century. Not that it isn’t real, it’s just a switch in manifestation. As far as I know the positively polarized entities have concluded that walking among the people—coming here physically and trying to help that way is out of the question.

For one thing people are afraid of them and they shoot them down, for another thing, of course they are perceived as highly advanced and futuristic beings and the response of the government really has been for some time that what dealings it has with negatively oriented extra-terrestrials that are doing a fair job of concealing that fact by simply giving a negative slant to positive information, have basically made a deal with people within our government and within other governments, not a deal that they should have made.

I never say anything more than that because I don’t know anything—I’m not a player—I’ve heard a lot of things said to me by people who are impeccably respectable and have done research into the subject which suggest a rather oligarchic structure of power, international and secret.

Since this is all an illusion and since all of these occurrences are within the illusion it’s very difficult for me to take them really seriously because I am aware of illusions within illusions within illusions.

The Creator, in a very literal sense, is the creation. Within each of us is a light—we can call it Christ, you can chose an object to worship to objectify that same feeling and call it Jesus Christ or Gautama Buddha or Lao T’su or in certain Indian disciplines, whoever your guru might be, or in the sense of Catholics there is a certain amount of what I would consider idolatry given to a living person who supposedly can make no mistakes—that’s a cute one—except of course that none of us can make mistakes in any true sense according to Ra.

But the Creator has, in my understanding of it, two faces: The uncreated creator, passive creator, which is simple consciousness—intelligent infinity—as Ra calls it. That Creator can never be known, however, I believe we will return the light with which he or it created us to the freewill portion of the Creator, which chose manifestation in the first place, the logos creating light by the use of freewill and manifesting everything by the use of this light.

So consequently, although to speak of the Creator is not to speak of the Creation, but of the Creation and a great deal more. But to speak of the Creation as the Creator is a concept that gives offense by seeming paradox. How can the Creator or the source also be also that which it has created from that source?

I am of the opinion that there are an endless number of creations, but only one Creator and as the giant heart of the universe beats, every beat is a creation which takes however long everybody’s figuring it will take this entire creation to burn out or whatever creations do and it all will be formed into something Ra called “Spiritual Gravity” where that which is not of the Creator will have been burned away by conscious decisions, choices, and we are in the illusion that we recognize still hollowed out in such a way as to hold the treasure in earthen vessels that is spoken of in the bible.

And I think that the Creator is nourished in a way by its creation—it learns because of watching entities that are a part of the Creator but do not have any idea of this, only a yearning or a feeling or an instinct to right action—giving those people complete freewill and just watching it work.

I think the problem of computers is such that it would be possible, theoretically, to create a computer which could be programmed to seek out various aspects of itself which can be in the possibility of the computer’s program, improved (also defined by the program) and this would mean that the creator of the new computer would have even perhaps improved as it reproduced itself, however, I don’t believe there is any way to construct consciousness, because a computer makes choices—consciousness is.

I believe that everything is alive, but I would not know how to program a computer to be an entity which was able to move in the programs which were beyond the capacity of the computer and those are metaprograms which make absolutely no sense, like, there is an end to cold/hot, good/bad and all other polarities.

If you drew it in what in logic I learned is Boolean Algebra, a large circle, which was the Creator, and a tiny dot—we talking infinity here where there are no boundaries—and this tiny dot of “finity” which is the active portion of the Creator and in that sense when all entities of the conscious or manifesting aspect of the Creator which include many messengers and so-called saviors, we do in literal fact, complete the Creation as we complete our journey of seeking and chose finally, as prodigal sons and daughters always do, to remain a slave, if necessary, but to go home.

Notice that in positive polarity the surrender, the willingness to be a slave, a servant, the humility to allow that, although this not something I’ve heard people talk about, but it’s a very humble thing to do, and I think that is a very important part of becoming vulnerable to feelings, purified emotions, that move you deeper into the awareness of your own consciousness.

Unfortunately, people who try to get below the level of consciousness and use tape to do that, often gain access to a portion of the biocomputer which is directly below the level of consciousness which is filled with phantasmagoria, all the fears that we have shoved down below conscious thought because they were not easily solved, monsters we were afraid of as a kid. All this stuff lies where the conscious mind has pushed it so they are artifacts of the conscious mind that have been pushed down into the subconscious because the conscious mind does not want to deal with them.

These are not interesting to a metaphysical student—it is necessary to go deeper than that to get past the “glamour” (used in the archaic sense) of one’s own thoughtforms, which are largely created out of fear. As we persist, that is all, I do not try to make the spiritual path sound either easy or necessarily rewarding in the normal sense of the pursuit of happiness, as we persist in doing this, sheer persistence communicates itself to the deep mind and as the deep mind is like, archetypically speaking, a maiden who may be courted gently and who has much to offer, so you turn into a kind of courtier or lover of truth, willing to give the truth within time to speak in the silence that you choose.

I seem to remember you saying that you were not doing very well with meditation—I don’t either. I can clear myself in an instant, by will, I’ve been using will and faith rather than a strong, healthy, physical vehicle all my life. I’ve never had a normally comfortable life. But this was obviously chosen by me and has enabled my ministry tremendously.

I’ll leave that one because I’ve said it enough different ways that somewhere in there is, for better or worse, my opinion.

The passive portion is a complete mystery. I don’t think the passive portion does anything at all. Is not even aware of itself. Its encounter with the first distortion, which is freewill, is the basis of the manifest creation, in my opinion, and no, I don’t believe that passive and active Creator represent a kind of polarity—I believe it represents a gift, and that is consciousness and life itself—eternal life, absolute, imperishable beingness. And that part of us doesn’t think either. But it does collect the feelings that are built up through experience. And often underlie biases that we cannot explain.

The passive aspect of the Creator is not given to the Creator by the Creator—the Creator sends messengers—think of a Christ, any Christ, think of one who suits you best—if they were truly messengers of love in the positive sense, they expressed that it was not they but the Creator within them that was speaking, and as Jesus put it “if you look at me you don’t look at me, or if you listen to me you don’t hear me but the Creator within.” A very terse and pithy definition of channeling.

It always amuses me and I’ve lost the ability to be too dismayed but it is still amusing that people that believe unquestionably in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, find that Holy Spirit concept extremely threatening in the present day sense. The concept that the Holy Spirit could send fire down on the apostles or on the disciples is seen as perfectly logical but if people feel that they are receiving information from a messenger of love of the Creator now, they get the “you are a witch” routine, or “you are a Satanist” or something like that.

Now, next question, the concept of the “kingdom within us” and yes, it is in the bible, is a concept that depends heavily upon one’s perceptions of the true nature of the universe. If you have paid attention, and I know you have, you are quite well aware that things that seem to be quite solid, such as time, are subjectively quite elastic. In fact, once one realizes how much stimulus is coming into the databank of our biocomputer, which seems to be able to hold everything, and one realizes how ruthless we are the choice of what we are going to attend to in our surroundings, one becomes aware that one is dictated to by one’s programming so that we all create our own universes, just as ten witnesses of the same crime tell ten different stories, so each of us may choose the inner environment in which we live.

