“O my, what if the strands had spectra of their own, and so the
strands could populate a whole region of existence
through different expressions. So, the strands are
coherent continuities of information, and also wide
expressions of the same. And you could, if you were more
evolved, sense their continuity or their breadth of
expression, but not both.
“They are either bundles of info or fields of info,
and can be either but not both, because those are
self-contradictory states of beings. Take a football
field. Now, for some minutes it is 100 yards of
action-packed drama! A struggle between 2 forces. But the
same field could also be the place where decades of
memories are made, and any single Saturday afternoon is
not replayed in the memory, but only the overall pattern.
The field is empty, the stands empty, no band, quiet. But
that quiet doesn’t negate the crowded noise of games
past and future. Just an analogy.
“Some information spreads out and infuses
everything. Some information focuses itself tightly into
a progression of understanding. Could be the same strand,
acting in 2 of its many modes, holding a full spectrum of
possible expressions.
“Just something to think about.” (10/19/2009 -
I#157)
“So, here we are in a matrix of strands and each
strand a matrix of strings and each string a series of
entities and information arranged in a matrix which is a
strand, etc.–up and down. Forget about atoms. They
are just physical representations of much more essential
entities. But I’ve said enough.
“The universe is not made up of atoms! Atoms just
represent the more primal building units of existence
which, in the end, is information. The same way
that the tiny silicon switches of a computer are not the
data and logic of the computer, but just representations
of the information they present–expressions and
representations and conduits and sewers (shit in, shit
out). For example, the NRP (National Republican Party)
computers and Rush Limbaugh’s so-called brain.
“Here’s a trick. Decide what you want the
output to be, then reverse engineer the input needed,
then only put that in. And if you can
keep the processing the same, it will appear rational.
The process itself is actually reasonable, if only the
full data were entered.” (11/7/2009 - I#158)
“So,
let’s recap. It has been discovered that parallel
universes aren’t parallel, or else we would never
get a sense that they’re there. All realities
intersect somehow. And we increasingly inhabit the points
of conjunction as we become more complex.
“Now a question from little Bobbie Alcera of Rancho
Cucamonga, California: ‘When we get more complex, do
all our parts come from the same plane.’ ‘No,
some come by train.’ CT! Read the card!
‘O.’ But no, you grow in complexity across
planes once you are complex enough to envision planes
other than your own. Actually, you have become more
complex across planes on the step before
you comprehend other planes. It happens to you, and then
you can conceive it.
“This is the long and sad history of complexity: You
are always more complex than you realise. ‘I’m
not.’ See. Otherwise, you would be creating reality
to fulfill your fantasy, but rather you are growing into
your reality by way of your perceptions. Everything LD invented was already
possible... except for the potato poacher. That still
defies reality. Ok, that’s today’s pith!
“A universe filled with parallel universes would be
a one-dimensional simplistic place. Gotta bump into one
another to get depth.” (12/28/2009 - I#159)
“So, if life isn’t linear, then it can’t
be planar. So, to have parallel planes is not the same as
parallel lives. Parallel lives would each dip and roll in
the same ways; so, parallel existences which are not
planar would be wavy in the same wavar ways. So, if even
one point of Existence B were not just
in synch with A, then you might get a point of
intersection instead of planar parallelism. ‘And
that’s the way it is. This is Walter Cronkite. Good
evening.’ Whoa! Where’d WC come from.
‘He’s dead, you know.’ So are we.
‘O.’ It can be confusing, but lively. No no no,
deadly. No no no....
“Why do folks think of linear parallelism when, in
fact, it’s a jumbled matrix. Peeps like to envision
a matrix like a large array of chess boards in multiple dimensions...
‘or checker boards.’ Yes CT, them, too. But
from Checkerboard Square comes Purina Dog Chow...
ARF. And Cat Chow... meow. O, it’s
Sandy’s friend, Mimi the cat. ARF. Meow.
But we digress.
“But a matrix need not be linear nor in any way
parallel nor even symmetrical... ‘nor even Metrical, which is a diet
drink.’ CT, have you lost your mind? ‘Why
yes.’ O.
“When we speak of the existential spiritual
matrix, I can assure you it’s not a neat and
pretty sight. It’s more of a goo of being, with lots
of connections but little symmetry... ‘and few
Christmas trees.’ CT. ‘Cinnamon trees?’
No. ‘Cinnabuns?’ Yum. But we
digest... yum.
