Dialogue On The Way Of Knowledge - Part VIII
You can now translate this page to ANY language.
I've added, what I'm calling, Dialogue on the Way of
Knowledge, to my site, Carlos Castaneda's don Juan's Teachings. It
began Mon, Jun 28th, 1999, when I received an E-mail from Michael. I
will use "M:" to begin his comments, R: to begin mine. This is part eight of the dialogue. It continues where part VII left.
M: Hummmm. Intensity is perceived.
B: Had the strangest damn dream last night... I was about 7 to 9 years old, but I wasn't ME.
M: Are you certain that it was not a representation of you? Innocent? Young? Unsuspecting? Dreams can often be the expression of self that cannot be accessed in normal first attention awareness, and they can be full "second attention" experiences that engage in interchanges with allies. Both conditions, self-invoked or not, have the impact of second attention experiences simply because "the dream state" may offer access to information and experiences that are "blocked" in the processes of normal awareness of the first attention.
B: and I was in a western town, around the 1800's. ... the adults in the town had done something , and I can not remember what, to piss off this herd of horses, so the horses decided to break the earth and wood dam at a nearby river and drown us all.
M: The horses: are they a representation of society, bound a century or more ago, in attitudes and narrowness, and the horses, the nature and the consequence of inept actions? Consider for yourself what the significance of the processes noted in the past may mean for you.
B: ... we found out what was happening, (I also saw it but not from my body, like a scene in a movie as a horse moved the flood gate latch with his muzzle) and someone yelled out what was happening.
M: Innocents are often caught up in the unwitting errors of others. Innocents have the power of observation from which much may be learned, provided that emotions (specifically fear) do not interfere with the ability to observe.
B: We all started running to get up on top of the buildings, for some reason we had all gathered just outside of town. My father was with us (not my father in real life though) and we were about to reach one of the buildings, the group of people I was with, when it caught on fire.
M: The one support structure that was perceived as available was also now a threat....the protective structures available to you were failing.
B: We headed for another building, which was taller, when the horses started stampeding after us. They realized we were not going to be drowned and were going to remedy this. I was almost to the house when I heard a horse behind me, I looked over my shoulder and he was about to trample me, I turned my body slightly as I ran and slapped him, this threw him off and he stalled enough for me to get a little ahead, I hit him again as he was about to trample me again, and then I made it to the side of the house.
M: ... Indicating that even those innocents, unprepared and surprised for events not their own, can survive by reflex wits and actions ... And the analogy of the parent didn't do it, it requiring independent action...to survive. The action was proportionate to the need, not over-reaction.
B: The horses parted to go around the house , some children reached down to save me but I couldn't climb up their arms and they couldn't lift me, and adult reached down and I was pulled / climbed up, and was saved .... then woke up. When I reached the roof and safety I woke up. When I woke up my body was vibrating. I think I had been in the astral. But it was too slow for me to get back out of my body.
M: Good test! Good result! The test showed you can "positively" respond to "continue."..upon the invocation of your will. Congratulations. This is to one degree or another, an example of value being brought to you in the "dream state," provided the significance is explored. This is also an example that tends to indicate how "informative" perceptions may become when the fixations upon the first attention are diminished in order that more may be encountered and experienced.
R: On the compiling of our E-mails that I am working on: I think one of the appeals of Castaneda's books is that they seem to follow my dad's saying that a good speech is often one written at an eighth level.
M: Several individuals have been met that have not been able to grasp the potential significance that would motivate them to get through any CC book or any of the others such as Taisha Abelar's book (or even Susan Gregg's book). Typically they start to read them, and after a few pages dump them because they are written as what they report as being about 6th grade level. Some have evaluated Chopra's book (the Way of the Wizard) at about 8th grade level, but other Chopras' (Ageless Body Timeless Mind) at college level. This dichotomy in individuals point to the difficulty in broadly issuing any book because in "targeting" the writing for the more intellectual and better-read set, many of the audience may be lost where "targeting" the presentational style for the masses will "bore" those seeking more articulation. Since the concepts are applicable to all of humanity that chooses to "seek" an approach toward their evolution, overcoming the initial perceptional barriers becomes an imposing task.
M: In issuing any "information" the primary question to provoke self-response is, literally: "what's the point?" (to providing the information) because in the historical record essentially "all" of the information is out there, published variously in the past perhaps 1,000 years (including CC, of course) and about 3500 years if the old testament were included, and perhaps five or more millenia when truly ancient descriptions are reviewed. Your efforts to bring cohesion to the CC pieces have demonstrated that there is a purpose and a value to writing AND to clean up some of the rattle into better coherence.
M: So, my suggestion to you on compiling our E-mails is to be cautious in the presentation, because there is, from the feedback represented by a very limited sample observed, a huge credibility gap between something written at the 6th to 8th grade level, and that of the more scholarly level. It can be understood, on evaluation, that the CC books have a credibility problem relative to society not to just their subject, but to the writing style. In addtion, these exchanges were initiated as "personal exchanges" meaning they were not prepared or intended for review by others. This note is included to indicate that some editing would be required during "compilation" in order to cause the context to be applied more broadly.
R: Interesting. The function of language is to communicate. Lack of patience with Castaneda is something one would have chosen to have, not something Castaneda's book "did" to them by the level they were written to.
M: Yes. True. On the vocabulary part and the method of presentation, though, we all have to ultimately be careful that what is presented represents what we intend. Through words, vocabulary, those representations form what might be though of as our own versions of reality.
R: And even to say that something is written "to a level," is meaningless if the communication of an idea has been effectively accomplished. The language is used as it is used and ideas are communicated. If one idea is communicated in two ways and one way is understood by 80% of the people, the other by 20%, which is the one to use?
M: It's more complicated than that, although in concept there is agreement with your statement. Information well communicated but not "gotten through" is useless. In something like this presentation, it is necessary to try, as always, to strike a balance. For me, if that means that some have to have a dictionary handy so that the context and syntax are more impeccable, then it's better in the interest of accuracy, which is considered to be a component of impeccability, to suggest they do have the dictionary. There is another element to consider also. The "way" as you know fully requires a significant amount of focus and discipline. While one does not want (because it would be inefficient) to mark information way over the reach of the intended audience, in many ways it cannot be fully otherwise because some will get it and some will not. For those who are not willing or are unable to "get it," then they are not part of the intended audience and probably never will be.
----------
Bob to Ed: The figure was an ally and has probably been stalking you, as you put it, since the 70's. Ever go in a book store and see a book that calls to you from the shelf, or some small voice calls you and tells you to buy the book? We are not alone in this Ed, and there are beings who tend to such matters, inorganic beings that have never been human, beings who have been human. There is much more to the allys than was reported by CC from DJ. Some think of them as guardian angles.
Ed: The above just triggered another recollection. When I was 12 my Mother moved our family to a little small town in South Carolina from Chicago. My Mother was very poor and the most she could afford to give me was ten cents a week, enough for a coke and a candy bar. One day the local soda jerk asked me if I would like to wager a quarter on the upcoming college football game. I said sure. To make a fat story lean, I won every bet for 16 weeks in a row. It was uncanny. The soda jerk after a while would change teams after I had made the original bet, it didn't matter, I still won. So yes, I think there are beings that look after us, I have had too many experiences similar to this and your experience to think any differently.
M: Ah, the recapitulation here into understanding self and experiences are truly enjoyable! It's amazing, as Bob can attest, when just a little self-recognition in invoked. Many things happen and that, if one does not deny and block, starts a renewed process of evolution. The threads were there all along, but remained unrecognized.
Bob: But there are no angels, not in the Christian sense ... but there ARE beings ... you have obviously seen them. They can be house pets, but most likely they would not take such a mundane form.
M: It is well understood, even described by "the church" that "angels" never had organic form. That, by implication, would make "angels" in fact, inorganic allies.
Ed: The reason I asked about house pets is because we used to have this very special cat. The cat would sleep with us at night and sometimes my wife and I would wake-up and talk about having had "cat" dreams during the night. The cat dreams would be as if one were seeing the world from the viewpoint of a cat.
B: I have experienced them as sounds like a rope being twirled in the air, as a fog, as a swirling mass of energy. Most of my contact has been through channeling one. The ally who is mostly in association with me from all the others. Ever had your life saved by nothing at all??
Ed: Bob, wow what a flash-back the above triggered. The year was 1954, I was seventeen years old and in a troop ship on my way to Germany. The ship was rocking back and forth in a severe winter storm. The bow of the ship would plunge into the water and seemed to stay there for about 30 seconds. Then the bow would rise out of the water for another 30 seconds and then hit the water with a loud bang before it went back under the water. This cycle was repeated again and again. I was laying below deck in my bunk. The bunks were stacked one on top of another with about 2 and 1/2 feet between them. They were stacked with enough space for six bunks, from floor to ceiling. I was on the bottom bunk. The guys above me kept getting sea sick and they would roll over and vomit. After this had happened to me about three times I decided I could'nt take it anymore. So I went above decks to get some air.
Ed: I went to the bow of the boat. The very front of the bow was where the anchor was kept. It was roped-off to keep people away from it. All of a sudden, I lost my footing when the bow headed down into the water. As the boat went down so did I. I was just barely able to hold onto the anchor. Just before the bow went into the water I held my breath. I went under water for about 30 seconds. When the bow re-surfaced I yelled for help as loud as I could, then just before the bow went under again I held my breath. This happened again and again. I recall being concerned that nobody even knew that I was on deck. After what seemed like an eternity, a rescue was put in place by having a guy being held by a rope place a rope around me and pull me up. He later told me that I was extremely lucky because he just "happened" to be in the area when he heard my calls for help.
M: There are no coincidences. Everything happens for a purpose, it is often noted.
Ed: I was driving a car one day, about 1`2 years ago, and this kid in a huge surburban started backing out right in my direction, i was surrounded by cars, so I did all I could do which was to swerve, however, my car moved SIDEWAYS into the lane of oncoming traffic, with NO FORWARD MOTION. Impossible. I found my self looking into the face of a woman in the car which would have been smashing into me had she not stopped, I was in the oncoming lane, and her mouth was WIDE OPEN. She just stared at me. Something had actually moved my car to the side into the other lane and saved me. NO FORWARD MOTION.
M: Love those "attention getting" stories....
Ed: Bob, this is terrific, you have caused me to recollect many valuable experiences. Thank you!
M: You are both triggering each other! It's amazing, sometimes, what is "there" but concealed just under the surface.
---------
Linda: I read your comments to this letter and I was asking myself, (after I read your last comment here) if it is so important to recall stories from the past. Is it the stories themselves or trying to reveal something hidden in them?
M: Yes. There typically is a forgotten or ignored understanding within them.
L: What is the stories' task? Is it the same with dreams?
M: Yes. Perceptions, information, and experience.
L: How do we know that we don't spend unnecessary energy trying to remember?
M: If it's a struggle, then it's not appropriate. There is always a flow when it's appropriate and "on target."
L: I often feel that the tendency we have as ego-oriented people is to over use our energy instead of learning how to expand it.
M: Yes. That is the point of the "no struggle" descriptions provided.
L: I fear to fall into some of my ego tricks and continue loosing energy. So this is why I am asking you this question. I want to re-teach myself the art of keeping my energy.
M: Yes.
L: Is there some special way of recalling stories and using them for our purposes?
M: Soft and self-nurture. Be kind to yourself. Be peaceful. Love.
L: I feel some emptiness. Maybe this is why I ask this question.
M: There is usually some emptiness as pieces of the human form are lost. When you can connect yourself into the power of the universe, you will never - literally - be empty or lonely again. Peace. Patience. Love.
------------
M: The "instinct" to inquire initiates a cycle. Information is gained as given impetus from the instinct to inquire, which results in finding information sources, then absorbing the information. The information then gained has to be understood - the process that you're increasingly involved in - and to execute that (because it takes energy to continue to engage) requires increasing commitment. Then, when the initial processes, particularly those that result in experience, find congruence within an individual, one achieves yet more motivation to gain more knowledge --- all in impact acting in mutual convergence to cause evolution. -----------
B: Now I am beginning to realize why one should get rid of desires.