There’s an old joke about heaven and hell (and pardon me if I ever repeat myself because I use some things over and over because they’re very helpful in conceptualizing). The joke runs that a guide is taking a visitor through all of the hall of real knowledge and there are two doors in this corridor and one is marked “hell” and the other is marked “heaven” and of course the person asks the guide, Dante-esk [inaudible] it’s an old way of perceiving the gaining of knowledge—“would you like to see how” and he says “yes” and so he opens the door and walks into an elaborate banquet with food piled high in dishes all over the tables, and there are people there dressed in their very best, their glitter and glitz, their very best eating out formal attire and they look wonderful except that they have three-foot long wooden forks strapped to their arms so cannot get any of the food to their mouths. That is hell.

They go back into the hall and the guys says “I’d really like to see heaven too.” The guide says, “no problem” and opens the door and it’s the same scene—incredibly luscious and luxurious banquet and people dressed in their fineries and they too have three-foot long wooden forks strapped to their arms, but in this room people are feeding each other.

Thusly, within this illusion we create, by the use of those things which …

[Side 1 of tape ends.]

The choice of how we react to catalyst is always our own. We can gain only so much data by observation of ourselves and others without coming to conclusions, making choices and thereby creating a different frame of mind or point of view. We would have difficulty intellectually creating a heaven or a hell because these states are basically emotionally laden and significant of more than words say and they are significators which don’t go down well with people anymore because they don’t want to talk about either heaven or hell which is usually of consciousness in a certain internally created state of mind.

Were I to choose to pay attention only to things that I sense with my physical body, within it, which is the pain, which is constant, and my response to the objective perceptions of reality… Let’s look at this a little.

We have a brain designed rather specifically as far as I can tell, like computers to make choices. The basic choices we make are made fairly early because there are some seed perceptions that are first concerns of the young soul and children spend a good deal of time in hell because they are not able yet to tolerate the incomprehensible vagaries of a freewill universe. As soon as they think they have learned a rule that will always apply, it snaps back on them like a rubber band and they simply, for the most part, are not able to solve the tangles, so they basically learn by other imitations or they deliver it, refraining from imitation of the parents.

Further, in order to chance the priorities of those things which we will notice from our environment, there must be that yearning in consciousness for intangible, and Noumenal information which is a yearning within us for that which we seek ever beyond our understanding.

To the intellect this is not an easily processed program and I believe at that point if the person is brave enough to ask the Creator whatever way one wishes to think about a fairly inarguable higher power, given the tip top excellence of the universe and its balance, it has to abandon thinking processes in order to put in the metaprogram, which says: “Here are the intangible things that are a serious priority for me—here are the additions I wish to make to my programming so that I will notice things differently.

This is a change—a very strong change in the way we use the intellect—we still use the intellect to make the choices—this is the density of choice—the intellect is a perfect tool. But the heart is able to deal with the metaprograming, that is the deeper mind, the purified emotions, so that added to the program are the requests made and consequently established within the conscious computer to notice and to process as important information any way possible that any situation may be seen as a lesson in love.

It is quite illogical that we should love our enemies, it is quite unlike our species actual second density nature to be utterly peaceful, our ancestors in the trees were not utterly peaceful though they certainly bluster more than they fight, the great apes. I think it’s very informative to watch the experiments done on these entities which are basically our second density minds. It helps us to reckon with what it means to have self consciousness and what it means to have true free will.

We have the free will to program what we’re going to notice—this program is an absolute dictator of our experience. Consequently, if we wish to experience the kingdom within (or alternatively, the kingdom of indifference or the kingdom of the negative path)—instead of heaven, let us just say the positive path, one must actualize the belief that this is for something in and of itself, regardless of any outcome within this illusion, that is, peer approval, the gaining of knowledge that can be shared with those who are not interested in working on the metaprogram and so forth, very intangible, all of the values of the kingdom of heaven are intangible within our every day experience.

However, the secret, of course, is that at the same time we are in the flow of time, we are always in eternity as far as we are present in the moment. The resonances of the moment are as deep and informative as we allow them to be and as we continue to allow them to be. In other words, one does not get extremely good at courting the subconscious immediately. It is a process that is much better started quite cautiously and perceived in a very self-protected manner, because no one will understand you—almost no one will understand you.

Consequently, you do not want to be overly noisy about this wonderful kingdom that you’ve discovered that you can create within yourself with the grace of the Creator.

The Creator is almost always objectified. The actual Creator is a mystery. So what we are doing by moving spiritually in accord with a life lived in faith is worshipping all we can see of the Creator that speaks to us of the Creator. We’re using an entity that is a symbol, a gateway, a bridge across the span of time and space into imperishable things and eternal consciousness and I would guess evolution that is also from creation to creation ongoing forever.

When most people say “the kingdom within” I’m not sure that they have this kind of thinking in mind at all—this is simply my interpretation and I wouldn’t presume to deal theologically with the bible—that is not an area of expertise though I read it everyday I do not read Hebrew or Greek and have no Aramaic and I hardly see how I could speak on that subject which is very powerfully emotionally laden for many people, without at least a Master’s Degree in the study of theology—learning the languages so that one can go back and see what the insinuations are that are between the lines in the various languages—you have to learn not only the words, but also the kind of emotional milieu the words are intended to produce.

Okay (reading) “The idea that infinity is one, that the mathmatics of the eternal must reckon with only one number and that is the number one and that there are no numbers in infinity except one…I do not understand it in the mathematic sense so consider therefore the number two—one plus one equals two—yet infinity plus infinity plus infinity—quite a puzzle.”

It may be a puzzle—the concept that I have in the context in which I made that statement of my opinion, was my concept of this tiny part of the Creator that has moved into manifestation in order to guide the growing consciousness of third density and densities ahead of ours also—if the guidance is requested. We have been given freewill—an act of incredible generosity so we never have to listen.

So to me, when I use the word eternal, I was being sloppy. The mathematics of the active eternal is the number one, but it’s the number one in a sense which I did not, as far as I remember, didn’t specify, and that is that our basic nature is the spark of absolute love found inextricably with the absolute variety of freewill or variousness of freewill. Things do not come into manifestation unless the ratio of freewill to love or the ratio of temporal to eternal is a fraction which reduces to one—unity. So those I think are the mathematics of the portion of God that we could ever pretend to begin to comprehend.