“As I was trying to say, in a soup
there is structure but not always linearity. And so, you
can get a bit of pasta or not-a. And once in awhile, even
in a lentil soup, you might get a fava... ‘and a nice Chianti?’ No, unless
it’s a lamb stew–very quiet, silent even. But I
don’t want to foster the impression that this will
always be the case. However, those who are open to
spiritual diversity will always experience matrices which
are richer than those who think in linearity and
parallelism. And nobody expected the
Spanish
omelet. ‘With ketchup?’ Sure, Papa.
“Now, a question: Are all movies played out in the
other side, or are all movies an expression of the other
side? ‘What is it.’ Well it’s the place
where the dead go, but that’s not
important right now. 'Where did it start?' Here or there. And
pay no attention to the man behind the
dog... ARF. What I am getting at is this: The matrix of being,
which includes the matrix of nonbeing...
‘well of course it does, but what has nonbeing ever
done for us?’ The roads? Oy.
“If you reduce the matrix of being to either
linearity or parallelism or any form of symmetry or any
system of order, you are imposing the dimensions of only
one level of spiritual complexity-- which is so
incomplete as to be laughable, hahahahaha.
“Stop looking for the universal theories of
anything, because you can’t find them at any single
level of complexity. The best you can do is particular
theories which will be spiritually parochial but not
inconsistent with universals. The boundaries of your
particulars are not the edges of your theories but the
limits of your complexities. And I’ve said enough.
Pondering required, batteries not included or helpful
unless you are a robot or unless they are S Cells (AA,
AAA, C, D, S--Spirit Cells, which outlast the Bunny).” (1/1/2010 -
I#160)
“So, here’s the bubbles story: If every
possible reality were a plane, then yes, some would be
parallel and inform ours by their parallel insights. And
others would be intersecting and connect us to points of
insight, but not necessarily to planes of understanding.
However, there are also bubbles. Planes are
infinite... ‘but Bubbles is not’... are not...
‘is not’... are not... ‘o.’
“They are finite systems of understanding, in which
they appear infinite and meaningful, but they are neither
in the totality of being. Get the picture. Inside a
bubble it looks like a plane. However, here’s the
tricky part: At any point on any plane, not only will the
bubble appear to be parallel, but actually two
points on the bubble will appear to be parallel. So
bubbles seem to be twice as relevant to any plane as any
other plane, but in fact they are not. And from a plane,
a bubble will appear infinite for a long sequence of
encounter. So the closed system of the bubble will appear
parallel, infinite, and most significant, and will lead
you down a finite path. Think alchemy.
“So, just because some insight seems to mirror your
reality with greater possibilities and seems enticingly
strong a referent, doesn’t mean it’s an
infinite parallel plane. How can you tell which is which.
‘Bubbles are pink!’ No no no no. We will save
that for another day. This is quite a bit for one
sitting.” (1/10/2010 - I#161)
“Here’s
a thought. Spirituality is planar, but religions are
bubbles. They seem to be connected to all reality, but
they are closed systems... open only on Friday afternoon,
2-4, holidays excepted. And the same with fads of all
kinds.” (1/16/2010 - I#162)
“I’m not wild about bubbles. They are chimeras
which beckon as if realities, but which are closed
universes (universe with a small u).
See, any closed system is its own universe; there
doesn’t appear to be anything beyond. Just ask Truman. But the completeness is
an illusion.
“Bubbles not only seem complete, but their surfaces
mirror other realities. And here’s the trickiest
bubble of them all: ayeeeee.... no no no, not
yet... when a bubble so perfectly mirrors its situation
that it is essentially camouflaged--so you can’t
tell where it is, or even when you are entering its
torturously contained self-logic. Cults within
evangelical religion are examples. Good chocolate truffles are, too... oooo.
But in history we see such as well (Nappy and his people).
“You think you are in the big U, but
suddenly you run into an invisible wall. Planes
don’t have no stinking walls! Get that in your
noggin. So, if you reach a wall, you know you are in a
bubble. But most people don’t know they’ve hit
a wall. Here’s a hint: If somebody says there’s
something you shouldn’t ask about, there’s a
wall around somewhere.
“Planes admit infinite curiosity, even when they
know they don’t contain the full answer. Ponder
that!” (1/21/2010 - I#163)
“The
overall tensions of your times are caused by some
being in a bubble and others being on a plane
which is reflected in the bubble and confuses the hell
out of peeps.