M: Oh yes indeed, at least desires of "obsessive" passion. The only true and valid desire that has significance is "to continue" (circumvent the Eagle) and evolve. After one "really connects" with their own abilities, there forms enormous responsibilities because of the impact one can simply (but inadvertently 'will') relative to others. With enhanced "ability" the old saw "be careful what you wish for" takes on a whole new expansion. This is not to say that a process of human love or desire is inappropriate for the warrior, or that wealth, property, or poverty is inappropriate. The OBSESSION toward any component, for most, represents a dependency. Any dependency is typically an indication of a person attempting to "fill in" as compensation for something missing in his/her life. If self-esteem is sufficiently low, then dependency can become an obsession. The ability "to continue" is blocked by obsessions and dependencies, not specifically by wealth or property, or poverty. Poverty can indeed impede progress because it's difficult to explore the self, let alone the other attentions of the universe, when one is not organically protected or if one is not comfortable.
-----------
Ed: A new recollection was just triggered, from when I was five.
M: Those who are natural empaths often start initializing experiences at about this age because they are confronted with a new group, kindergarten, and have to deal with a flood of perceptions that are often foreign to them.
Ed: How very interesting. I just surfed the web to find out what an "empath" was, and now I are one! What a call you made on this one!
M: It has been observed that most individuals who are drawn to these understandings and "the way of knowledge" have some intrinsic attributes, and it is also observed that being empaths is frequently one of those attributes: normal. Bob and Linda are most certainly empathic, and Rick as he alters his approaches, will discover the magnitude of his perceptional ability.
M: NOTE: As has been admitted variously to a few of you, the connections to individuals are many. Please, it is "NOT" intended that this as a "group" dialogue be expanded, since for myself all relationships are direct.
Ed: I do feel others emotions quite strongly. Therefore, I've been careful (on a sub-concsious basis) to avoid crowds, yelling and screaming and especially loud rude individuals. When I was in the world of work, I could feel other's emotions during meetings and would often come home emotionally drained as I seemed to absorb all of the negative energy being expended.
M: These are quite normal "symptoms," if you will allow, and on a personal note something that those like "us" have to normally learn to deal with.
Ed: How does one learn to deal with it?
M: By placing oneself in a quiet mode, wrapped in a form of internal peace, there is the opportunity to, through perception, identify oneself. There are many self-perceptions. The "characteristic" of self-identification might seem obvious, but to the empath that has been in turmoil or "noise" for a long time, the key is that the perception of internal peace is quiet and congruent and not at all confused. Generally, it requires meditation in a place of quiet and in a condition of quiet to achieve this self-discovery.
M: With this achievement, relocate yourself to a place there are a small group of others. It would be preferable if one could simply walk a bit to this new location. When arriving at the new location, hopefully with strangers, no verbal communication is to occur.
M: Using the same technique as noted above, and now located in this new ambient environment, attempt to find the same state as before when previously in the meditative state. There will be very different perceptions and energies. The difference between the prior state of being and the new state, is the "noise" from the environment of the others. Then, attempt to separate the extraneous perceptions from the internal perceptions, much as one (by analogy) tune a radio through a field of static noise. Then, the perceptions can be understood, one at a time, one person at a time, through focus of self.
M: In the "impulse" phases, empaths attempt to "block" the noise as previously noted. Alternatively, some use anger or other stressful emotions to build a reflexive wall of defense. These methods are not appropriate uses of energy, and they ultimately can be destructive. The "efficient" method is to simply admit that one has these abilities, to accept that the perceptions will occur and that they cannot be efficiently blocked, and to learn to deal with the perceptions through focus. Focus, it should be hastily added, can also become unfocus meaning that the world is stopped and "tuned out." This later state is accomplished with practice but only after the perceptions and the impact on self is fully explored and understood. The state of unfocus is very passive and internally peaceful, requiring only intent and no inefficient use of energy.
M: Empaths in general have the problem, absent the recognition of "what" they are in terms of intrinsic abilities, that they tend to lead "noisy mind" and often very confused lives because they are unable to understand what the "real" personal emotions/feelings are when compared to the emotions/feelings of others. This can cause an inability to focus, particularly in gatherings, and a sort of "buffeting" relative to emotions and perceptions: turbulence might be a better term. (It could be extrapolated that some individuals who are stuck on Prozac or the like, might be empaths-unaware, operating under this turbulence.)
Ed: The above statement is "right on."
M: (smile)
M: Due to their sensitivities, empaths tend to retreat into isolation for solace. When they surface, they immediately become confronted, sometimes even assaulted, by perceptions causing sometimes elation followed by the oscillation into withdrawal and this can result quickly in self-deprecation and/or depression: an awful cycle.
Ed: Again, I agree. It seems as if you are describing my behaviour to a "T." I have cycled between elation and depression, many many times. Again, I'm most interested in how this cycle is broken.
M: -smile- Hopefully the foregoing will be of assistance.
M: Given the baseline "confusion" to an empath, and the turbulence that is related to high perception, the reflexive "defense" mechanism (absent self-recognition of the process) is to create more mind-noise, since noise/rattle can block the perceptions. The problem is, of course, that is also causes a high dissipation of internal energy: energy is being squandered. The result in internalized high dissipation of energy is that stress is foisted upon the physical systems, and health problems (sometimes coming and going like magic) result.
M: There is, of course, more detail to these descriptions, however this can probably be extrapolated from the above. More below.
Ed: I found that the older I got, the more intensely I could feel others feelings.
M: This is because as you matured, your mind-noise became less, and there was accordingly, with less noise, better understood "signals" from others. There are couple of important items to relate. In wandering around the planet, and for that matter travelling throughout the attentions, it has been noted that a small percentage of humanity observed have empathic/telepathic abilities, and these are intrinsic to their heritage just as societally recognized "talents" such as music or art, are inherited: DNA structures. There are observations that are highly significant to relate: empaths tend to be "naturals" to enjoin the "way of knowledge" because --- it is their destiny.
Ed: Ah hah, destiny. This was going to be the subject of a separate email. It appears that I'm on a track. However, the track is fairly wide.
M: Everyone on this distribution is on a similar "track."
Ed: By this I mean I have a choice of endeavors in which I can participate in but the choices are limited. Every time I have tried to force some things to happen without getting the OK from my Essense, they have just failed to work out. However, it is only when I look back at accomplishments that I can see that they were destined to happen.
M: In impact, this really means that it is possible to "guide" without force and without stress. This is an important attribute of loosing the human form, and it meets the dictum of impeccability by not squandering energy.
M: Empaths, with natural sensitivity to energies, can "more readily/easily" access the 2nd attention. One of the major components of the 2nd attention IS BEING empathic. It only goes to logical processes that the 2nd attention is a bridge to the 3rd attentions, and allies that you are all becoming familiar with (or have). Those in the "blind" copy list have experienced allies, some have "seen" allies even in the first attention, and can experience these highly. Some have "seen" the torus open to the third attention, and some have "seen" the luminous forms and the electric-tendrils that emanate from themselves as well as from others.
Ed: What is "the torus" exactly?
M: When the sentient consciousness of self is willed into the other attentions, specifically the third attention, energy moves in an orderly manner to accept the motion, the travel momentum, of the traveller of sentience who, when in the state of travel in the third attention, exists only as the energy of "pure and free being" for lack of a formal term. When the energy that reigns throughout the universe moves about to facilitate the traveller, it initially forms a pattern that is quite dramatic, dynamic, and beautiful. That pattern becomes a gateway for the traveller, the nagual if you wish the term, and it forms like a torus. You might be interested to learn that in the distribution of this response, there are two of us that have travelled.
M: The "sensitivities" of empaths "always" have a bi-directional result: the abilities that inherently provide for the "reception" of fields, also provide for the "transmission" of fields. This is why empaths "always" make candidates to connect, and are enjoined into, the forms of abilities that these discussions are all about. Yes, society in it's dependent need to hang labels on everything may call these effects magic, psychic (gag), sorcerery (like CC/DJM), religious, or many others, but in reality the "burden" is really only such because it is not a reality that is understood by the masses, and never can be.
Ed: So if I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that empaths are good candidates for sending transmissions. Would this be to other individuals as well as entities in the third attention?
M: Yes, and more. To connect in the third attention to other enhancements of energy.
M: To key to evolution for all is to "loose the human form" of dependencies, negative emotions, and any distractions that disrupt the coherence of self-being. In the third attention, all - emphasized - that one has or is, is the being of self and to maintain "that" as a state of coherence requires "intent" and this cannot sufficiently be yielded with dependencies or negatives. Loosing the human form evolves as a high self-esteem which brings an understanding that enables the ability to unconditional love of self. The unconditional love of self brings to fore the ability to unconditionally love others, on intent and will as directed toward another on selection. The open-ness to extend self to another in the mode of unconditional love provides the ability to quite literally bond with another sentient consciousness so that when bonded, and unique sense of common-being results. The ability to bond in this intensity to another, extends to the ability to unconditionally expand one's energy to travel and bond to others in the third attention. In that condition in the third attention there is commonality of form, because all sentience is comprised of the same forms of energy and fields.
Ed: This was one of the reasons why I retired at an early age. It just didn't make sense to subject myself to the emotional turmoil when I did'nt have to. Anyway, thaks for pointing this out. It is quite a revelation.
M: Although you are in intrinsically a state of being that is essentially foreign to society as a vast majority, you are most certainly, "not" alone. If you can commit to yourself and "the way of knowledge," your direction will be altered, literally forever.
Ed: I am very open to the above concept.
M: The concept is yourself: it is only what you are and your processes will become. You may accept or reject it, however rejection will not alter the basis of what you are through your inheritance.
-----------
M: To describe individuals that I'm closely connected to, two terms are used: proteges and apprentices; which hopefully without arrogance, places myself in the function of a facilitator/mentor for these individuals. There are perhaps about 100 individuals scattered throughout the planet in various intensities of connection that are described by these two categories. Just to expand this babble, the distinction between the terms "proteges" and "apprentices" is as follows.
M: Originally, starting about 1961 (yes, 39 years ago) I was requested by my then management to "mentor" a new staff member who would be assigned to myself. Since I had a model of what a "mentor" was, having had one since about aged 13, (we lost contact about the time I reached age 40, but he was called 5 years ago to say "thanks" and to let him know that there are now perhaps 100 individuals with whom his technique is directly linked) it was an easy process. As time, activity, and opportunity continued, more were slowly added to the "protege list," called that because the connections were always technical/professional/science-based.
M: It became quickly obvious, in confirmation of my experience with my own mentor, that it was not possible to execute thoroughly the task without working profoundly with the individual and his/her personal attributes. From this observation, a litany was devised: a person's ability to be objective about his/her experimental data results or his/her theoretical results, is founded on the person's ability to trust; a person's ability to trust is founded on the person's ability to trust him/herself; a person's ability to interact with another and be credible is founded upon his/her self-esteem that transcends ego; a person's ability to transcend ego is indicated on his/her ability to love him/herself, absent the dependency of ego; a person's ability to love another, is founded on his/her ability to love self; and, if such love is to be based without the barter (almost an economic exchange) of dependencies (e.g., "I will love you if you behave or perform in a specific way and my love of you is predicated upon those behaviours.") so that love of both self and another can truly be "unconditional," then self-esteem must be extended within the person so that it can exist in the form of whole acceptance without self-deprecation.
M: Simple.
M: There was another mentor who was engaged circa 1975/6, a licensed psychologist, and the relationship was intense between that period and about 1980, although contact was continued through about 1983. (He was also an Episcopalian Priest, and the first time I saw him in "priestly attire" was in 1983 when he performed the ceremony when wife and self married.) This mentor, though a paid psychologist, was an empath. He taught me the elements of self-acceptance that were still unstable and the pieces of self-objectivity that had been tweaked or missed. By the time of our later activity (circa 1978) he had taught be the technique of moving my consciousness out of the physical body and out of the human form. Through him, the ability to link myself to another as sentient energy (he served as the prototype) to another was learned, and it was possible with effort, to "see through his eyes" (literally). With those attributes that seemed intrinsic to my heritage, enhanced, my existence was altered forever and the "link" between my sentient consciousness and my body was enhanced in dramatic ways. Any "rattle" of intent, will, emotions, became amplified as "impacts" to the body.
M: For every attribute of ability, there is a commensurate demand of responsibility. These two elements, for those like myself, are inextricable, as they are for you.
M: The story goes on.