I think probably that the mathematics of infinite intelligence are best described by a zero, but a zero that is not drawn. A simple plenum that is no consciousness but a plenum of infinite intelligence that is not self conscious—it just is. And it will never be seen. So what we basically, what we are doing in any attempt to seek the kingdom within is change ratio—not that it can’t have its limitations, it always has to be a ratio that is equal to one. But I believe that—this is all a mystic’s gaze at Larsonian Physics—I can’t read Larsonian physics since I am quite ignorant mathematically (Don could, being a physics and mechanical engineer) but in Larson’s equation, which is not at all spiritual it’s just that I can perceive it spiritually as being a better model than any other I’ve seen of cosmologies—velocity is identified with the speed of light, that is what Larson calls “unit velocity”, in other words, it’s one. Why it appears to us in this illusion as 186,000 miles per second, a measurable thing, is something I would have no idea about except that obviously the mathematics of this illusion are only able to deal with the infinite one by noting this constancy.

Importantly, it is to noted that this constant is the speed of light, and as the first distortion is freewill, the second one was the freewill creation of an active principle which represented the infinite intelligence of the passive creator. It’s sort of like the messenger of the messengers—a messenger that informs the messengers that we meet or hear about, and they are represented by an absolute that is quite a mystery, so I see velocity as identified as the creation and the active portion of the Creator, which, in my mind is the same thing; I see time as equivalent to the first distortion after love, that is, that is what translates into the positive nature seen as positive in manifestation because the logos, the consciousness, the infinite intelligence is actually endlessly and wisely compassionate, or compassionately wise.

So I identify that with Larson’s time. I identify Larson’s space with manifestation or light, that which takes up space—that’s why we have space, there is no other reason. There’s nothing out there, Steve, you know that. It’s been described for years by physicists as a bunch of energy fields, and everything else is empirically derived from some observations made by various [inaudible], but no matter how astute, and in fact, the more astute an entity is, the more often it will have a mystical side (he or she).

Scientists often come to an utter devotion and mystical awareness of the universe as a mystical thing, simply because of the observations about the nature and limitations of the scientific method.

So basically the choices that we make are the things that we put inside that plenum represented by or symbolized by zero. So what Larsen says by saying velocity equals space over time or time over space, is re-addressed in my consciousness as the infinite Creator in manifestation equals the ratio or fraction of love, the unmanifest, the logos, the thought to create, and light, which Larsen shows as going through various spins from the completely inexplicable particle waves—the best way they can describe light, obviously, a living oxymoron, and people simply have to live with that—scientists must be nuts not to see these, well, no, they simply have to realize they earn bucks by continuing on with other people’s research and making better gadgets, and you are a theoretical person and actually think, very much a pleasure to talk to someone who thinks.

So I would say that the inactive portion of the Creation, the Creator in its infinity could be represented by a zero if we robbed zero of both is finity, as the drawing of a “O” within which everything is, but to take the limits of that letter away.

The manifest world on the other hand, both the active portion of the Creator that is now in manifestation, in other words, we can be represented by a ratio that equals one. A goal in this life is, to my mind, fairly obviously to alter our programming of V=S/T to V=T/S, in other words, and I don’t know if this is true in mathematics or not, probably isn’t, we give higher respect to free will in the less informed point of view by identifying free will with our own personal wishes.

Our own personal wishes are whims, fancies, things in the moment that pass, they are ephemeral, our deeper desires are at least half hidden from us and we must search for them in the darkness of unknowing, that is why living a life in faith is so particularly important.

Follow me on this: our computer minds have programs which we have created more or less like [inaudible] unless we’re very conscious beings—we have chosen those things which will help our survival. This does not simply include what we perceive although we’re quite ruthless about what we perceive of the physical, yet also ruthlessly edit that which we perceive of the intangible, things like body language, tone of voice, a feeling that isn’t being expressed by another which we notice, any form of love, of course, is quite intangible. These things are not important to our survival—the “go for the gusto attitude” is by far what Don always humorously called, being a scientist himself and being able to poke fun, “the survival of the fattest.” I know you’ll get a big chuckle out of that—you really would have loved Don. His puns were always, when well considered, extremely deep, unlike mine which are simply creating out of a mental tic—makes me look at words playfully.

So, we have, in the end the incomprehensible 0=1, which, of course, is a distortion. There is no possibility of this being [inaudible] and foremost. This model is logical but incorrect. I believe that the zero of the Boolean Algebra that I met in logic class, was much more adequate than an equation to express the truth of things, and that is, that the ratio of the unmanifest and manifest or the Creator and the Creation, which always must equal one in order for manifestation to take place there needs to be an absolute equality of freewill and love in our makeup.

Whatever we conceive of our ontology, whatever we believe our being to be like, I believe it can be seen in a somewhat foggy fashion as taking place within the circle of the manifest, the unknown, the Noumenal, so that by realization more and more of the nature of the unmanifest as the kingdom within as that opens to us because we ask to understand. We place the statement of our lives as that which manifests within the circle of consciousness or beingness.

It is probably, though quirky, interesting to view this role which I’ve accepted theoretically as the circle dance of infinity. By viewing our living sentence, the living sentence of our manifestation as a punctuation mark if we have not yet awakened to any sense of ourselves that lives beyond ourselves and the body living the only life we will know one might have seen the statement of self as being extremely weak…

The first thing to arise, I think, in the developing, not intellect, but heart/mind, the true wisdom within which partakes heavily of what we would dismiss as emotion, deep and purified, is the phantasmagoria of that which has been sublimated, which is that which we have feared.

In response to this fear, many people find an extremely self-sure system of authoritative doctrine and with it build their four walls, their floor, their ceiling and their definition of themselves. Because nothing is allowed in this definition of the self except that which is specifically embraced by that ism, there is no opportunity for any growth and understanding, there is merely an acceptance of the authority.

In a moment of realization that such livingness which extends beyond this little life, is even remotely possible, I would perhaps see these people as represented by a period within a circle. All that can be known, is known, that which is doctrinal is absolutely right, the life shall be lived in accordance with these beliefs and therefore one shall achieve the Noumenal, the unknown, the mystery, which to the embracer of an ism, of a fundamentalist or [inaudible] nature in any system of religion, if we accept that and nothing else, there isn’t any room or any perceived need for growth, there is simply the one act of will of the giving over our ability to think independently by ourselves as ongoing beings in favor of surety. There isn’t anything easy about living beyond the period.

Now there are some fairly interesting thinkers who have never discovered the modest desire to do anything but observe. They do not wish to form allegiances to decide to choose they wish to observe. This is of course a scientific viewpoint. It is also the viewpoint of any art. The distinction between arts and sciences is, to me, false. They simply offer different kinds of language which may cause within us epiphany of awakening to new thinking, new processes. If that thinker is quite dispassionate but unavoidably and without exception observational and not willing to note anything that does not have an objective reference, they could be, perhaps, represented by a comma.