“So some on the plane think they are bounded, and
some in the bubble think their notions are infinite and
universal. And some think their understanding should give
them the rights to call the shots. But they are in the
bubble, and everyone knows... wait for it... the reign falls mainly on
the plane!
Ain’t any real leadership options in bubbles because
they ain’t going anywhere. Think dog chasing own
tail... grrrr snap. The preceding was brought to
you by Sanford Canine Services... f f f f f .
“So, those in the bubble and those on the plain
plane talk the same talk and think they see the same
realities, but they are just passing in the wind. But
here are some dogs passing wind... f f f f arrr.
“Anymoo, when vast numbers seem to be talking about
the same reality, but their words end up just zooming
past, you got a bubble-plane confusion like now. And just
be glad you are not in the bubble. For as painful as the
plane might seem for awhile, in the end the bubble will
burst and spew its parochialism into the universe, like
spittle in the winds of change.
“Those in a bubble get stuck, mistaking the
transient for the permanent. They mistake the box for
what could proceed from its infinite contents.
‘Farts and burps are bubbles!’ Thank you, CT,
for that enlightening insight. ‘No problemo.’
“Bubbles are attractive because they limit
change–resistance to the unknown.
“Here’s something many don’t realize: The Aquarian Conspiracy was a bubble; so was Camelot. Idealism can be a bubble
as much as cynicism.” (1/24/2010 - I#164)
“What
happens to the atmosphere of any closed system. It
degrades and slowly pollutes. So, too, with the contents
of any bubble. But those within it slowly adapt to its
malodorance. See, CT, I could use it in
a sentence. ‘You win!’
“And often, they claim its redolence as aroma. Whoa.
Yep, kraut stink can smell good in Munich. And to a bunch
of drunks, whiskey breath smells good. So, too, with the
philosophical air in any bubble.
“And those in the '60s drug culture thought it
liberating, as they sank deeper into it. Each drug moment
proved inadequate and begged for more.
“Planes take you new places; bubbles take you to old
places that leave you wanting more. You could see it
again and again. Never enough. We work so hard for what
we don’t even want, and think the exit is the way
out. Drop out just means turning round the
bubble.” (2/4/2010 - I#165)
“And the
question is: Can a plane pass through a bubble, and can
bubbles have planes in them. Well, duh. Yes,
some bubbles can be adjacent to planes; so they appear
just off shore, so to speak. And those in the bubble see
the plane, deride it as being fantastic, and stay in
their bubble. Other times the plane cuts right through
the bubble, and this is perceived by the bubbleheads as
counterculture and they resist its allure and validity.
1950s materialistic bubble did not know what to do with
the early '60s plane to the future. For example, on a
plane, hair length never matters. But in a
bubble, it can be definitive.
“And sometimes, in a large bubble, you can get what
appears to be a plane but it ain’t going somewhere.
Roman Empire was an apparent plane within a cultural
bubble. The Catholic Church is a plane within the
Christian bubble. And yes, Christianity is a bubble, but
the spiritual insights of Jesu Ben Joseph were planar.
Did I make this plainer.
“So ponder all that. And the Roman plane was in a
bubble all about power. So the continuity of the
state seemed a plane within the repeated conflicts over
power.
“And now the puzzler: American democracy, bubble or
plane. That’s the question of the moment. Will it be
turned back on its own self or continue a journey into a
different future... ARF. Yes, Sandy is taking bets on
that... grrrf.
“Any bubble can be pierced and those within
liberated, but any plane can also be turned back on its
elf and made a bubble. Christianity was a plane until
326. Then Constantine--with the failing Roman
bubble--transferred his bubbleheadedness to Christianity.
To be on a plane requires an optimistic view of infinite
future, but too much fear can turn any plane into a
bubble. I stop.
“ ‘They’ve gone about as far as they can
go’ is a statement about reaching a crucial point.
And the decision is never about content but about
process. Obama’s election was planar, and then fear
started to turn it back on itself. And good-hearted will
fuel that, by insisting on content performance
rather than process integrity. I’ve said
enough.” (2/11/2010 - I#166)
“We have
encounters with concepts. Well, I’m sitting here,
but not really sitting but the spiritual equivalent of
sitting on a Sunday afternoon. But not really a Sunday
afternoon, but the spiritual equivalent of a Sunday
afternoon. And I’m thirsty, but not really thirsty
but just the spiritual equivalent of thirst hits my
throat. But it’s not a throat, but a spiritual
equivalent of a throat. And I think, but not really think
because I have no brain, etc., etc.