M: Starting about 1978 there was from professional sources, an increasing demand to add proteges, and in the period from about 1978 to 1982, several were added. Some of these individuals had the attributes similar to myself. The wife of one male who sought acceptance as a protege (since this is for me a life commit, it's not taken capriciously in terms of who is compatible) circa 1981 was instantly identified as "like." The protege (male) was cautioned (a standard statement upon acceptance of one as a protege) "If you do this, your life will change, and quickly, and you will never be able to return to the condition that you now have." With that acceptance, the engagement was made and within one year their life styles were catapulted about (according to him) about three-to-one. His wife is now a licensed nurse and in terms of metaphysical ability, extraordinarily powerful. She uses her abilities as a natural empath, a traveller, and a healer in ways that (given her position in profession) society can never suspect. Perfect.
M: She is called "an apprentice," to separate from those with whom the relationship was initiated as "professional."
M: There is, of course, much more to this rattle. Perhaps this open-discussion. Perhaps this is sufficient. -------------
Ed: One of the things that has not been discussed, but rather implied are the core values one exhibits on the path. Bob has alluded to the facility for honesty and his surprise when others don't always share this trait with him. But we have not had a detail discussion relative to the importance of core values. When it comes to values and the path I can only speak for myself but would be interested in hearing others views on the subject.
R: I like to think of it in terms of CC/DJM's, "impeccability is the only thing that counts on the path of knowledge." Impeccability is something we personally expand within us. That is, our expression of impeccability is at most, equal to our current level of what impeccability is for us at any given time. And all too often, our expression of even what we currently hold as impeccability is below that level of current understanding.
Ed: I pretty much agree with the above. And its like the old saying, not an exact quote...oh what a wicked web we weave when first we set out to decieve...I really do not think there actually is a right or wrong, but .... when we do things that are considered wrong, we cause ourselves a lot of problems, we cause bad feelings from others and society about and towards us, and we lose a LOT of our energy.
M: Specifically, it is observed that everyone who exists has a set of core values that are emphasized in various parameters. Since the core values form a reference for each person, it is observed that they form a part of reality for each person. Given that, it's possible to say that every individual walks with his/her set of individual and alternate realities to everyone else.
Ed: I like everybody else started development of my value system as part of the socialization process. However, these were cultural values and not universal values. These were drilled into me by the church, the educational system and by my Mother, my Father died when I was eight years old and have little memory of him. However, during this process, there was always the real me, my essence, so to speak, that was the final arbitrary of whether to take them at face value, with a grain of salt, or to reject them entirely. Through this process, I have came to accept certain values that just make sense. They are not cultural values but rather universal in nature. Some of them that come to mind are:
R: We use language this way, and we say that our core values are integrity, love, etc., almost like a recapitulation. I think doing so serves to instill the concepts into our impeccability base in a way that has us act from that base more consistently in line with it; that is, it frees up energy.
Ed: 1. Integrity
My definition of integrity is the goal of trying to be honest in one's transactions. I would qualify "being honest" as using discretion of when to be totally honest, and would restrict this application to only those situations that really "mattered." In other words brutal honesty sometimes is not only not required, but could be unusually cruel for no good purpose. Another component of this ability is the goal of being dependable in one's relationships regarding friends, family, and work situations. Another way of expressing this is taking responsibility for one's actions.
R: Someone once told me (a numerologist) that if you know the reaction of someone before you say something to them, then you are responsible for their reaction. What do you think?
Ed: Could be, if you are manipulating them.
M: On the societal level, and on the individual level within self, trust is the most important parameter to gain: trust first of self; then apply that to another. Honesty starts with trust of self. Honesty can be a brutally applied parameter. Under this condition the "application" of honesty is often a statement of self-importance.
Ed: 2. Love: Love truly is that undefinable "something" that makes the world go round. I have been extremely fortunate to literally marry the "girl of my dreams" (I'll tell you about how I found her in a dream, one of these days). Everyday I thank my lucky stars that we are still together. She is a marvel in that she is very attached to nature and in reality is a very spiritual individual. For example, we recently moved. The last day at the old house she told the house how pleasant it had been to live there, she did the same with the plants and the birds and then wished them well. She truly practices "unconditional love." I'm not there yet but am working on it as an objective.
R: I think you mean by, "working on it as an objective," that you are aware of it as a concept, have witnessed something that you are calling that, and trust that you will come to the point where it is, if not all of, then part of, the expanded impeccability base you operate from. It seems to me that you are either seeing something other than unconditional love or that you are already "coming from" there yourself, as, how else could you see it otherwise? You've described some nice things that your wife does. I'm saying that if it is unconditional love that you are witnessing, then it has to be your unconditional love. Because what she is doing is either unconditional love, or it is not, but when we see it, then it has to be our unconditional love.
M: Unconditional love initiates with the unconditional love of self. It is never, can be never, a dependent love.
Bob: a lot of the time now I feel like I am in love, in love with everything, so now I try and direct it out at the sun, or at my ally, or at everything in the universe.
Ed: 3. Peace
Ed: One way to describe "peace" is to describe what it 's not: war, strife, conflict, tribulation, turmoil, doubt and uncertainty, whether these conditions are internal (to the human mind) or external. It is that place where one can find and feel eternal joy. Peace is a valued state-of being. I'm coming closer to this state (sometimes I flit in and out) but can,t say that I've made it a permanent residence. I'm beginning to understand that a major pre-requisite is unconditional love.
R: I want to consider that Peace is NOT "a valued state of being," Peace is peace, and nothing more (or everything more). Corny as that sounds, it looks to me to point out how we so easily conceptualize ... stuff, as if there really is a not-valued state of being ... so we have the valued states and the not valued states, but, as Michael has pointed out, there are no negatives. This is one reason I have a little problem with the "being food for the Eagle" metaphor. That would indicate that there are most definitely valuable and worthless states of being. Unless dissolving into the void with no congruousness is equal to continuing on with sententiousness. An I missing something? Have I used to much nessness? (smile)
Bob: I don't think being food for the eagle is negatve...I like this metaphor I came up with last night...If you take a glass of water, toss it onto the floor and turn it into a millon drops of water, which are then consious people in a way, then gather them all ack into the glass, they lose their individuality...I prefer to be one of those few drops of water that get to stay a drop of water on my own, out into infinity...and when someone achieves this state, they uplift the viratory patter for all of humans...because you MUST evolve to do this. And there is a lot I want to see out there (smile)
M: Well said. There is almost always more elaboration, but still well said. In "circumventing the eagle" you are indeed always yourself. When one conjoins with another in the form of being as pure sentience, one is still self, but conjoined intricately. The metaphor of "the eagle" only means to allow oneself to dissipate into oblivion.
Ed: 4. Sacrifice
Ed: This one causes great pain to think about yet on the other hand, it cannot be dismissed as just a noble endeavor that one aspires to. Sacrifice, in the moment(and sometimes years) hurts. It's difficult to be there for someone, when the process causes such emotional toil. Yet it is an important value, that needs to be kept in total recall to be used again, if necessary. However, I'm learning that sacrifice is just another thing that one must do, like doing dishes after supper. It's not pleasant but it's not that bad either. M: This one is loaded with potentials for human form possibilities. If one feels sacrificial, then one is experiencing human form ego dependencies. Absent the human form of conflicts, there can never be a sacrifice.
R: Ed, I know you have gone through stuff in you life that has been infinitely more challenging than anything I've gone through. Yet the word "sacrifice" calls up the word "victim" for me. You mentioned under Integrity, "taking responsibility for one's actions. " That, to me, includes choosing things to be the way that they are, and no way else. When we choose things to be just as they are, there can be no sacrifice, just choosing. When someone says, "I didn't choose it that way, it just happened to me," they are being a victim. Again, I'm not making any claims about what I can or can't do here, I'm just asking, "can you NOT be on a plane that is about to crash, when you ARE on that plane." At that point, choosing to be on it is the only way to have peace at that moment and that is responsibility for one's actions. "God damned ticket agent, he knew I didn't want to take this flight. Oh well, I saved someone else from being on it." Sacrifice looks to be higher up than resentment, but it still has that ring of "victim" to it.
Bob: I agree with Rick 100 percent ... if its going to feel like a sacrafice .... don't do it.
Ed: 5. Unity
Ed: We are all connected. To ignore this is to live an ego based existence and to act in an irresponsible manner. We are part of a system. Our ripples can and do impact others so we have to touch things very carefully and lightly.
M: Yes with some expansion. The "connections" are limited by impeccability to those where efficiency of use of self and energy of self is evident. Use of energy beyond those bounds is "sacrificial" and against impeccability. Remember: there is no such thing as altruism.
-----------
L: Rick, I do not know how to explain this. I just know that the fact that you work/ed in pottery and the colors you use and the forms you make, connected me to some flow of energy inside me. I believe that art is like a "snapshot" of energy flows. All these things are really difficult to explain in words, because as you know, they come from some other attention where words are not so available. The funny thing is that to communicate with each other in this e-mail way we do use words, but the whole experience of exchanges has the source in a place without them. So again, words will not explain it. The only way to understand it is to experience it. As I am doing now. Focusing on you at this certain specific moment. That's all.
M: Ah, yes, the energy/fields that flow have many shapes and structures, so there are many overlays that might find a shape/color match. There is more unification to these with the balance that loosing the human form causes over time.
R: I don't know what to say to this kind of stuff. On the one hand, I really want to be part of it, on the other, I don't seem to feel very connected to anyone or anything on a "special" kind of level. That is to say, I've never experienced, what would be called, "unusual stuff" with anyone. I can't imagine what being an empath would be like, other than reading about it. Honestly, when I look at art, I just like it or I don't, and sometimes I even say stuff about it to try and sound like I "feel" something, but I never do. (Note to readers at editing for posting time: That was not true, there are times when I feel emotions while looking at some art - I must have been in one of my "don't pigeon hole me" moods when I wrote that) When people call me an "artist" I smile to myself and know inside of myself that I am exactly a masterful technician with clay. I absolutely control the clay in the throwing process. That's it. That fact allows me to make amazing forms, size wise, so when I turn them upside down and poke them around, people call it art. But it's mostly the size or throwing (making on the potter's wheel) control, that has them do so and the fact that there are so few people who can control the clay to that degree to get the form to work with in the first place. And I don't mean to sound like I'm running myself down. It's just the way I experience it. I'm a technician, plain and simple. But it feels almost rude to tell that to an artist. I very much admire what I call, artists. I can see a painting and say, "I love that," but I don't find that special in anyway different from what everyone else can do: say themselves about what they love, "I love that." So when you, to me, infered that form -- you felt to be a link between us. It almost embarrasses me because I want to feel that too, and never have, can't even begin to imagine what it would be like. Above you said, "because as you know, they come from some other attention where words are not so available." To which I say, "No, I don't know that." In Castaneda terms, I have to believe that what you say is true. I have to believe that there is something exactly as you say that cannot be put into words. But I've not experienced it. The only thing I've experienced that I can't put into words is a few fever dreams when I was a child and which I believe were second attention experiences, and a feeling of what I've called a "hugeness" I've somehow expanded myself as, on a few occasions, as if I was somehow swelled up to triple size. And lots of dreaming, but all of the dreaming has "normal" components that are describable. But, I really appreciate being on this path with you, and Michael, and Bob and Ed. And it's a thrill to know that I actually believe that all of the teachings of don Juan are true and descriptions of our actual human potential. And it is a greater thrill to have a real person, Michael, expounding all of that and adding more.
M: Couple of comments: as you let go of the "I don't experience" or the "I can't experience" changes may initiate in how you feel and where and in what intensity. When you study yourself, try to learn if your internal thoughts go toward the "I can't experience whatever." If that is true, that is if the "I don't" is driven by an "I can't" internally then there is a complex "block" because in feeling, perceptions, attitudes et al, "can't means won't," always. It's a deep connection in the human psyche.
R: I get stuck in thinking when I should just let go (most of the time). I will think about this as I view your art.
L: Thinking is not a bad thing. Letting go is not so easy. I get a lot of headaches from letting go. Probably I do not really let go. I just try hard.
M: The struggle and the conflict is the problem because they both squander energy and cause dichotomies in energy flows. It's true that you don't "really" let go, and on the smaller-time-frames that you do, you travel... and perceive, and begin to enter a transformational mode...then you either panic and regress or cling to the familiar and regress.
L: I sent those forms to you without thinking why I am doing it, the same as my first e-mail. Maybe the only thing you have to do is to tell me what happened after you saw them. Some minutes after, some hours after. Maybe then we will know more about why I sent them. There must have been a reason. Just tell me what happened, without trying to find the logic.