In other words, observation is ongoing, notefully written down, this is in process, and the mind does think about that which it observes, but it observes within the construct of one long sentence and sees life itself as one long sentence, not as a creatively ever-changing statement, that is more than one sentence being needed.

A person that has the temperament to notice things which are intangible, and there are many things that come to our senses that are intangible, has much more of an opportunity to move from one sentence which “sings the self”, will learn a little more and a little more and a little more. The learning being randomized to the extent that the entity does not come to conclusions and make choices.

Still, the mind is seeing this as a time-bound process, rests still securely in the intellect and simply opens the intellect to the awareness that intangible things are to be reckoned within oneself and in the world that one observes.

Love is completely intangible. But I have argued the most devout semanticists to a complete standstill several times in my life, much to the discomfiture of the always-highly intelligent…

[Side 2 of tape ends.]

…I am, as I recall, moving through the concept limitations of the model of a person who accepts the intangible as data to be processed and I believe I was saying that there is no entity, no matter how [inaudible] he may be that is not buffaloed into a standstill because he cannot deny the reality of love—he has felt it, he has felt it being given to him; he has felt himself loving. That’s what this environment—this illusion—is all about.

To the person who has dropped the limitations of the objective reference, much more is available, much more data is forthcoming from observation. There is, of course, the constant reprogramming of the computer to accommodate the observations. The person may well still be thinking of himself as a “sentence of being”, however, he has graduated to the semicolon, and in reality is making one statement, then another statement, and then another statement, but seeing no period.

Because of the fact that a semicolon implies statements, rather than one continuing sentence, however, the entity is, in fact, on the verge of moving into the kind of realization that is spiritually desirable, in my opinion, and which indicates that the person has awakened from the dream of the flesh and the glamour or illusion of the hand in front of the face or the face in the mirror as being ourselves.

Keen observation is the intangible that inevitably leads one to the perception of the Noumenal. At this point in one’s spiritual evolution, one becomes vulnerable to being born—that this completely imperishable self is ready to be born in this birth. As put in more realistic terms, the entity, which is infinite and absolute, which is at the heart of our being, which is a hologram of the Creation and the Creator though only a tiny spark holds the entire universe within us. And to the extent that we allow unknown things to be considered insofar as we then give our instincts, our hunches, our dreams, our visions, our imaginings credit for being useful, we begin to see ourselves as the tender infants of spirit.

We are all at this stage, I think, within the illusion. This is the illusion in which we awaken to the Noumenal within ourselves and by going through the catalyst that we have planned for ourselves we begin to understand the nature of infinite love.

Lessons are usually learned through trauma, but that is not necessarily the only way to learn. It is possible to learn by having the kind of passionate interest or desire or yearning to know more of this nominal to such an extent that the journey takes one and cracks open that shell of unknowing, and we pop out baby chicks, newly aware that we are able to be informed in ways that have nothing to do with our survival; in ways we cannot learn by words.

But whatever road that you used to travel there is always Rome at the end of that road no matter what spiritual path (to rephrase) we travel, we arrive at last in the same country—our homeland, and in the safety and security of utter poverty of information and utter humility before the knowledge that we have never known who we are.

We, as earthen vessels, as livers of a little life, kneel down and accept the seminal influence of love. By this acceptance, however, it is moved from head to heart. We concede ourselves—we see that the part of ourselves that feels the most real is that part of ourselves which stands upon holy ground. We have treasure in these earthen vessels—we have all the treasure of beauty, truth—total freedom. We have to nurture this little baby child that has been borne within us.

Many people in the heat of their excitement at discovering that they are more than a kind of bi-pedal animal which lives and dies and in between makes merry and pays off a mortgage … In the courage and strength of such a vision do we begin and once we have accepted this birth as being our identity and our experiences within the incarnation as those of a stranger in a strange land, we have given ourselves permission to nurture that within us which is heading for home, a home which is not here.

We yearn for the absolute—we yearn for the divine—we have an undeniable instinct for the good, to call it something loosely, there is a moral imperative within the breast of the normal man—the lack of such a sense of morality indeed is remarkable and those without any perceived moral imperative are seen as hopelessly ill.

That we having perceived the race to be run having allowed a new self to be born within us which is spiritual entirely, may give ourselves over to the process of spiritual evolution as we understand it. There is usually a great spate of study, reading, talking to other people, as we search, by any means possible, to help nurture this babe chick of imperishable light that has been born—not in the aim of self-satisfaction and success but in the poverty of that rude stable within ourselves where we come at last to grips with the fact that we must let go and surrender to a rebirth in order to be true to ourselves.

Thusly, the imagery of the story of Jesus, the Christ, is very accurate to me in terms of the metaphysical situation. We have to be informed by Mary’s angel in one way or another, that we may take, and must indeed take a leap. We must allow ourselves to become pregnant with spirit. We must nurture that pregnancy. There are no words to describe this process, but there is eventually the birth of the tiny Christ child within us. We lie in the manger, the stars over our birth.

There is a tendency among those that have had their first experiences with being not a dot-dot-dot, not a period, not a comma, not a semicolon, but an exclamation point. This denotes to me passion, emphasis, excitement, deep humor, think of all the reasons that you might put an exclamation point at the end of a sentence. This is exciting, this is living, this is larger life, we become able to touch the kingdom within in the vision of ourselves as having been reborn as spiritual entities.

So we, in allowing ourselves to be redefined as other than our bodies, and as that little child, which alone from this point forward can continue to evolve, become, as we accept ourselves in this new mode of the God-self within, or the metaphysical self within, or that self which can perceive absolutely, we become an exclamation point.

The passion, the absolute passion, which is love, begins to be seen within us and together we have grasped the truth, which is an a-ha, the exclamation point, there are two incorrectnesses people achieve at this point.

One is to talk about it a lot with other people. Other people will kill your child—it is very fragile—you don’t want to be in sales—you don’t want to be in sales ever—if you can be an advocate, you can say to people, well, I have a life in faith with this symbol, as the chief cornerstone of the life that is without words, but is through faith alone. You don’t want to hold on to that truth, you don’t want to hold on to that aha!

The other thing that we do wrongly is evangelism because everyone will come to his own exclamation point, or his own awakening, or his own birth, within the body of flesh. Self aware spirit—this is the order of being that we are at this point. It is a quantum leap from the order of intelligence of plants, which, by the way, dwell in the absolute, and have a complete harmony with not the ratio, not the ratio of freewill, they have no freewill, they are planted in the earth. They have the desire to turn towards the light.

In achieving recognition of the self as an entity achieving self-consciousness, third density is a quantum wherein we work with this new self consciousness, self awareness, and begin to refine our concepts of self and in doing so we necessarily gradually become metaphysically inclined because there is that within us which we do feel instinctually to reflect our source. The thought of being chance is, on the face of it, ridiculous, and I don’t see how any scientist, given how many typewriters and monkeys can come up with a source as doomed as chance.