“You don’t have the keys to understand. And I
don’t mean keys, but the spiritual equivalent. You
think we don’t have some equivalent of everything
you have? We do, and more. But wait, there’s more.
‘Hey you, enough with the equivalent shit. We are
trying to be dead over here.’ For a small guy you
gotta big mouth, or the spiritual.... ‘Shut up! She
does go on, or rather the spiritual equivalent of her
goes on.’ And on and on and on like everything,
including eternal dog whiskers... f f f f f... hic.
“Lots of pith in that, or actually the spiritual
equivalent of pith with a question, or the... no no no
no. What is the spiritual equivalent of you? Hmmm.
Would you be an angel, a cherub, a basket, a dog, a thing
that goes here and there but whispers in the wind. If you
were reduced to your spiritual essence, what would your
physical equivalent be. Ponder that!
“That’s my stuff for today, or the spiritual
equivalent of today, which in your estimation is what? Or
for our German readers, ist das was. And for our
Yiddish fans, oy, who cares.” (3/28/2010 -
I#167)
“Dare I mention distilled spirits? We here are all
distilled spirits, reduced to our essences and
concentrated. A drop of us is worth a life of you.
“We are just you in condensed form–pure
essential oils of being. Not different, but
focused, precise, good to the last drop, I guess... or
not. A point of existence. And some are more pointed than
others. But it takes focus to be universal. Huh.
Counter-intuitive, I know, but the more you are yourself,
the better you can draw connections.
“Let’s say you want to drive to Cleveland
(why?). It would be easier to find the connecting route
if you knew you were starting from 1103 North Warren
Avenue in Savannah, Georgia, as opposed to driving from
the East Coast. So the more focused you are, the easier
it is to find the connections because you aren’t
wasting energy trying to keep yourself together.”
(4/1/2010 - I#168)
“So,
when we last left our interspirit travelers, Rikkity and
the Wonder Dog... ARF... they were contemplating how real
connection is always interplanar, while everything on
one’s plane is just an extension. And the Wonder Dog
was wondering... grrrr woofé... no no, Sandy,
just because something is unseen that doesn’t mean
it’s not an extension of you and your present
reality. Woof? Indeed. Those other planes are
probable parallel and non-parallel realities. Woofé?
F f f f f. You’re getting it.
“We can connect only to that which is not us
or an extension of us. ARF? Yes, it’s true
that all probable realities are extensions of us in a
way, but not until actualized... grrrr. Think
about it, Sandy. You are connected to all that will be in
your current plane of existence, so finding connections
is easy... grrr snap. Yes, even a cat could do
it. But to sense connections beyond oneself, or the
projection of oneself, is the art of connection--to see
patterns across pattern systems. Woof! Yes! To
sense a Sandy who is not a dog and is not any of the
spirits you’ve been or would be if you stayed mainly
on this plane. Don’t dance... f f.
“And now, Wonder Dog... ARF! Let’s see if we
can get CT out of another mess. He’s caught in
linear thinking outside the Sphere of Compassion... ARF
ARF. And away we go.” (4/16/2010 - I#169)
“So,
those planes. Now, are all planes planar to each other,
no. When one is on one’s plane, it
appears planar, but other planes may appear other
than planar.
“You can only perceive the ground of your being
as consistent, while other grounds of being may
appear consistent... or not. Don’t judge a plane by
its appearance.
“So, the trick is that some reality which looks to
you as a discontinuous jumble could be a plane of meaning
and understanding. Doesn’t need to be what you
expect, in order to be what it is. You are not
the interpreter of existence. ‘O yes, I am.’
No. ‘Yes.’ Aren’t. ‘Am, too.’ No
way. ‘Says who.’
“There is no universal view--unless you are one with
everything, and then you’re a weiner. I relish the
thought. It takes many lives to catch up.”
(5/16/2010 - I#170)
“So, a
question: Have you ever been going your merry way, with
everything falling right into place, and then suddenly it
feels like you’ve gotten caught in an existential
twister... Auntie Em! Like, instead of smooth and linear,
existence is more circular and rough. ‘Then try
Smooth-Out.’ CT, I am trying to be serious.
‘And I’m just trying.’ We know!