R: This is where I feel so dumb. I actually just saw them as pictures like I see other pictures. You know, it's like the art I put up on my Castaneda site of Mao's. (Note: I've removed it as I'm close to my 5 meg limit with my server) I knew I liked them. So I end up using others terms to describe stuff, like, "wow, those are really powerful images," when, honestly, I'm just trying to sound like I "see" something that I really don't. Yet I am making some kind of distinction to at least have the "feeling," "I really like that." It's in explaining "why" I really like something that I find myself just making up what I think will sound good to others. But, having said that, I will say about your computer art: The first one looked wild and child like, out of control... none of that in a negative sense. The next one, I saw the image of a bird head and the eye was out and again there as the sphere. The last one reminded me of a taffy pulling process and I like the undulatingness of the wavy part.
So what I want to say to you, Linda, is thank you for sharing part of who you are through these emails, especially, as they present me with a real example of the "tales of power" aspect of the teachings. I truly believe that we have the avenue to reach the third attention, as expounded my Michael, in Castaneda's books. That belief is the direct result of your reports along with Bob's, Ed's, and, of course, Michael's.
-------------
(Note: A new person enters: Burt)
Burt: As you are already aware, my name is Burt. In 1991, when I was 12 years old, I came across a book called; The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge. I have been reading and referring to these books since that time. I have made all the efforts that I could think of during that time to embody the practices display therein.
M: Given that and with a little hasty arithmetic, you'd now be about age 21. This is an extremely unusual age for one to become deeply involved with CC/DJM's philosophies, concepts, and practices. What was it about these writings that pulled you into this interest??? For reference, most of the others that are "connected" with me are generally over age 40.
Burt: "When a man embarks on the paths of sorcery he becomes aware, in a gradual manner, that ordinary life has been forever left behind; that knowledge is indeed a frightening affair; that the means of the ordinary world are no longer a buffer for him; and that he must adopt a new way of life if he is going to survive."
M: Yes, this is true and it also has a way of being somewhat isolating relative to general society. When the human form is lost and when one evolves to a higher awareness in all three attentions, isolation can never be experienced again, however, the transition period yields many peaks, valleys and tests.
Burt: After 9 years of living with the knowledge displayed in "the works," I have experienced this statement. I can never go back, I can only go forward. With this understanding, I now know that it is my duty to seek out others like me. To find those who can be spurred by me, and spur me on.
M: Caution is advised as referenced to the above statement. A warrior's mission, if you will allow the concept, is to evolve self. There is nothing altruistic in life: everything has a purpose. Evolving self does not demand invoking the actions or interchange with others, by definition. There is also a high risk that interchange with other can become a dependency, and any dependency is the antithesis of freedom.
Burt: At the moment Rick notified me of your existence, by allowing me to read some of your correspondence with him, I knew that I had to talk to you directly in some way. I seek freedom. I seek the third attention. I seek to lose my human form and be totally aware. I know that what I have to do next is "stop the world." Is this something you have been able to do? Can you see? Is it possible to do these things on one's own?
M: Ultimately one's intent drives the result. You have asked something about what I can do, but I perceive you want to know more. My progress "on the way of knowledge" has been active for perhaps 50 years, in fits and starts. The first experiences occurred at age 8, and these were sufficiently profound that my mother had me taken to a priest who was an exorcist. There is direct ancestry to a prominent historical figure in Spain who seems to have set the path for my family, and there have been something like over 100 books and one full-length docu-drama movie about him. The movie (in Spanish) was released about 1993. The original reports of his abilities and history were written in a book, circa 1526. My mother had the ability, but it scared her and she hid it in the bounds of the church. It would require many pages to relate the history, however for now, suffice it to say that my experiences have taken me to the third attention (which is "not" unknowable - once it is experienced) on multiple occasions, three of these with my body clinically dead. My existence is "always" on the bridge between the 1st and 2nd attentions, and on intent on the bridge between the 1st through 3rd attentions.
Burt: Sometimes, I am able to rejoice, for I am a warrior, I have stored my power. I am living impeccably.
M: Remember that impeccability is always a moving condition of reference. It moves commensurate to the abilities and experiences of the candidate.
Burt: Other times, I get so lost, my reason, my mind, my importance, they are such strong enemies.
M: Self-importance, ego, dependencies, anger, individually and in any combination are human form components that impede or halt the march to freedom. It must be borne in mind that "freedom" always carries with it, responsibilities. For every ability and attribute, there is a parallel attribute set of responsibilities and these are commensurate always with ability. The "tests" that the candidate must pass to continue on "the way" become proportionally more difficult as the ability expands and amplifies.
Burt: I don't give up, I never will, I know that a warriors struggle will never end. Never have I yeilded to fear, or doubt, or remorse. I feel now that I am at the edge of an abyss...at the crest of some threshold.
M: The concept of "struggle" becomes foreign after a point of evolution. Struggle, by definition, squanders energy and that is a violation of impeccability. The candidate has as an important element of impeccability the proportional and efficient use of energy. The demand of this concept related to efficiency is to find the methods that cause the result required, absent significant struggle.
Burt: Does this make any sense?
M: Yes, with the comments yielding expansion.
Burt: Can you help me go further on the path of knowledge?
M: Perhaps.
Burt: Can we walk together to a place that neither of us have been?
M: (smile)
-----------
Burt: I have yet to try and find my hands in my dreams, but I think my correspondence with you has already inspired me to do so. I will begin immediately.
M: That is only preparatory to "finding one's hands" in the third attention. In that state of being, there is wholly no physical form, so every image is constructed through intent. In the third attention, only the luminous form is normally present.
Burt: Hehe...I'm not sure that was the effect I was intending, and forgive my articulation. I don't think that any obstacles are "impassable," what can I not accomplish with intent? Then again, maybe that was the effect I was going for ... I read in the words of Michael that you sent me ... or rather .... inferred ... that you, Rick, were at some kind of blockade in your progress and Michael was trying to help you overcome it. I was simply curious what that "blockage" was. What was preventing you from going forward.
Burt: As for me ... I'm 21. I've been involved with the teaching for nine or so years. I have not tried to do many of the thing I know I could be trying, such as dreaming and stalking. I have simply given my best shot at living the life of a warrior and wait for my will. It seems that I have taken that as far as it can go, though. Having the privledge of meeting you, it has already shown me that I must make more of an active pursuit in "stopping the world," in that way I will make myself available to "power."
M: It is suggested that the term "power" be changed to "ability." "Power," as a term, has many connotations and most of those invoke dependencies.
Burt: Furthermore, I must intend my assemblage point to move to "the place of silent knowledge.".. and in doing so obtain the tridimensional reference of the sorcerer.
M: The assemblage point is the location of the zone in the luminous form where the attributes converge into a locus, and accordingly be accessed by intent, simultaneously. If the assemblage point is moved prior to this understanding, threads and tendrils of one convergence of attributes might be enhanced, but others might be rendered inefficient.
Burt: And as I said above ... I will be more impeccable pertaining to sleep, and utilize that time to begin developing my "dreaming attention."
Burt: I am happy that I was able to help you...if only by giving you a different vantage of your situation. In reference to the things I mentioned above, I have a question, and I pose it to both readers.
Burt: Is there any danger to what I'm doing? Is there any danger to my life in "stopping the world" and intending my assemblage point to "the place of silent knowledge"? Can I safely do this on my own? I ask this because, I remember something from "Tales of Power" about...shrinking the tonal...how a man cannot live without the tonal, and the tremdous effort required to shrink the tonal has to be immeadiately reversed to sustain it again...
M: Caution offered above.
Burt: perhaps this is just a silly fear...
M: Fear, by itself, is only an expression of the ego. Impeccable concern, though, is always proportional and appropriate. The candidate may utilize "concern" as a checkpoint for purposes of self-evaluation.
Burt: Perhaps power will take care of my safety provided I am impeccable enough...
M: Please be careful with the word "power." In this statement, it could be replaced with "Intent" or "ability."
Burt: perhaps my intent will take care of any gaps in my understanding...
M: Good.
Burt: Still, I am interested in the thoughs of the readers.
M: Remember that "information" is only a piece that can lead to experience, but "information" by itself is "not" knowledge.
----------------
Bob: A most interesting thing occured this morning. While meditating for some time, the ally which is most familiar was present, and channeled, without request, but with warmest welcome neverless. This time, however, there was percieved to be 2, possibly, 3 other allies present.There was, however no channeling of the other allies, however they were here for a purpose, and their presence was percieved in the room very clearly.
M: Ah! Progress!
Bob: This had happened once several years ago, and can be described most aply as a sort of "surgery." There was in fact, for a brief moment, a feeling that arms and legs had been dismembered from the body. This was not however alarming, ordisturbing/painful, in any way. It was then that the memory of the past experience aluded to above, was presented by the most familiar ally.
M: There are a couple of obvious pieces to the above. First, and perhaps the most obvious, a "test" related to fear. Dependent human-forms cling to almost anything that gives them satisfaction or an illusionary sense of self, and the body is by nature a major piece of this. In the third attention, one must learn to exist without any body or even reference to the body. So, the second issue in the test, is to probe not only the dependency/fear issue relative to the body, but to the dismemberment of it with the "hint" that energy flows from the third attention can compensate.
Bob: There also seemed to be some minor activity taking place in the body cavaty around the area of the stomach.
M: This has been "a place" where stress has been stored for a while. Another check point.
Bob: As this proceded there was a tremendos amount of movement of energy through the body, most specifically in the calves, then in the right dorsal side of the body (felt pronouncedly in the back). This even caused a feeling of IMBALANCE while hapining, but ended in a feeling of even MORE BALANCE between the two halves of the body after it was all over.
M: Tests can co-exist with waves of fields....
Bob: Most observable after effects being an increased feeling of wellbeing, and greater detachment. There also seemed to be a "hint' of a much more profound contact with the ally than has been made before. This contact will be most likely visual as physical contact through channeling has been profound for over a year. This was seen as a preliminary "adjustment" which was necessary for this contact to occur. This contact has been requested for several days by self.
M: Generally, these sequences occur in ways that are preparatory, so you're getting a real sense about what the fields of consciousness are about as they moved through your body, so that when you experience more the issue about the body and what it all feels like, will already be understood.
Bob: Also it is noted that the ally had been absent for several days, which seems to be a pattern. It seems to go away for a day or two before any "event" takes place.
Bob: This was far to profound to be an act of the immagination.
M: Understood.
------------
Bob: The immersion in the ally's field is exactly what I feel ... it seems to decend upon me, for I am prone, and its energy body is much larger than mine, and it surrpounds me, then sends its energy through me. I feel it in my body because my energy body is in my body as well as around it. Actually, I am in my energy body. So I feel it in my body.
R: Bob, when you use the word "channel" do you basically mean "communicate"?
R: Michael, as for Bob's allies piece; is this something that is taking place with the physical body or with the double, but in such close proximity as to be believed that it is the physical body experiencing what is actually the double experiencing.
M: Essentially, it is the latter case. In order for this manifestation to be as significant as Bob reports, where the perceptions and movements of fields propagate through the body, the alignment and proximity of the physicality and the double have to be quite in-phase and combined. From the report, there is come indication that there was a sort of "out-of-phase" oscillation between the two, and this resulted in the feeling of dismemberment in his body that he reported. When everything is precisely aligned, the energy of the fields tend to wholly saturate the body. This saturation is because the luminous form is quite large compared to the mechanical size of the body, so that when one becomes coupled to another, including an ally, the perception is one of immersion in the field of energy.
R: I've related to you my belief that for years I'd "known" that an unknown physical presence had rubbed my head and I had held tightly, it's hand, and how it was just last years in another such experience that I'd made the distinction of it's actually occurring in my, what I've called, dreaming body or double, in nearly identical position as my physical body . Is this what occurred here or is it actually possible for such contact to take place with the actual physical body.
M: Both. The "connection" generally occurs simultaneously. If you are not aligned at the time, the perceptions will be more "scattered." There IS sufficient ability to interact "only" with the body, just for a note, however this technique, since it is not complete with the luminous form (the double being a component of the form), is generally used as an "attention getting device" for a candidate.
R: In the years of reading Castaneda, I'd always assumed that much of what he described as happening to himself was actually happening to his double.
M: Not necessarily. It can happen in the physical form. On occasion, to get the attention of an (early) apprentice, the technique of altering his/her heart and breath rate, and perhaps, altering their body temperature (hot to cold or the inverse) has been used.
-------------
R: No one ever told me to study when I was growing up and I cheated my way through, never studied, and finally dropped out. Now I'm worried that my son is copying my mistake. The problem is that I scold him for it rather than talking to him about it.