If I gave anyone a simple object, like a watch, and say “did this mechanism happen by chance?” “No, dear, I don’t think you’re in touch with reality—this was made.” And so were we and we were made fearfully and wonderfully as people that can make their own choices, as people who can choose to evolve beyond this quantum and take a quantum leap into what will be fourth density and we do this by using a meta program of our computer which comes from source deeper within our being than intellectual thinking can reach.

It is through the grace of this meta, or other program, also implied, greater program, that we achieve faith and it is only through faith that we are to make the many necessary choices in order that we become a newly defined entity, and not defined by time, not by space, but by the ability to be an imperishable light being—a metaphysical being that is part of eternity. We still cannot approach the absolute, we are merely within the sea of the absolute, that of which we can apprehend in the absolute is apprehended immediately and I have never seen anyone, no matter how articulate able satisfactorily to describe the experience of the immediate presence of the infinite Creator.

So basically, we use the computer to go beyond the computer. This is the power of faith. Alive we’re not in our own hands—the beginning of life and the end of life will not change because of our concern—our hype, our bone structure. These things are pretty much given to us. We are at the end of a cycle of evolution. There’s not much more we can do to improve the body in regard to its environment. The mind takes over in this illusion and we cannot claim objectivity because in the metaphysical sense there is no object—there are only subjects. Our perceptions, therefore, are subjective entirely.

(Reading) “when Hatonn says at this time we would wish to transmit [inaudible] in order that each entity may practice the experience [inaudible]—can I infer that the social memory complex of Hatonn was saying that another of its entities wished to partake in this communication?”)

No. What Hatonn was saying was that there were two channels in the room, one of whom had been taking questions for years—the other is in actual skill level able at this time to begin studying the art of concept communication in random question form, an important step along the way to channeling a message that is the central message which is this entities preferred way to communicate. That is, a main message and then questions and answers.

This occurred twice after questioning. I discovered that K, who is my student, wanted, as far as her decision making apparatus was concerned to tackle that. But she was very much afraid and you cannot work in fear, so the contact has to be offered either freely, as in as Hatonn said “I’m going to transfer but I’m not going to say to whom,” then the person will screw up the reception of that contact and detune himself with fear.

This can be a sticking point as in each person’s various steps along the way are sticking points and this particular student, a woman of admirable independence of thought and will, she wants to go ahead but she has a lifetime of feeling inadequate, low self-esteem, the usual for females in this culture anyway and particularly accentuated in K’s case by a missionary father whose opinions were quite settled, not just on doctrinal matters, but every portion of life, and who Kim was never able to please in a way she perceived as lovingly and supportively.

So she may be at this stage for a while, the first time I worked with her she was at a sticking point with the first thing that I said, so I am familiar with the way this instrument looks at things and I applauded. I have no problem with it.

The actual question that you had because a mistaken assumption, however, I should address. I believe that we are speaking to an entity of the brothers and sisters of Hatonn or whomever (to whomever we speak) in an individual sense and certainly each individual offers a slightly different perspective—our uniqueness does not change, it is simply more and more harmonized, in order to form unities between larger and larger masses of love made visible, which is what we are, if we don’t confuse ourselves with these animals that have very generously given their lives to carry this consciousness that we are around.

But that entity, whoever he or she may be has access to the thoughts, opinions and emotional biases of the entire social memory complex, which certainly would create a more objective point of view.

I’m going to give this to Jim to answer, however, I will speak to you in my own way. It isn’t likely to be the same answer, however, Jim’s answer will be far clearer. I admire his terseness and pickiness very much. It’s one thing I can never do is be utterly simple. Jim is a simple, straightforward guy and his capacity to pack information into spoken words and messages has always impressed me tremendously. His computer doesn’t work nearly as fast as mine but it doesn’t matter because he works at it until he understands what I mean. I just have to wait for his computer to work, that’s all—then he has an opinion and it’s his own opinion and he’s as much of a juggernaut as I am. Our styles are completely complimentary, that is to say 180 degrees out from each other.

Now, first question (Carla reads) “My very being is hopefully a poignant example of the necessity and the near helplessness of attempting to teach.”

That is, because we cannot teach—we can expose people to information, but people choose what teaches them. Now in a rarified atmosphere of a particular class and particular concepts you come closer to an opportunity to teach (in a linear fashion) the material that’s in the course. And it is not surprising that if a student had no logic circuitry worth dealing with, the student would be unable to grasp what you would consider to be easy concepts.

Along the same lines I know absolutely nothing about science beyond the high school level, yet when Don asked if he could move in with me, at that point where he didn’t know me very well—he was interested in the phenomenon of my being such a person, I don’t think he’d ever met a woman, except for his mother, who was a very realized person, a woman who had an identity which was not dependent upon anyone or anything except those things which she claimed dependence upon. I claim dependence upon faith and my path of service—certainly not on other human beings or the necessity of being liked, appreciated, understood, that sort of thing—it’s nice but it’s not necessary.

But I feel passionately about attempting to listen and understand other people and share what I can of what I have thought so far, because people will sometimes find it helpful, which makes me very humble, but I’m certainly glad to talk. It’s a gift of love and I’m very glad to do it. I learn a lot and I love that.

Some people have no discernable logic. I, on the other hand, was tested in Elkin’s unique way—he kept making up situations and asking me to describe them as simply as possible. Basically, he was looking for my capacity to conceptualize in an accurate way. After about an hour of this kind of thing, he shook his head because I was becoming disabled and he said “you should have been a theoretical physicist—a nuclear physicist” which was really a bolt out of the blue although I did have some suspicions that I might be good and have fun with the language of mathematics.

So I’m aware that I’m extremely able in that way, I tend to develop [inaudible], the missing logical portion of which is faith, which isn’t anything to do with logic, but is a constant in my life that creates the rest of my life—the metaprogram at work. So that in terms of logic, I don’t think my logic would be accepted metaphysically since I do invoke an absolute quality which we simply cannot deal with mathematically.

As I said at the beginning of the tape, I think that one thing about a multi-digit IQ is that we have little conception of how people think in general. This makes us extremely good teachers for some who are ready to follow you, and lesser teachers to those who are woofing and grunting all the way just to get a piece of paper so they can get a good job. At the job, if they choose it wisely, there will be a finite amount of material to cover—it will not demand logic, just simple paper work which most jobs do, except for executive organizational type jobs—those people are not drawn to us usually anyway, and they’ll be fine. It is simply that they never learned to think, and I’m not sure that anyone can teach us to think.

We simply offer words and information that we hope is of substance that becomes a catalyst for the other person. The way that person’s mind is programmed and the speed with which the computer works dictate what will be perceived out of that. It’s surprising how often we are perceived differently than the way we intended to speak.