“So, what’s up with that? Let’s review our
last pith. A plane, as seen from another plane, may not
appear planar. ‘And the rain in....’ CT. So we
often assume the twister is about the plane we are on,
but usually it is about another plane which is
intersecting. And it appears helter-skelter to us until
we transition to it, and then for awhile the old plane
appears twister-like as well, until we can be just
totally flat-out in the new existence. At the point of
change there always appears chaos, but it is really 2
chaoses in 1. ‘It’s a breath chaos.’
Don’t. Keep going on! ‘Candy?’ Don’t.
“And the parts are the chaos of becoming
and the chaos of unbecoming... and we know who
is unbecoming because he is about to make a smart
remark... wait, I mean a smart-ass remark. ‘O I
thought I had won for once.’ No no no no, up against
moi, I don’t think so. I lack self-esteem.
Sure.
“And here’s a little secret: If the transition
between the two planes is lengthy, the chaos can feel
like a plane of its own in which both past and present
planes appear to be the chaos instead. Lots of peeps,
leaving a plane of living which had been sustained for
years, get into the in-between and look back at that time
as pure confusion. ‘What was I thinking?’ And
that’s the pith for now... and then and then and
then but not then.” (5/20/2010 - I#171)
“Sometimes,
people on a plane that has been left behind try to deny
the value and reality of the new plane. Being present
where you are and giving heed to where you want to be is
the way to go. Ponder that. It sounds simple, but
it’s not.” (5/29/2010 - I#172)
“Now,
about those parallel planes which are concentric. Parallel
just means infinitely equidistant, so curves can be
parallel.
“I ask you to think about ripples on the still pond.
The ripples are parallel circles, so how do you get any
intersecting planes? By the introduction of complexity.
All it takes is a second pebble. In a different spot. So,
when we experience an intersection of planes, we are also
experiencing the intersection of two or more sources.
Ponder that for awhile.” (6/17/2010 - I#173)
“You
see, here we don’t have the constraints of
physical reality. It’s all up for grabs. I think
without a brain, so there! I’m just a figment of my
own imagination. Now read that sentence over and ponder
its subtlety. And it’s turtles all the
way down!”
(10/5/2010 - I#174)
“You
know, we all have physical memories–that is,
memories of being physical. Just as y’all have
memories of being spiritual. So, we remember belly
rubs... f f f... and sunshine on our mocha skin, and we can connect
across memories. So, I can remember petting a cute
dog’s tummy, and a dog–a certain dog–can
remember having his tummy petted, and those two memories
can be real in spirit even without being physical. And so
we can recall the feelings... f f.
“It’s the concepts that persist. I can still
enjoy French fries without a mouth and stomach.
Y’all know this. Watch and listen and be amazed: Baguette. See. Cipriani’s gelato. The sun at the end of
day on the Tour Eiffel. It’s all as real as
if you had a loaf, a spoon, or your eyes.
“Here we realize that the deeper experience is the
intersection of the idea, the thought, the feeling,
between the object or event and the perceiver. And in
fact, physicality gets in the way often. So here I can
express the thought of being loving and Sanford can
express the thought of being loved and it is... f
f f.
“If you think skyscrapers rise high, try ideas
beyond physical restraint. For we are now loose of all
ties of time and space and matters. So much less
interference. Get to the heart of it. Ponder that. The
physical is the limited and clumsy expression of deep
notions. And the notions are on the right aisle.
I’ve had some pretty strange notions... ooooo.
“So, two people sit down across from each other in a
darkened room. Their breathing, slowly but surely,
synchronizes. And after a passage of breaths, they leave
the room knowing each other without any idea of looks or
philosophies or anything more than that two essences
shared being. And if one were to meet the other
at some other time and place, she or he might say
‘Don’t I know you?’ Enough to
ponder.” (10/7/2010 - I#175)
“I
don’t want to get physical, physical.... All subordinate
states of being have filters that qualify the
experiences. Physical is one filter. And
here’s tonight’s cliffhanger: Spirit is
all-experiential, physical is a filtered subset, and...
here it comes... it’s not the only
filtered subset. Just let that seep in.
“Am I saying that there’s more than just
spiritual and physical. Tune in next week when we hear
our hero say Arrrrfé.” (10/12/2010 -
I#176)
“So, is
it better to understand physical while physical
or spiritual? When does a dog wear the most clothes. Just
checking if you are paying attention.
“Ok, physical refers to those things which
are material, and spiritual to non-material...
or does it? Spiritual refers to one state
of non-material being, as defined by the dimensions of
your material. But what of other dimensions--and
I don’t mean dimensions of your world, but of worlds
beyond your world. Why do they always assume the
alternate worlds are physical. Am I saying that there are
parallel spiritual worlds and
existences, too? You bet your mother’s brisket, I
do.