M: Place the equivalent of a mantra for you - always - before you approach him on this subject. Suggested concept of a mantra "this problem is my petty tyrant to learn from." You may be letting your petty tyrant win the battle with you. If you can learn to make this a structural management problem and not experience negative emotion, then you will bond better to him, and get a job done for BOTH of you. The structural management problem, from your report, has become an emotional problem of resentment, and that's a loose-loose situation for both of you. My interactions with you are devised to help you loose the human form, and this specific situation with you son can be of great benefit to you.
M: In this specific situation, the subject of this E-mail could easily have been seen as "a parent's responsibility to a child that will benefit the parent."
R: Michael, you've said, "There can be no "got to's" except driven by one's own imperatives. Learning those imperatives, then placing into practice true self-impeccability, is the task and the challenge as defined by each of us as we operate into the realities that we form and perceive."
M: Why, yes indeed...expanded to explain that impeccability here also can utilize this situation in the model of the petty tyrant that serves such an important purpose for "us" to evolve. Petty tyrants are one of the best resources that we have available to us.
-----------
Ed: When I was about 22 years old, had an experience that was rather unusual. One evening just before going to sleep, as I was laying on my side, felt a pressure on my back, as if someone had their hand on my back. Needless to say, I was in the bed alone. This went on for about 5 minutes. Used to ascribe this experience to "ghosts" but can now see that maybe it was an ally trying to get my attention.
Ed: Would be most interested in hearing how one goes about channeling an ally. This also raises the question about the character and type of ally that one is summoning. Do allies exist that are not beneficial to our well being? If so, how does one avoid them? Is there a selection process for allies? Or do they select us?
R: This is exactly what happened to me on a number of occasions over the last 25 years. It was only recently that I realized it to be happening to my dreaming double, while, for years, I'd "known" that someone/thing had been touching my physical self. For me, knowing that it happens in dreaming, makes it much more repeatable as it puts it into the realm of a second attention experience. I don't know what it was that finally allowed me to make the distinction. It seemed to have something to do with a series of many dreams where I was lying in bed unable to move, also now distinguished as a second attention experience, the dreaming double. For the longest time I'd also thought those to be my physical body's experience. Now I understand that they never were. I would ask Michael, but I'm guessing that the significance of being able to finally making the distinction is in what I can possible do "from" there the next time it happens. I plan to intend myself to get up and move around next time. They seem to occur for me in groups. That is, I will have those dreams for a few days in a row, and then they stop and I can no more call them back than I can fly to the moon.
M: The 1st attention can be connected with the 2nd attention, with physical results. Only the "freedom" of the third attention dramatically severs the "need" and interconnection to physicality.
M: The process is relatively simple. Adopt the attitude that "there's something here that might be valuable for me" and be open to the experience. This, basically, facilitates the contact/communication, and if open to the extent of being vulnerable (while knowing within that one can deal with anything through will/intent, and without violent actions). Remember that with the evolution of sufficiently high self-esteem, without arrogance without ego, without overconfidence, "being vulnerable evolves to being invulnerable." Relative the "allies" that are not beneficial: one is tested. On the surface, one could confront an "ally" that is appears to not be beneficial. They, in general, take the form of approaching the candidate in a manner that would imply dependency upon them, which would imply that the candidates' energy would be either suborned or otherwise drained. If this is the case, then one of two items could be in force: either the "ally" is not an ally but a tyrant that wants a piece, or more, of your energy, OR, it's a true ally attempting to test the candidates' impeccability. Be impeccable, and there will never be a problem in either case. For a specific example: once on a journey in the third attention, in limitless space, a luminous form appeared that then metamorphosed into a human form, as something like a priest. The message from this figure was something to the effect of "come with me, I will take you to god." While panning around my cocoon in the study of this image (a common observational technique in the third attention) it was processed that if there was a deity as that implied, it was silly that a figure would be required to "take me to him," so in carefully processing of this "opportunity" my intent-response was "no, this concept is not possible" and POOF! the image of the figure dissolved instantly, and my travel was reversed. It was a difficult decision (this was a very early travel experience) and it required a commit to my own impeccability, but it held and the test was passed. There were also a sequence of very frightening forms that appeared at various times over perhaps a month: more early experiences. These forms came out of the torus that had been forming. In this mode, there is absolutely no question that my being was bridging between the attentions, since there was full awareness of all the attentions through the torus. The images, holding against my body in the 1st and 2nd attentions simultaneously, would metamorphose into some really dynamically, "scary" images, and occasionally play the roles of observers, actors, and in the more "awful" forms, charge at me. With the process of other empirical backgrounds, it was understood that there was (easily) sufficient ability, by intent and will, again without any violence, fear, arrogance et al, to "intend" them away in a linear instruction: without words, but by intent of thought projection. After many nights of these apparitions, and having observed their antics and their approaches to my wife (who was sleeping beside me), finally it was decided that the curious observation of them was sufficient so basically a command was given, in effect: "Stop. Enough. Go away!"; no words, just intent. That was a few years ago, and they haven't been seen since. On the command, there was no resistance. They departed instantly as they dissipated into a fog and were drawn back into the torus. With respect to the last question: after one is identified as a candidate, they appear to you. The individual basically has to already be "known" as a candidate, or there would not be contact. Impeccability demands, always, that energy be utilized efficiently and this applies to allies as well.
M: There has been information on occasion to some of you about the existence of a consortium that propagates through the attentions. The allies are part of that consortium, and it is universal.
-------------
R: I was considering today while walking, how ... what these exchanges between us are all about is exactly the losing of the human form of dependences. It struck me how tenacious are the patterns of the past and how freeing ourselves from those patterns is the primary challenge.
R: I find it fun, interesting, and furthering, to talk about and to hear of, the "tales of power" experiences. And I am happy to be guided in and to hear the guidance given to others, in how to relate to those experiences. Yet they are in large part, as I see it, a gift from "intentability." And I believe that our "intentability" is in large part, if not all, the result of our current states of impeccability. So, it could be said that these "tales of power" experiences are much like having a hand: just part of us, a reflection of our current states of being.
R: In that the major work to be done to advance along the way is our expansion of impeccability, and it's expression, within us and from us, I put forward some questions for myself and some thoughts on them. I'd also like your feedback on them.
R: What does it take to catch ourselves acting/reacting out of old patterns that don't support an expansion of impeccability. That is, is there some kind of device we could use that would stop us in our tracks and make us say, "I'm doing it again, stop it" in a way that would actually have us stop it instantly.
M: Quick opinion is that the message implied that you "quote" above, is probably the best way: self imposed awareness. The old axiom that old habits are hard to break, is applicable here.
R: That reminds me of my complaint machine. That was a device I thought of for a story. Everyone in the world had to wear one and we were all given 1000 "free" complaints. So whenever we complained to someone who could not do anything about our complaint, and equally, whenever we listened to someone else complain about something we could do nothing about, our complaint machine would make a buzz sound and the counter would click to the next number. On the 1001st complaint, the machine instantly injected the wearer with deadly poison.
M: Well, about one percent of organic humanity might survive the first generation of this machine. That one percent would produce the next generation, and where it goes from there would be a matter of guess work. For example, observing humanity in it's current state of evolution for the masses, it's just as likely that the result would be that rather than having "complaints," the survivors will convert the "complaint" actions into "hard actions,,"and those taken directly on the basis of society's impulse responses, would probably be more drastic than complaining.
R: I imagined that after about 10 years, the machines would only need about 100 free complains, and not long after that, the actual way of language, and consciousness, would be altered on the planet.
M: Yes, but not in a positive manner, at least in concept of equal probability.
R: Further was the notion that, someday, the lie of, "He, she, it, or they; made me so mad, glad, sad; will no longer be told." Maybe there should be a lie machine as well. "friend, you hurt my feelings when you said that." Buzz! Buzz! (two machines.) "Damn, that machine pisses me off!" Buzz! Buzz!
M: And out come the firearms...
R: I guess we should just have one machine to handle both. Don Juan - "It is of no use to be sad and complain and feel justified in doing so, believing that someone is always doing something to us. Nobody is doing anything to anybody, much less to a warrior."
M: Ah, would it all be so simple....
-------------
Ed: Just had an experience the other day that was rather unusual. Had a dream that someone was making fun of my name and it irritated me. The next day, I took my car in for service and it actually happened.
M: Hummm. "Never try to teach a pig to sing: it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
Ed: Anyway, after my car was ready, I turned on my radio on the drive home. It was tuned to a well known radio talk show psychologist. The caller was a eleven year old girl. Her complaint was that her classmates were making fun of her last name. the host told her that kids that do that are idiots and they will probably grow up to be idiots. So her advice was to ignore the whole thing.
M: Ah the irony of societal observations....
Ed: What was really odd about the above experience was trying to figure out what it all meant. I think someone is trying to tell me something, and don't think it has anything to do with my name.
M: It might have to do with your "reflex" reactions to petty tyrants.
-------------
Bob: On dependencies. The body, the human form, is dependent often on alchol, drugs, money, etc. This is also a dependency of the mind/spirit....through the body. these things bring comfort, solace, to the body, and also the mind. However, after these dependencies are eliminated, there is one final dependency, perhaps the most staggering of all, and that is the dependency of the mind on the BODY. Even the body is a dependency. By its very nature we are dependent on it to be on earth. This dependency also must be broken.
M: With preparation "on the way" it is amazing how easy this becomes. There's a peace and sense of purpose that is incredible. On the discussions after my second clinical death (1994), the comment was offered "If I could take the feelings that occurred during the travel and during the meetings in the third attention, and bottle them or put them in tablet form, humanity could be addicted in a matter of a month!."
M: Through meditation, and detachment, we basially make for ourselves a space...a space from which we can act rather than REact. This is of extreme significance and can not be stressed enough, for at one point, at the moment of death, we will be confronted with a situation, alian to some, familiar in aspects to others, in which if we react, we will be eagle food. Gone. if however, we can ACT, there is the chance that we can move into infinity with conciuousness.
M: Hastily added "if one reacts, incorrectly."
Bob: It is not understood, why, time and time again the body decides that it is immortal. The three main teachings of DJ: give up self pity, give up self importance, have your death as your advisor, and the interlinking teaching of Michael: give up dependencies, all interrealated, and all lead also to creating a space, a moment in any situation, where one can pause, reflect quickly, and ACT, not, react.
M: Yes. The preparation of the "trial," the training ground provided by the first attention, is intended to instruct "how" to act (intend) absent impulse-reflex that could result in being an Eagle Snack!
Bob: We are most certainly ALL going to find ourselves, at a moment in time, without a body. Dead. In light of this, life is merely a school. If you ponder the nature of school, what happens in school, other than learning your lessons, is really of no importance. Whether you have a good relationship with someone in school, whether you have a good time, is irrelevant (however in most certain terms, if you learn the lessons of detachment, etc., you will experience universal love and unconditional love and you will be happy) but the main thing is that you learn the lessons so that when you graduate ( die) you can do what you need to do. And that is to be able to act. To act impeccably.
M: Well stated! ((-:)
Bob: To chose not to be afraid. fear is percieved to be our greatest enemy, because it is in a state of fear that we react, rather than acting.
M: Progress!
--------------
Bob: The immersion in the allies field is exactly what I feel...it seems to decend upon me, for I am prone, and its energy body is much larger than mine, and it surrpounds me, then sends its energy through me. I feel it in my body because my energy body is in my body as well as around it. Actually I am in my energy body. So I feel it in my body. love
M: yes. The luminous form of those who are able is immense.
---------- Linda: I just wanted to say that I have been reading the discussions about the allies and others for the last few days. I have been some kind of watcher and not written any comments though. I just wanted to tell you all that sometimes I need things to "incubate" in my perception so I can express them in words, but I hope my presence is felt anyway. Using intent I participate in the discussions, even if I write no words. I have been very focused in all that you were all writing, and I had some short exchanges with Michael during last week. I am working very intensely on intent. And there are some strong results, one of them: before the subject of "allies" came to the discussion, I wanted to send a question about how to experience allies. I did not need to write it because instantly after my question appeared in my mind, the whole discussion was open in front of me. In fact I am not only working with intent but also trying to understand my personal dependencies. I will write more about this during the week, personally to Michael and to the group.
--------------
Note: I've cut out much of my "story" part so you are going to just have to imagine what I'd talked about.
M: It's oversimplified that "if" you could commit to a firm base of actions, without oscillations and "what if's," and make a path that is steady absent the noise of indecision, life would be simpler for you.