I had the interesting experience a couple of years ago of talking with a chap that I have come to name “the eater”—he’s visited us about three times and each time he was fatter and his appetite was larger. He’s a monk, he’s self sufficient, he spends all of his time writing many volumed books of philosophy which he does not want published until after his death so they won’t be subject to human opinion during his lifetime, although he did ask me to go through them. I pointed out the logical inconsistencies in his thinking, but it was his philosophy and he didn’t want anything to happen to it and he certainly didn’t want me to get at it, because I would be fussing with him on every page.

The man is a decal nut—doesn’t see the forest for the trees—he is however, intelligent, experienced and dedicated and he does have a path sort of vaguely Buddhist so he will be fine.

But once again, I channeled just for him when he was here. It was a fairly long answer having to do with the Christ—the tape didn’t pick it up, this happens from time to time, one can expect it to happen from time to time, when the freewill of the entity would be damaged by repeated readings of the material. He would be forced by logical which he himself approves to come to a conclusion that he would not wish to or not ready for. So it just didn’t record, so you could say it was a coincidence. Either works for me.

I asked him to write it down for me. Now I only have a vague sense of what is spoken but even to my relatively unaware self, since the person who does the channeling is the last person to have any clear idea of what’s been channeled because it’s simply too preoccupying to deal with the mechanics of work with the concepts, or the even harder and more strenuous job, which has been—I have invoked sometimes when you were here—because I didn’t know anything about it—of word-by-word communication which is more accurate. It certainly doesn’t get to the accuracy of prophesy and so forth because I do not wish to know about those things—I simply wish to encourage the rate of acceleration of my own spiritual growth and be an enabler of others to the extent that catalyst is possible.

So Ra is basically saying we are able to offer catalyst—it is the person’s decision about whether he will be taught and how. Ra was, in my opinion, saying that they had given that lot their best shot and they felt that they had mistakenly given information to people who would not be able to continue to grasp it and were distorting it, and had it not been for their presence among us before they were aware they could infringe on freewill, none of these distortions would have happened, and consequently there is the necessity and the near helplessness.

Sure Ra is incredibly intelligent—so is my Dad—he died this last year, one of the prickliest pears I know, played jazz drums as an avocation and really would have liked to be on the road most of his life but he had to make a living. He was an engineer and I once asked him about the gas laws when I was taking chemistry in high school. He said, “oh, they’re really simple, let me show you—just plug this in and it will work just fine.” I looked at him and said “do you want to explain this?” He got very impatient with me, being a very perfectionistic person who is the kind of person who having grokked a 200 plus IQ then wanted me to live up to it and I am an underachiever.

Perhaps in some way I could have grasped what he was talking about but you see, he didn’t teach, he was mostly upset with me for not understanding the gestalt. I took his explanation of the gas laws to the chemistry teacher and he said it was nonsense. Well, I knew, beyond a shadow of doubt, that my father was many thing, but not the promulgator of mathematical nonsense. So I took it to a mathematic teacher and he said “well, this is just calculus” and I said “what’s calculus?” “Oh, well, that comes after solid geometry, trigonometry, then you get to calculus.” Well, I hadn’t taken plane geometry and he explained there was no way I could have understood it and showed me another way.

So I was able to grasp the material quite easily the way the mathematic teacher explained it—the book was faulty.

So it’s a perfect example of something that is quite obvious to you, its fundamental, it’s like an old shirt, you put it on, it fits, it’s fine, it works, you’re not going to get rid of it, but show it to somebody else and they’ll just see an old shirt and think you should throw it out. But to you it’s an exotic creature that I can’t make out—are those stripes, are those spots, what is the shape of that concept, I’m not understanding it, and there’s no entry into the mind that does not have the logic, so you just put it out there and let it go. Don’t worry about the outcome of what you do, just worry about doing the best you can when doing it.

To teach/learn is the Law of One in one of its most elementary distortions which simply means that we help each other, I think. (Reading) “A social memory complex cannot effectually discern the distortions of the societal mind by [inaudible]—we cannot plumb the depths of distortion complexes which infect your people.”

They can understand the contents of our mind but insofar as we do not understand our distortions, I would doubt sincerely that time bound and within the illusion as we are our distortions having to do with the effect of the illusions on otherwise excellent minds, they would be unable to have access to these timebound spacebound distortions.

(Reading) “Also, I would like to say that Ra prefers any positively oriented source of information prefers to answer that which is asked in order to avoid loss of freewill.”

Suspect a channeler whose source is dogmatic or has a title of any kind.

Okay, the first density is the density of creation, earth, air, wind and fire, the elements, rocks, water, coming out of timeless chaos into time and beginning the process of landmass and sea and river and lake formation which predates dry land. Everything being alive but the consciousness being a quantum step below second density we see here a consciousness which though steeped in love and able to reflect that love as without mind, it is what it is—second density is the density of turning to the light.

In it, animals, plants, second density creatures of that kind which are obviously a quantum leap higher in consciousness than the consciousness of the rock and the water and the winds, fire, quite literally turn to the light. They have become able to respond in a very unthinking way, but a way full of feeling and sympathy with any entity which gives them individuality, I mean, all of my objects, because I know that in order for them to be useful in my life they need some attention, that’s one of my responsibilities as a third density being is to give love and invest in love the world around me. My cats, my plants, our car, anything—there isn’t anything without consciousness because the basic building block of the universe is consciousness—light, which is created directly of love and manifests love as nothing else can manifest.

Third density is the density of self-awareness, though we’re learning the lessons of love and the fourth density we polish up the lessons of love and study wisdom. The reason we study compassion before we study wisdom is that unless we have a thorough going and complete sense of love, in a sense of there being no such thing as sacrifice for love sake, that is all about love.

Wisdom is very dangerous. Wisdom can create a great deal of logical sounding falsity. If you doubt that, read economics.

Fifth density is the density of wisdom, or light, the sixth density is the density of compassion and understanding, or unification where the laws of loving without stint and the lonelier and harder-won laws, for me anyway, of wisdom are blended into what can be called compassionate wisdom or wisdom informed by compassion, or compassion informed by wisdom, whichever.

The seventh density is where the understanding of unity is perfected and at that point—when the universe has all reached that point—it compacts in upon itself from “spiritual gravity.” Ra was very careful to mention this, not that I understand it, and the Creator’s heart pumps in a timeless manner, taking in all into the infinity, and as it pumps out again, taking the sparks that [inaudible] and sharing the learning with us of another creation designed by the Creator out of the accumulated knowledge amassed in prior creations.

(Reading) “…the fifth step involves observing the geographical and geometric law of relationships and ratios of the mind, the other mind, the mass mind…”

I was able to see this as I meditated on the concept myself. Colin Wilson wrote a book, can’t remember the title but I don’t keep anything in my mind that I don’t need—I keep it pretty well cleaned out so I can think—anyway, it’s relevant to this. The mind seems to be like an ever more complex and satisfying version of itself.

When you go below the threshold of consciousness you are entering that which at its heart is holy ground. However, one must court this deeper mind, one cannot rape it, it is sensitive, very greatly sensitive to the way it is approached. Now, I’m talking as if there is some distance between myself and the deep mind—there is a distance between ourselves and the deep mind, if there were not, this would not be an informative illusion because we would already know what we were supposed to do and the guesswork would be gone.

The work we do in the dark is intended for us to experience choice making at its most difficult because the choice that we make here is the cornerstone for the next two and one-half densities, until finally the negative and the positive path coincide—the negative people needing to change polarities because it doesn’t work to be compassionately wise—you have to see your neighbors as yourself instead of people to manipulate and so consequently they can’t go any further and there is a drive toward evolution that is irresistible so sooner or later the sixth density negative entities will switch.

So obviously there is a portion of the mind that is involved in your fears, lower than that, golden memory. At this point now we’ve left the intellectual stuff that is learned during any one incarnation behind and we’re dealing with things we don’t have words for which makes it difficult to speak, but it’s as though a tree grew upside down in our consciousness and at each level that the mind becomes a more and more universal version of itself, it is as though the branches ramified and became smaller and smaller branches, so that it becomes ever more complex—at the same time it becomes more do-able as a whole thing because of the nature of leaves making all of these things seem like a big round ball of leaves, we don’t see the branches.

I think at the point of the all mind we are looking at the bloom, and neither the roots, the branch, the sub branch or the ultimate complexities of mass mind, the infinite mind, is quite simple, and thusly very very difficult for people to understand—it’s too simple.

(Reading) “How do you think sideways?” Well, I’ll tell you—my grandmother, a marvelous woman, an artist, a dancer, a composer for the dance, and a woman who had a very simple faith that didn’t have anything to do with any doctrine but simply had the single image of “Well, I’m a candle that can’t be put out.” That’s what she always said. “My candle won’t go out—I’ll just drop this silly old body.” So she was a very strong influence on my mystical self as a young kid.

We would be sitting on the train and she would say “Now I want you to let your mind bend in the middle.” And then she’d say a word to me and I’d say a word to her and she’d say a word to me and we would get the giggles and we would have the best time. But we had to say the word immediately we couldn’t think up an association. If we didn’t like what came into our mind that was tough. We had to say it right away. We weren’t playing the game unless we let our mind bend and sag and let spontaneity take over.

So anything that you do that is spontaneous will help unify the right and left lobes of your brain and help you to circuit into the frontal lobes which are actually what we are about. I encourage people who are strongly right brained or strongly left brain to balance and for you, since you have not had a lot of insight from religiosity or really any satisfactory or useful ideas from the philosophy that you were into before the Ra Material (or not much) I would suggest that you seem highly unused to being spontaneous, and that sort of goes with your job—you can’t really be creative and improvisational while dealing with an equation that has to come out. Although I do think that the most brilliant theories are those which are created with the mind in a sagging condition, in other words, those where “I had a dream and when I woke up I wrote it down and this is what led me to…” You hear this story a lot if you read histories of interesting minds.

I would suggest, as the most accessible by you, since you are looking to me to be in quite good health and unlimited relatively in your ability to do physical things, that you attend a Sufi camp—I don’t know what they call them—but they can last as long as 40 days. But you really only need to get your feet in the water if there is a Sufi dance or a Sufi drumming going on.

What the drumming and the dancing do is exhaust you completely but you’re still dancing. This creates, I think, two things—the lack of oxygen in the brain which creates euphoria, and the build up of endorphins which is the runners’ high so that you are euphoric and are receiving a good deal of healing good times kind of chemicals from your own brain in response to what you’re doing and you end up in a worshipful and slowing environment which is entirely spontaneous.

Allow that consciousness to continue without analyzing it at all as long as it lasts—you can analyze it later, you want to experience it first; or jump out of an airplane, though I think you’re a little big to be a great parachutist—the best parachutists are small and compact and long legs are easier to break than short ones. Heavy weights hit the ground harder than light ones and as I recall, you’re fairly slender, but tall.

So that would be what I would suggest to you, some way of altering your consciousness mechanically and experiencing the job that cannot be expressed. It isn’t cheating, it’s simply playing hardball. I go to church and pray and that having been my path for a long time it feeds me and I don’t need a two by four—but you do.

Yes, I suspect that you do lean too much on the intellect, but obviously you’ve got some desire to really create a thinking that is not logical, so there is spontaneity within you and I think you just need to trust yourself to find a way that suits your family and your own schedule to gain some experience simply in altering your state of consciousness and then experiencing it. I would not advise you to take drugs, although say the use of marijuana once in a great while will alter your state of consciousness and create for you a spontaneity and creativity of thought that is not available to you in normal consciousness—at least I have experienced it that way although I’m so absent minded myself I can’t take it as a way of life.

I don’t think that your spiritual development will be limited or hampered by anything but lack of desire. I hope that’s a comforting thought to you. We are all limited in one way or another even the best of us, no matter how balanced we are or how carefully you think will be seen by any confident psychologist as quite mad, which is another reason for not talking about this freely to a psychologist or a psychiatrist or to most of them.

A life in faith is the same things as saying this person is hysterical because when you have a life in faith you for things like fortitude, courage, even though you’re a devout coward—you wouldn’t be courageous if you weren’t a devout coward—if it was easy for you I wouldn’t call it bravery.

So I really don’t believe that anything will hamper you from carrying on and I would like to comfort you by saying, for what it’s worth, that I too have a great deal of difficult getting deeply into meditation and listening to the silence. Multi-track minds are not very amenable to good meditation. Once again, it is the purity of the desire. There are no truer words I know of spoken than “seek and ye shall find—knock and the door shall be opened to you.”

Every time I’ve knocked on the door, I’ve opened it up to find, in my vocabulary, Jesus, in other vocabularies love or whatever—the answer—standing there waiting for me to open the door. There is a process of learning to live without fear here, which I don’t think would be difficult for you—you seem relatively fearless and enjoy thinking. Anybody who enjoys thinking is going to come across various unacceptable realities of oneself, which one doesn’t have to accept. (Laughs)

The older we get, the more mature, the more clearly we see the part that we haven’t fixed yet, so our iniquities are forever before us—there’s always a path ahead and as far as I know it is without end.

If you are in fear of what you will find out about yourself, I can tell you in a sentence what you’ll find out. You are a 360 degree person—you can murder, you can rape, you can pillage, you can experience every emotion possible, you can, by circumstance, be put in a situation doing every horrible thing you could imagine or that you’ve ever seen.