M: Spouses can make "really good" petty tyrants to use as a base example for loosing the human form...(so can teenagers).Those with "control issues" are locked in the human form as much as those with submissive issues.
M: Sounds like the "control issue" monster. That monster does not need any form of logic because it attempts to control anything for any excuse at any time. The seeming irrationality could be a closely related component of the "control" tyrant/monster. Because "male logic" usually requires a sequential process and order from which logic and reference are derived, the "controlling entity" often knows this and uses reflexively irrationality of argument to destabilize the order of logic with the result that more control is gained.
M: It would take a major change, a paradigm shift as it were, however if you could deal with her as a petty tyrant and learn to love unconditionally, she would be a very useful prototype to process loosing the human form.
M: If your relationship with her were to remain as volatile as you have reported, it's wondered if it would be good for the children. The role and actions of all parents are imprints (positive or negative) that eventually have to be recapitulated by the children as adults. Look at the style and sequence of intensity with your son and determine if it is not similar to what was going on with your wife.
M: As for the idea that impeccable entices the spirit to descend, remember that the energetic form required does not literally descend to you. Rather, one can summon the energy by: being wholly open to the impact and the knowledge; and, facilitating this by projection unconditional love "toward" the universe; this, basically informing the energy that 'one is ready'. In my own experiences, it was questionable if it came to me or if I projected into it, and merged as one with it, although the more profound experiences this was the situation in the third attention. After a time, and after full engagement, a partnership of sorts forms.
----------- R: I hate whining, Michael, so when I'm in a whiny mood I don't like to be around anyone.
M: Then look at "why" you might whine and determine that you're not going to do it - within yourself! If you whine internally, it's still a dependency and at that point it doesn't matter if you whine externally or not.
R: I'm going between concentrating on human form dependencies as a way to still my mind and feeling sorry for myself about the fact that I have nothing I'm driven to do.
M: Ah, being "driven" to do something is an artifact of what society has been telling humans forever: DO SOMETHING!; BE SOMETHING! Usually the "something" is "something" that society finds acceptable and that IT can use for itself! If you can find the motivation to evolve yourself, personally, internally, then you are evolving.
R: Rush Limbaugh said today that, "what makes people successful is not discipline but desire"; that is, that discipline follows desire.
M: DJM/CC often pointed out to the discipline required to be successful in evolving. A university did a study many long years ago to learn why we have people with PhD's working at menial jobs, and high school dropouts (like Lawrence Welk and Del Webb of Del Webb Construction) who became very economically successful. The answer was only "motivation," and that is probably true of any human endeavour.
----------
B: Hello all. It seems, that at first when we start out on the path, in a way, we retreat from the world, because we know that it does not matter as much. But while we were in the world, because we thought it mattered, our acts, were hasty, they were reactionary, because everything that happened was important and a threat. Then after we have retreated, after we have started to learn, we find out that things are not important at all, all that is important is the knowledge of our death. At this point, or soon there after, we start to move back into the world. However then, because we realize that nothing really matters, then we have a clarity we did not have before, then when something happens, when we have a choice to make, we can sit back for a moment, and we can act, and we will be far more efficient ia a world that does not matter ( the world of men) than we did in a world where everything mattered. Bob
M: Bob, just a clarification to be careful in using the "nothing" part of "what matters." In the context that you intend, it's obvious that the trivia of the human form and societal events that plague most of humanity do not matter because they are comprised of "just noise," however much in terms of personal evolution and the factors that drive it, do matter intensely. Although what you have written below is well stated, this piece is only intended to highlight that this little detail in phrasing could be misinterpreted by others not familiar with the context.
----------
Note: as a prelude to the following section I would like to use this quote from Michael which for me, sums up the whole of the exchange:
There are many intervals "on the way" where activities and approaches tend to overlap. Although it is always preferential to work in processes that occur in efficiency, sometimes "efficiency" moves to shake a candidate and his/her processes in ways that might be disorienting, "but" ultimately when the test or experience is over, it is recognized that it was necessary to cause one to move off the center of the moment.
---------
M: I have listened to Rush on many occasions, and in general have the same societal and political concepts in mind - all Ayn Rand, at their basis. Rush, though, has been known to become really distorted in his rebuffs, and your example reminds me of a distortion that he ranted on about a few years ago. In one of the best technical journals, "Science," there was a research study about a person who survived a large metal shaft penetrating his brain: but it warped his personality and a soft person, because of the accident and the brain damage, became a violent person. The piece in "Science" journal was simply a study of how the intrusion of the metal shaft interacted with regions of the brain and caused the tragedy. Rush responded to this piece, a simple explanation of "what went wrong" in various places in the brain, in the same "reflex" that you did - inaccurately and incorrectly - a "Rush rant" that this was yet another attempt to "justify" behaviour where it was not. Any study that has reasonable technical base in human mechanical (as in damage) cause-and-effects and the impact of chemical alterations, are only explanatory in nature, not "justifications."
M: Rush could not have been more incorrect in his approach to that piece, and having read the original piece in "Science" versus what he said, Rush was a gross distortion. There have been many such pieces in various technical journals over the years that the media takes out of context, the public takes the media reports as what the "real" research said, then "blames science" for either not correctly stating "the truth" or misleading the public - when it was really the media "version" of the research that caused the distortion.
R: As for sex drive reaching a level where it would be called an addiction (Re: reports on Clinton) or as a drug related thing. Calling it that way sounds to me like exactly the kind of excuse making that we are getting more and more of in this society, so that, it's no longer the "poor" rapist's fault, no, "it was the drug dependency, poor guy, let's get treatment for him and give him a big pat on the back." To which I say, Wrong!
M: Not at all, any more than we allow the felony drunk driver to go unscathed. It's not an excuse, only a process.
R: That's why we have laws against natural impulses used in a way that doesn't work for the benefit of society. That's why rapist get thirty years in jail instead of two hours of community service. Wouldn't that be lovely, if we just gave rapist two hours of community service and maybe some drug addiction counseling.
M: Yes. Agreed. Your focus of response is interesting.
R: I imagine that the whole country could keep going to hell morals wise, and that the country could even fail and we lose our freedom, and even with all of that, the way of knowledge remains intact. But I like being on the side that stands for the principles that this country was founded on and your informing me that "sex addiction is a chemical addiction" set me off.
M: The concern here, is that such a simple comment about a simple fact, "set you off," in your words.
R: I was thinking along the line of the chemical processes of the body and what it is that we actually "know" about them. I guess my question to you is, when are you telling me things from your science-knowledge base and when are you telling me from your second/third attention knowledge base.
M: There is a very important point that seems to be missed: the information starts in the 2nd/3rd attention and receives various levels of explanation in the "1st attention" of science.
R: Yes, I've missed this. And, remember, there is no experiential meaning in that statement for me. When you say that information started in the 2nd/3rd attention (again, remember, I have no experience with that).
M: Experience, then, has been replaced with assumptions as preconceptions, and those, in term, form some basis within you.
R: (well... very little) receives various levels of explanation in the 1st attention of science, I'm wondering, What are the "various levels of explanation"? Isn't it those levels that I'm questioning the validity of? I really have only concept of what the 3rd attention is. And the second attention, from my experience, looks like the first only done in; what I've come to call, dreaming, with the exception that other things are possible to do there as well; flying, etc.
M: The questioning of the validity is a theme for your life, by observation. It's wondered if the questioning itself forms a primary boundary to experience.
M: Somehow, in these dialogues you received the idea that they either based in science initially, and then extended to the other attentions, or perhaps somewhere in conflict.
R: No, remember, these are mostly concepts for me... the 2nd and 3rd attention. But the first part of that, "based in science initially" ... yes, that is the only way I know. Said another way, "based in science and experience, and that's as far as it goes. Remember, an extention of that into the 2nd/3rd attention has no experiencal meaning to me.
M: Nothing can be said that will cause preconceptions and assumptions that form validity in place of experience, to in fact cause validity. The boundaries, the questioning, though appropriate can never be satisfied absent experience.
M: The concepts, and many of the details, were and are based in information turned into experience, that came from the 2nd attention and the 3rd attention. About in the period circa 1980, myself and a colleague published a series of papers providing research on how a specific dynamic of electrostatic fields and boundary collapses function. We took measurements, and simply couldn't explain the results in any normal technical model. One morning, in meditation, there was a flash of light that surrounded me, and the answer was there instantly. I wrote the technical paper: the information was so "off the edge" of common wisdom that it required other researchers about 5 to 7 years before there was acceptance. The information came from the 2nd attention, perhaps the 3rd, as a instantaneous vision. The result was "credit" for about "five" discoveries, but it took the others those years to agree.
M: How have I failed to communicate to you that there is no difference in these matters for me?
R: What you explain above is wonderful, but it is more tales of power for me. I wouldn't say that you have failed to communicate, more likely you have failed to empathize with someone who has not been having these experiences from age 5, as you have, and "knows" nothing of them. You share them from your reality but I have no such reality base and therefore they are only encouragement for me to follow the way of knowledge that I may too, someday find these possibilities within myself.
M: It's wondered if this is truly a goal, to gather these possibilities and have experience yielded from them. If the experience forms a "reality" for you, it can always be negated by questioning, which then takes the form of self-denial or perhaps sufficient self-doubt that eventually relegates the experience, no matter how perceived as valid at the time, to be worn away into negation.
R: It seems to me that you are very quick to accept "science" as absolutely above ANOTHER's perception. And I don't care about defending Rush in the below above, over "science" but it looks to me that you accept the science journal report as, well, gospel. I'm just wondering why. What is there about physical science that you find absolute?
M: Your conclusion is so inaccurate that no comment other than this can possibly be offered. Even if my concepts were limited to being only one involved in technology, I find myself stunned sufficiently not to have a response. Clearly there is are both a failure to communicate with you and this is paralleled by a lack of understanding within you even about how "science" works. It's amazing, fascinating, and sad.
R: Take out "physical science," then, and put in behavioral science. "amazing, fascinating, and sad," This is a bit extreme, isn't it? Also sounds condescending. (I know you would not want me to hold back being honest with you).
M: No. Not hold back. My dialogue with you simply cannot overcome your predispositions and preconceptions that, by observation, hold you. From these, it is probably, the boundary and impedance is derived to limit progress. There is little evidence to this point that there is "valid" effectiveness for you within our dialogue, because the above responses have echoed before. The condescending conclusion is, of course, the reality that you form for and within yourself. An alternate conclusion could easily be "disengagement" on some level because there is evidence of ineffectivity, which equates to inefficiency of energy, which is a concern of impeccability.
R: I'm thinking of my introduction in the CC compilation where I'm imagining someone on earth 18 million years from now. I just can't "get" that in 18 million years, people will be looking back at, say, all of the specific "science" you point to below, and be saying, "damn, they were really smart back then, they had all that stuff figured out." Really, I find that absurd as a premise and so when "science" starts to explain behavior to me, I lose interest really fast as I perceive behavior as totally out of their (the scientist) league. Again, not to defend Rush, but his rant could be right on and I would say without even reading the "science" that I'll bet you they didn't "prove" anything, they only "concluded." So I'm asking you, do you think those conclusions will be the same in 18 million years?
M: I surrender. Give up. No comment.
R: More condescension? ... the mole is gone ... with no knife!
M: Your reality and conclusions are as they must be for you. There are alternate explanations that could be discerned, but to this point the reflex assertions have taken hold, by observation.
R: And lastly (from your above) "The concern here, is that such a simple comment about a simple fact, "set you off," in your words." Given what I just said and your use of the word "fact" I'm wondering if this isn't something which sets YOU off. I'm suggesting that your use of the word "fact" is indicating that you are operating out of a human form dependency in that area. Could it be?
M: -blank- Nothing can be said that could be worth while. This cannot become a struggle.
R: More condescension? "Nothing can be said that could be worth while." Excuse me for saying so, but this sounds like a spoiled child talking. I'm right here for you Michael.
M: Alternatively, rather than condescension, it could be considered "decoupling" in the concern for effectiveness. The long held boundaries of a person are usually not swayed by words, or the energy/effort required to form the words of the dialogue. If the boundaries are set in place in ways where reasonable effectiveness and efficiency of the discussion are not viable, then the conclusions that you report are not necessarily valid. They would also mean that you don't accept your prior interactions and conclusions that you have reported have evolved for you by basis of this interaction, and that you are doing a reverse-course, retreat, into an earlier phase of the dialogue.
R: That reminds me. I was thinking about the attributes level you have described and it occurred to me that perhaps it was the case that within those levels are, say, a multitude of mini attributes, and that the set of mini attributes could be distributed randomly throughout the five levels so that a person who had attained level 3 (thinking of what I recall as your stated perception of yourself) and someone who maybe was at .02 of level one (thinking of my guessed own level) ... well, it occurred to me that the few I do have at my level .02 of level one, may contain some that a person at level 4 did not yet have. I don't know how else to explain what is happening here. And it really looks like condescension to me up there which would seem to be giving evidence to my suspicion of how these levels may work.
M: There are always a mix of attributes, of course, however each metaphorical "level" has emphasis of the mix of attributes that efficiently cause progress. While, based on experience, there is some consistency to your comment, the analogy could be express to note that roller skates have wheels, and airplanes have wheels that they use prior to flying, therefore, roller skates can be projected like airplanes because of the commonality they share, "wheels." Airplanes can lift off the wheels and fly, but roller skates are far better at their purpose of small movements upon the ground in which quick navigational movements are employed, but the user can never fly with only roller skates despite the implied similarity with airplanes.
R: Listening to Rush, generally, the lack of attention that the people in this country pay to the moral and social decay being advanced by liberalism .... I just find it very disheartening.
M: Yes. True. The only caution is that Rush admits that "he is a showman" using his words, so his emphasis needs to be taken with that in the background.
R: I know that you were just pointing out a fact and were not advocating anything based on it.
R: And now I'm calling that fact into question.
M: Yes. That is your approach. Words and interactions, it is observed, are useless against such preconvictions and predispositions.
M: Okay. Your choice. In fact, your agenda. No response.
M: Understanding the "why" and the mechanisms of the "why" are not "justifications" and how these concepts become mixed up, I'll never understand other than in societal terms. Look at the report(s) that Ed provided about his son. The research that provided the information that really helped Ed and his wife and son, that the chemical changes in the brain were directly attributable, would have at one time been condemned, by the media (in fact it was) because the common wisdom was to "blame the parents" or "blame the psychology" of the person for a physical condition of inherent brain chemistry. We have known for about a decade, that about 7 percent of humanity have a predisposition, genetically, toward alcoholism. If you took 100 individuals and did "anything" to force them to become alcoholics, only 7 would submit after the forced attempt. (With hard drugs, all would become dependent - the chemistry is so pervasive.) Knowing that is not a justification for the alcoholics to BE alcoholics, but "knowing" the genetic fact causes an alert that can assist individuals with the condition that they indeed have a predisposition and carry an added responsibility.
R: Phrase of interest above "we have known" ... Have we? in 18 million years I don't think you will find much agreement about that.
M: In 18 million years, almost all of what is currently understood and considered important or intense in any human endeavour, other than evolution into the third attention, will be irrelevant because the new information base that will follow with be sufficient to replace the current concepts. The third attention is timeless, and the 18 million years exemplified by the above, have no significance whatever.
M: Rick, please look back at this in a few days...
M: Peace, sincerely said.
R: I believe that. And at the same time it does seems like there is a block in place up there in your willingness to look at points I've raised. I love you, Michael, Rick
M: There is no point to engaging in exchanges that are formed in the basis that is observed. It is far more appropriate to not engage and not experience the energy inefficiency to promote a dialogue that ultimately will not be of service simply because the focus causing the intensity is irrelevant to evolution of an individual.
M: it is very clear that there is a failure of my communication with you. Once again. The processes seem very clear, well perceived, and yes, there is only silence that is appropriate for me.
-------------
R: Hi Michael,
R:I've deleted all text but the last responses from you and I'm going to now look at each comment as standing on it's own, as a guide for me, and in the spirit of the last entry, which, actually, I think I will now place up here as the first of you comments. So here it is, with your last now placed first and the rest in order. You said, "There is no point to engaging in exchanges that are formed in the basis that is observed. It is far more appropriate to not engage and not experience the energy inefficiency to promote a dialogue that ultimately will not be of service simply because the focus causing the intensity is irrelevant to evolution of an individual."
R: Yes, I see that too. I mostly feel like I don't even want to look at how it happened the way it did (the last few exchanges). The only thing I can logically attribute it to is the impersonal-ness of emails and the ease with which misunderstanding occurs. An example I'm thinking of too, is my "joke" letter to Jane (not sent, nor intended to be sent). I thought it was funny, but I guess the humor wasn't there in the E-mail. Anyway, I totally agree with the above, that if "the focus causing the intensity is irrelevant to evolution of an individual," then it's the wrong focus.
R: Also you said, "Experience, then, has been replaced with assumptions as preconceptions, and those, in term, form some basis within you."
R: I assume you meant, "those, in turn." Yes, it reminds me of the model -- Experience leads to the conceptualization of the experience, which then colors the next experience, and you get into, then, a "viscous circle." But if that is all I have ... well.... It doesn't leave much to say. (I finished all of the below and am now on my rereading of it. I guess I didn't keep what I just said here in mind very well as I wrote)
R: Also you said, "The questioning of the validity is a theme for your life, by observation. It's wondered if the questioning itself forms a primary boundary to experience."
R: I was thinking about that yesterday after first reading it. Are you suggesting that I may be questioning things, but that really what I've done is already made up my mind so that the questioning is then a primary boundary to experience. And by that, you mean that my questioning was not really questioning at all, it was my stated belief in the form of a question. Is that what you are saying?
M: Yes.
R: That does seem to fit what I quite often do. (adding on second reading to tie in with what I've written below -- But it does not preclude an ability to change preconceptions/assumptions)
M: Consider also the possibility that the process indicated above forms a dependency and a point of control, which is also a dependency. Questions can have a form of attempting to exude a form of control over the process of the interaction and the responses from which the answers are solicited. This is a one-way attempt for many to engage in the ego-driven power struggle, but it's hidden under the guise of "seeking information," while it's really seeking power and control. While considering that within contemplation, overview "the subject" where the energy of the questions are being applied. Is it, the subject, relevant to evolution or is it superfluous to the process of evolution/development? If it is the latter, then the subject is only an object of a control drama.
R: I have no interest in controlling anything here with you. But I like the idea of keeping to the question, "Is it, the subject, relevant to evolution or is it superfluous to the process of evolution/development? You invited me to talk about my wife, etc., and this evolved. I agree with your below (coming up) comments about my suspected lack of evolution. I guess I'm guilty of not working very hard to change and have been satisfied to be gathering information through all of these exchanges, thinking, somehow, that that was leading to the change of perception (into 2nd attention), not paying attention to the many times stated "impeccability is all that counts" and how I could -- up -- my understanding and practice of impeccability through these exchanges.
R: Also you said, " Nothing can be said that will cause preconceptions and assumptions that form validity in place of experience, to in fact cause validity. The boundaries, the questioning, though appropriate can never be satisfied absent experience."
R: I see, and in this case (of the past couple of emails) you are talking about the absent experience of actually reading to the point of understanding, certain scientific studies/reports. I see. One of my preconceptions/assumptions is that if I did read the report to the point of full understanding and thereby have that experience, is that it would be found to be not conclusive. Perhaps you sensed that and found it "sad" and the reason I was surprised by that (your finding it sad) was because it didn't seem to me that your holding my preconceptions/assumptions as "sad" allowed for the possibility that I might not still have those preconceptions/assumptions after reading the report to the point of understand.
M: Consider the significance of the approach of having intense opinions that are only founded in media reports and discussion.
R: hummmm. Yes, well, I've not considered that in the light that this recent exchange has placed it. It's foolishness. I will watch for it now in a new way. That is, pay attention to the many ways I've done that as though it was reasonable. I see that it is not. That is something I should have known, and dare say, did know, but have been shoving it into a far corner. Perhaps it is related to knowing that I cheated my way through school and don't have the knowledge base I cheated myself out of, nor taken the time to get since, and an attempt to "know" something in order to cover up that fact up. Well, I've been clever enough to grab onto something like this behavioral science conclusions calling into question, knowing that it was something subjective in many ways, ... But I didn't intentionally set out to do that. It's there like a pattern I've followed, under the guise of "core beliefs," but while not taking the time to educate in related matters. That is what I'm guilty of and therefore I'd better do better at watching what I say and "go off" about.
R: And I know that I don't have an attachment to being right about it. If the proof is there it is there. So I do suppose that I could just keep my mouth shut when I don't have the facts. But I really thought it was a very innocent thing to say -- in the sense of it's being common, or a notion I've formed knowing how often scientific "truths" have changed over the years).
R: I don't think this is violating the spirit of the first paragraph above.
R: Also you said, "It's wondered if this is truly a goal, to gather these possibilities and have experience yielded from them. If the experience forms a "reality" for you, it can always be negated by questioning, which then takes the form of self-denial or perhaps sufficient self-doubt that eventually relegates the experience, no matter how perceived as valid at the time, to be worn away into negation."
R: I don't see myself doing that. I like facts. If I see that someone has caught me making a mistake, I'll change so fast that the person catching me won't even realize that I've made it. -g- I honestly cannot think of one experience which I've negated by questioning. Thinking about it some more, just to make sure, ... no, I don't do that ... in fact it sounds psychotic. Give me an example of how someone could come to do that and not be psychotic.
M: It wouldn't have to go so far as being psychotic to still be a practice. It could simply be a subtle way of maintaining a status quo: the safe place of the "known and familiar."
R: I still don't get that I do that. Related to what I just wrote moments ago above, it's more like what you talk about somewhere in this: I've shunned even going where I'm told to find information, well, that's just as much of a block, I suppose. I guess it's more like I've avoided the experiences rather than negate them after having them. But I don't feel stuck in what doesn't support me, even though I may have been stuck in what doesn't support me, and definitely not to the point of negating experience.
R: Was this a "test" paragraph? Why would you wonder if it is "truly a goal"? This is, further, why it seems to me that you weren't allowing me the possibility of changing my preconceptions/assumptions. That WOULD be a "sad" thing. But you won't find anything in what I've written that proves I'm like that because I'm not. Plain and simple. You may find stuff that looks to indicate that, but I'm telling you that that is not the case.
M: As an observer, there were patterns in the recent exchanges that almost precisely overlaid with one major and one minor "rant" of the past. That is suggested not to be a coincidence.
R:Yes, yes, well, at the risk of sounding patronizing, I see that now, and did not before.
R: So it has to be misunderstanding. I love to find new things and I would have thought that you would have understood that from the tons of email between us.
R: Also you said," No. Not hold back. My dialogue with you simply cannot overcome your predispositions and preconceptions that, by observation, hold you. From these, it is probably, the boundary and impedance is derived to limit progress. There is little evidence to this point that there is "valid" effectiveness for you within our dialogue, because the above responses have echoed before. The condescending conclusion is, of course, the reality that you form for and within yourself. An alternate conclusion could easily be "disengagement" on some level because there is evidence of ineffectivity, which equates to inefficiency of energy, which is a concern of impeccability."
R: This, it seems, is the result of the misunderstanding I've talked about above, so I don't need to comment on it now.
R: Also you said, "Your reality and conclusions are as they must be for you. There are alternate explanations that could be discerned, but to this point the reflex assertions have taken hold, by observation."
R: This too, seems to be coming from the same misunderstanding... that I am closed minded. I'm not saying that it is your place to educate me that my preconceptions/assumptions may change. But you didn't even say that. You, apparently, just assumed that they were not changeable, and that is nonsense and very mystifying to me, after all we've been through together.
M: There is a repetition of history and from the point of view of the observer, the repetition begs the question to be considered about the efficacy and viability of the interactions.
R: Some just take longer than others, I suppose. I just didn't get it before, about my using non-education based core beliefs as though I knew something. And I still have the suspicion that I may be right, what is new is that I also see that I really don't know and that it is therefore very foolish to speak out on such things.
R: After all, in the case of the skin mole, I stated clearly that no one had convinced me that it was not a part of normal body function. It was not a question of being closed minded. It was a question of my seeing a possibility.
M: Yes. The prior exchanges did have some elements of that as a subject, but the intensity of the expression that resulted has similarities to this recent example.
R: Yes, more of what I've just been finding here.
R: Also you said, "Alternatively, rather than condescension, it could be considered "decoupling" in the concern for effectiveness. The long held boundaries of a person are usually not swayed by words, or the energy/effort required to form the words of the dialogue. If the boundaries are set in place in ways where reasonable effectiveness and efficiency of the discussion are not viable, then the conclusions that your report are not necessarily valid. They would also mean that you don't accept your prior interactions and conclusions that you have reported have evolved for you by basis of this interaction, and that you are doing a reverse-course, retreat, into an earlier phase of the dialogue."