This is the density of choice—we have complete freedom, we are complete people—there is nothing but choice that stands between you and somebody lying in the gutter. You began making choices so long ago, that basically it’s difficult for you to see that you and the person in the gutter are one, that you and Sadam Hussein are one, that you and Mother Theresa are one, that you and Joe Blow are one. You may have caviar stains on your bowling shirt but you’re still capable of wearing a bowling shirt, okay? (That’s not meant literally).

I wish you enjoyed yourself. I wish you could make choices in your life that would enable you to enjoy yourself the most possible, and I wish for you that as you begin to realize that whatever you do, if you do it for the love of the infinite Creator, it is blessed, and that includes a sink full of dirty dishes that cry out with their praise when they’re done. “You did me—thank you!”

There’s love everywhere, the path is the same everywhere, it’s the consciousness with which we approach whatever is in front of our face that makes our lives a life with a path of service. People usually think that only healers and teachers, such as myself who are channels, have a path of service. That’s a dramatic variety of a path of service, but most people non-dramatic paths of service—motherhood and fatherhood, providing, making ends meet, enabling friends, enabling your mate, and all kinds of things like that.

So I think enjoyment can come from this thought which is a very simplified thing. Read Brother Lawrence’s ten or eleven pages, which is all he wrote in his life. He was the best advocate for doing everything for the love of God and finding enormous enjoyment in life that I have ever read—Brother Lawrence. You’ll probably have to order it—it’s a tiny little book. If I can find it, I’ll Xerox it off.

Thanks for the compliment about being a good teacher—I’m afraid I’m the same kind of good teacher that you are. Don always said, “always retain the baby steps,” but I just can’t do it—I don’t know how. Jim is better at that, but the density of his information is such that unless you can look at it, he’ll go too fast for people that are not above a certain level of intelligence.

(Reading) “Our languages reflect consensus reality.” I will accept limited, rather than crippled, which has an emotional weight to it, but it expressed my feeling that our consensus reality is particularly toxic. Cynicism is rampant, people seem to lose their heads when they get to be president or in some governmental position of power, everyone seems to be turned, bent, we drift towards war. Why did we do this so soon after learning the lessons of Vietnam?

We are poisoning our planet, we are poisoning each other with bigotry, we’re letting people go hungry, this is a toxic toxic way to live, and that’s why I used an emotionally charged word, I have emotional feelings about it. However, I believe your way is more correct—emotions rather cloud what we say when we’re trying to be linear in use of language—and then there’s poetry, of course.

Yes, there is no language which can relay concepts. There is no language that can address absolute truths. That’s a cliché—everything is relative, but I will invoke it, and I thank you for saying that my language is not particularly limited though language itself is limited—I read voraciously. Thoughts originate by our higher self—they don’t come from anywhere, they’re simply there. You were puzzled by that.

Our thoughts rise up from some point within our deep mind—in a dicey situation which has caused us fear in the past, we’re likely to feel fear in the present as well. Those are the bad thoughts. If our consciousness is such to allow a flow of energy from the deeper mind, the parts of it, by our disciplined personality, are able to get up to a conscious level, then we feel them as revelation, epiphany, and we have to come to grips with the fact that we understood something that’s going to move us from one exclamation point to the next. That’s why I said, never hold on to truth because it’s going to leave you at some point and you will find a more refined truth. The Creator does not take away anything without leaving you something better.

But they (thoughts) are simply there. They are within us—they do not come from without. We think they do—that’s protection. The way we use our computers, the way we have them programmed it’s our choice and what we perceive is our choice. If we don’t like what we’re perceiving then we have to change our program. Certainly we have to clear the lower energy centers.

Bad and good are relative. Evil and virtue are relative. It is well to use terms that are not emotionally laden so I tend to use positive and negative like a battery and cathode. There is evil, but not one evil, not a great Satan. There are evils, we create them by our expectations, our choices, which may include paranoia and bigotry, many things that create suffering. But it comes from within. Our feeling that we’re constantly reacting to what’s happening on the outside is an illusion which must fall if we are to do work in consciousness.

We are the co-creator of ourself. The only thing we can’t co-create is what we are in the first place—we simply have to create a path to begin to understand our true nature. Wanderers—sort of like the Peace Corp—there’s a call, they hear the sorrow, many people are in deep travail about this planet, there is tremendous amounts of suffering on this plant—and the call goes out and people come. Not religiously oriented people but metaphysically oriented people and they give to those who ask for positive information, positive information.

Negative entities do the same thing though they’re responding not only to negative entities that call them, but because they’re negative along that which is not, as Ra calls it, they are free to plunder at will and they will turn any channel they can, firstly by temptation, and then if that doesn’t work by greediness, which occurs when any weakness that is inherent in the personality or the body or the mind is being experienced, they can accentuate that and what one has to do when one is being greeted is love, the greeter, and pray for it and pray for the situation, forgive the Creator, forgive the situation and above all love and forgive yourself.

Once we’re here we’re not any different than Joe Blow. We are not the elite, we are not special, we are all bozos on this bus. We will have to graduate from third density with balanced karma just like everybody else, or the road back to our home density will be longer, which is not that terrible—McDonalds for the next 75,000 years and maybe we’ll get it right. That’s a drop in the bucket when you’re talking about cosmic time—not even that—a gnat on the drop in the bucket.

So we’re naturalized citizens—we remember a little bit more about love and caring and sharing, and harmonizing than most people do. We feel alien to the kind of thoughts people have a lot of the time, we experience difficulties with the whole vibration of this planet, many wanderers have a history of allergies or some kind of difficulty adjusting to the planet.

But as I said, we’re naturalized citizens and we’re here to help and the first way we help is by our consciousness—that is our chief service. That which we manifest, be it channeling, washing dishes, being a parent, is secondary to the consciousness itself. People learn more from the way you are than what you teach and the planetary consciousness is lightened not by manifestations of the consciousness.

And now, I will stop. We have no particular news here—the book that I told you about that I and two other channels are going to do in order to show the positively oriented material from several different sources is about 95% agreeing. Most people try to find the difference but I didn’t see any point in that. Also, I thought it would be healing to see the great humor—it is very dry but delightful and with the three of us going it should be just marvelous but that’s been put off until next year because Pat Rodgast can’t make the time until then.

Pretty soon we’re going to have a brand new format for our books—they’ all going to look like Book 1, which is now called “The Ra Material” but which then would be called “The Law of One,” so they’ll all be able to sit on regular bookstore shelves—they’ll all be quality paperback, and I think that will probably encourage people to see that material as a unit. It could not be shelved together previously.

With that, looking out at the Indian Summer sun and incredibly blue sky, I will bid you adieu and may God Bless you and yours, and keep you well and shed light upon your path, until I speak with you again.;

Take care, my brother,

Carla