R: I really don't get this, Michael, I say that I don't believe that the conclusions of behavioral science will be shown to hold up and you go off into the above land of... "reverse-course, retreat" where is all of that coming from?
M: The reference was toward your processes in consideration of possibility that there has been a reversal of the progress made, or seeming to be made, or that the progress that was apparent did not become truly integrated and hence was only transient in characteristics. If the latter were to be valid, then the progress was a superficial illusion.
R: I think it's more that the progress was never made. And not to take away from what I have gained from these exchanges, but I've not really felt much progress and perhaps that is why when you've suggested that I was close to an expansion, that it never happened. I didn't see any difference. The only difference I've seen, up until what I'm seeing here about this pattern of acting like I know something, has been a stronger conviction that all CC possibilities are real. But I've pretty much been going on the assumption that I know lots about the mistake of complaining, the lie I recently wrote about of "he made me mad" bla bla bla, and have felt pretty good about myself for knowing those things, all the while not paying attention to all the stuff, impeccability wise, that I still have to work on. And thinking that the second attention stuff just wasn't coming because I wasn't intending well enough and that my lack of impeccability was mostly in the area of not being able to turn off the internal dialogue, along with certain traits I've just put up with without trying to change much: impatience with the kids, etc. But I don't think I can relegate this just discovered lack of impeccability, this "knowing" what I don't know, to an acceptable place like I have impatience. I imagine that I will quickly see myself doing that one when it pops up again. Time will tell what I do with it.
R: It's fine if you don't want to educate me about the behavioral sciences, but you are good with words, couldn't you have simple said something like, "Rick, there is much information regarding these matters that you obviously don't have. A good place to gather this missing information would be ... bla bla bal. I suggest research into... bla bla bal" Something like that.
M: Do you recall your reaction when there was a suggestion for you to read two books by Ayn Rand? It was a profound and intense rejection that even stimulated a "mini-rant." There is nothing that has occurred in the interim to suggest that any new suggestions would not be similarly rejected with equal intensity. Consider also, that these recent exchanges were a test to evaluate the possibility that there had been an integrated modification to your impulse reactions. Since the reactions came in a form that mirrors similar experiences in the past, it could be concluded that progressive integration has not occurred in any substantive way.
R: Yes, I'd read this before writing the above stuff and much of that writing came from the realizations of this. "Progressive integration has not occurred in any substantive way." I really had not even seen much to integrate. It's been more, compiled, what I already "know." But I've not held it that way intentionally. It's just been part of who I've been with all of this exchange. So maybe that explains my shock at your writings these last couple of days. I was just happily going along in my non-evolving way, and suddenly you dropped the hammer.
R: But your deciding to "decouple" ... I really wish it was a test that you are giving me to see how I'll react to "decoupling" ... but I actually don't get that it is that. And I do, then, find this very odd.
M: It was not intended as a test. Consider the indications provided above and couple those with the mandate that energy be conserved through efficiency.
R: Well, this is complete for me now, save for seeing what I do with it from here. I don't feel a need to apologize for anything as I think I've explained where I was coming from in how I saw your comments, and I'll let what I've already said now be a form of apology. I really thought that you were losing it and could not even imagine what was going on. Thank you for taking me through it. I'm sitting here normally. Yet I don't even feel like going into the other room. No wonder I have so little at 49. Not to drop into self-pity. But I just did, and I guess that is a reflection of doubt that I will change, yet maybe I already have and will now see it. -Rick
R: Also you said, "There are always a mix of attributes, of course, however each metaphorical "level" has emphasis of the mix of attributes that efficiently cause progress. While, based on experience, there is some consistency to your comment, the analogy could be express to note that roller skates have wheels, and airplanes have wheels that they use prior to flying, therefore, roller skates can be projected like airplanes because of the commonality they share, "wheels." Airplanes can lift off the wheels and fly, but roller skates are far better at their purpose of small movements upon the ground in which quick navigational movements are employed, but the user can never fly with only roller skates despite the implied similarity with airplanes."
R: That makes more sense to me, that "each metaphorical "level" has emphasis of the mix of attributes that efficiently cause progress. Okay, good. See there, I love to find out new things, ... always have, there is not a closed-minded bone in my body when given or pointed to the truth.
R: Also you said, "Yes. That is your approach. Words and interactions, it is observed, are useless against such preconvictions and predispositions."
R: Sigh, ... What "words and interactions" did you even try? I guess this is losing the spirit of the first paragraph, but if this is heading for "decoupling" it ought to at least be closed with some sense of completion... of something. Okay, sorry, I'm going back into the total feeling of this and forgetting that I'm making points above that you've not had a chance to reply to, which hopefully will eliminate much of what I'm reading down here.
M: Suggestion is that you might evaluate your words above.
R: Also you said, "In 18 million years, almost all of what is currently understood and considered important or intense in any human endeavor, other than evolution into the third attention, will be irrelevant because the new information base that will follow with be sufficient to replace the current concepts. The third attention is timeless, and the 18 million years exemplified by the above, have no significance whatever."
R: Now there are some interesting things I'd love to hear more about. I wish I could just erase all of this and the last two days, but that's not possible, so, I'll be looking forward to your reply.
-----------
R: It started when I left the computer after writing to you last night. I went out and my daughter was there and I accidentally knocked her jacket into her soup... Just a tiny bit. She got mad at me, just a tiny bit, I would always get mad at her back for getting mad at me. But instead, I felt like crying, told her I was sorry, and had to leave the room so she wouldn't see me.
R: This morning I forgot to give her lunch money and we were walking as we always do, to her friends house where she then walks to school with her friend. I said, can't you borrow from the school again (knowing that this had been done in the past and paid back the next day) she said, "I thought you don't believe in borrowing." I was stopped, I finally said, I don't know what I believe so much right now. Then I said, "I guess it's not so good to just make blanket statements. I guess it's better to look at the different possibilities on a case by case deal...
R: I know more now about negating experience too. I'm already catching myself doing that with this experience.
-------
R: I'm felling so melancholy since last night because what keeps coming up are the old was of being and on the one hand what you've said above is already part of my understanding of how evolutions occurs and I have so much attachment to having it happen ... and seeing the breakthrough that is occurring with this all and the huge sadness ... I don't know where it is coming from except from doubt of myself to move through this and not succumb to the pull of the old reflex reactions. I think the sadness is that I think that the old is who I am inclined to being again, yet even this present state of seeing it's loss of power over me doesn't seem to be producing anything but a feeling of emptiness in it's place ... and I know that is good and the doubt comes back again that I won't push through to the other side of this. I wish I could just go away from everything and everybody for a while. I feel so alone and like who I've been has been torn from me with nothing in it's place but sadness...
M: The "approach adjustment" reported by the immediately prior e/mail (last night) and this below are, of course, positive indications of the retrospection and contemplative processes that could eventually move you across a threshold. There is full understanding that this probably will not be an overnight progression. With a commit to yourself you may continue to move forward into a new awareness, which may have already started. If you can accomplish this feat, it will change your life - forever.
R: I took a nap after writing last and while first lying there with my reported sadness, many things passed through my thinking. One was the realization that nearly all (the thought was actually, "all")of what I do is with a motive.
M: Yes. Sometimes intentional and sometimes reflexive and not understood, as automatic responses, more or less in the form of habitual.
R: As that thought was occurring within the sadness and the feeling of nothing, it seems a good realization, I then saw for a few moments that I was so closely watching, right then, all of my thoughts as being inauthentic that suddenly I noticed I was going into moments of really no thoughts.
M: Okay, other than the word "all" (of my thoughts). The thoughts that seem inauthentic are actually authentic BUT within the frame of an alternate but inauthentic reality. Adjust the reality, and the thoughts adjust themselves.
R: Well that immediately brought up more old thought of learned expectation about how that is exactly where I need to be to go into the second attention, and then returned the sadness of how I just couldn't have an authentic thought, and more silence and even a slight feeling of peace to just try and lie there and just be. And little thoughts would come and I'd cry some more for a half second at the returned inauthenticity, and be silent again, and again think I was on the right track (anticipation of 2nd attn.) but wish I hadn't thought that as I didn't want to get in the way of it. And I ended up going to sleep to wake up now feeling just normal. It's like I've moved out of sadness into resignation. Not where I want to be.
M: CC did not use the term "warrior" for nothing. It takes a "warrior" to execute the alterations.
R: It's as if I just don't have the power to fight the old internal dialogue. The sadness seemed to be working, but not that is gone. I guess it's just a wait and see deal and ... maybe it's because there are no real triggers here at the computer screen. Maybe as I go back out into the world, pottery class starts tonight, new chances to relate with my kids when they come home, maybe what has been different since the dropped hammer email will still be there. But right now I just feel normal. Perhaps it's the new knowledge of the basic inauthenticity of my thoughts
M: Contemplate the above insert.
R: that will keep me going to what you pointed to as being a possibility of this time. It's one thing to be advised to not have self-doubt, it's another to stop having it. It's seems the same as the "Sound Of Music" soundtrack that is my "tune" in the head of the day. No matter what I tell myself about stopping it, It will be their even one second later just on it's own. Rick
M: As the ego and the human form dependencies grip as parasites into the energy of an individual, it is common for these "emotions" driven by them to invade the consciousness through the emotional pathways. The dying dependencies will disguise themselves as sad emotions in order to force the victim of the parasitic tendrils to release the concept of freedom to become re-dependent upon them.
M: CC did not use the term "warrior" for nothing. It takes a "warrior" to execute the alterations.
-----------
R: Thank you Michael, I'm finding myself hesitant to say much to you at this point as ... well ... there is just much to start doing that I've already been told and I don't want to write to you as a way of trying to "be" something. Well, this is dumb, again. I'll write when it's right. Thank you Rick
R: It's almost like I was tricked into discovering a major flaw in my character. You know how often I've gone on about one thing or another like my way was the only way. Basically I've seen that most of that came from .... from foolishness rather than from any knowledge of how things really are. Preconceptions and assumptions in large part, rather than any thorough understanding of issues.
R: It's not that that should be so hard to figure out, it's just one of those things I never considered myself to be doing and, rather, just was that way. And now having seen it for what it is, I'm finding a general inauthenticity to my thoughts, for the most part, ... sort of like a questioning ... "where did that notion come from?" and only finding as the source, superficiality.
M: Words that come to mind relative to the above: recapitulation; evaluation derived from impeccability.
R: So I'm finding that I don't quite know exactly who I am at the moment as who I've been seems to be looking very preconceptions and assumptions based. But the big draw is to return to being that way, as that is what I know how to be.
M: The "commit" piece that was e/mail attached some time ago seems appropriate to revisit.
R: Alas, what is one to do? I want to have the choice to change. It seems, though, that it is a lot like the Sound Of Music theme that is currently in my head as the tune-in-the-head-of-the-day; that is, it seems that even recognizing this that I've just described, doesn't get rid of it as it is so very established as "my way."
M: The choice to advance is wholly yours: it always has been. The choice to remain the same and not advance is also yours. The agenda must come from your own "fire, within."
Peace
Michael
Note: as a final note to this section, I want to again place the quote it started with:
There are many intervals "on the way" where activities and approaches tend to overlap. Although it is always preferential to work in processes that occur in efficiency, sometimes "efficiency" moves to shake a candidate and his/her processes in ways that might be disorienting, "but" ultimately when the test or experience is over, it is recognized that it was necessary to cause one to move off the center of the moment. -Michael
Introduction
The Teachings of don Juan
A Separate Reality
Journey to Ixtlan
Tales Of Power
The Second Ring of Power
The Eagle's Gift
The Fire From Within
The Power of Silence
The Art of Dreaming
The Active Side of Infinity
Appendix A thru E
Dialogue on the Way of Knowledge - Part l
Dialogue on the Way of Knowledge - Part ll
Dialogue on the Way of Knowledge - Part lll
Dialogue on the Way of Knowledge - Part lV
Dialogue on the Way of Knowledge - Part V
Dialogue on the Way of Knowledge - Part Vl
Dialogue on the Way of Knowledge - Part Vll
Dialogue on the Way of Knowledge - Part VllI
Please send e-mail to me by clicking on my name.Rick Mace
My pottery page is here. Rick Mace Pottery