“Just as many non-physical possibilities as
physical. So there! And since spirit is not about time
and distance, then the other possibilities are not
derivations or alternatives of time and space like
physical ones are. Aha, you say, so maybe
it’s not that there are 2 states, physical
and spiritual, but that those 2 states are among
a plentitude of states. So, there they are not opposites,
but second cousins twice removed on their enate side.
“So, maybe... no, really, at some levels of
complexity the transition is not between physical and
spiritual, but between this and that--whatever this
and that are. Am I saying that, in the
developmental complexity, physical as we know it
and spiritual as we know it are not active
dimensions of expressive existence? You bet your
mother’s borscht, I do. So, ponder that.”
(10/15/2010 - I#177)
“JC did
not supplant the laws of existence here. But people
recounted them as if he did.
“He became a legend in everyone’s mind but his
own. And these miracle stories he saw as a failure of his
ministry. He wanted people to recognize their own powers,
not his. He came to liberate, not subjugate to another
compulsion. He wanted to do away with the priests, not
create a new order of priests. And he wanted a really
good Reuben on dark rye. Could he get
it, noooooo. So much for miracles.
“They saw simple things which appeared a little
inexplicable, and then said ‘I don’t know how
he did that. I couldn’t do that. It was a
miracle.’ And to prove their point, they improved on
the story.
“Some inspired sharing became a few loaves and fish feeding thousands. You had to be there!
Deep depression in a coma-like state, he tends to him,
and he rises. The caterers unpack a
forgotten case of wine. So it went. And
remember, lots of young people followed him and then had
to go home and tell people why they were gone. ‘Hey,
man, it was like all the fucking world was there, man.
Wow, we had enough to eat without bringing anything. I
mean, Woodstock was like a miracle,
man.’ Get it. But he says wait, he’ll say it in
his own words: ‘I didn’t invent Miracle Whip.’ Thanks, JC. And
now, here’s the Mayo Brothers... tada. But
seriously... ok, enough.” (10/22/2010 - I#178)
“Ok, let’s get to the serious stuff. Now, a
quiz: You are in your matrix, and you have been through
an unnumberable nexi. Are you still you? Yes and
no. The physical you is you, but the you
which is information is now you plus them and those and
those others.
“You keep an identity through it all, but your
knowing grows with each intersection. You can’t come
through any point without gaining some insight--even if
the insight is that there’s nothing there.
“So you are you, and you are you
becoming an entity aware of more.
“It is the information gained in each connection
that grows with us, not the us. We hold the
capacity to, more or less, gain and remember what is
offered in each intersection. But how we use that
potential is the test. Genetics is a crude equivalent of
this.
“So, you are a spiritual repository... no no no no,
not suppository, CT... of the information of all those
intersections–even as they fade from physical
memory. Just a tidbit. An iota. An ort. A wee tad...
ARF.” (11/4/2010 - I#179)
“Just ponder this: The '50s and '60s had hi-fi, high fidelity--a
quality of adherence to the reality of the experience.
'With hi-fi it’s almost like being there.' But in
the 00s, we have wi-fi instead, which could mean
wider fidelity--looking for authenticity and
genuine connection in wider circles. Just a thought of
the brainless one. But I use one on TV.
“Waves of knowing, not points of information.
Don’t mistake one for the other. Humanists, noto
bene: You can have all the facts in the world and
still get them all in the wrong relationship. Ok,
that’s the pith.” (11/18/2010 - I#180)
Questions from Glenda: So Rikkity, am I to deduce
that you don't believe in miracles? Is it not a miracle
that you send these teachings now? Or is this a lingering
impact of your spirit on this planet? Do you reside
everywhere, the Universe? Wherever your thoughts take
you?
“I believe in miracles, but not the way that
most people think. I am not talking about the suspension
of physical reality; I am talking about existence itself.
“With all the odds against it, we are!
Awesome. We are existing miracles. But most people
don’t want to know they live in a field of miracle,
so they settle for less--which they call
‘miracles,’ but which are just undiscovered
aspects of existence. Just because you can’t yet
explain something, doesn’t make it a miracle. ‘Smokey Robinson was not a Miracle.’
CT!
“Now, where am I. Hmmm. Always good to ask
spirits a physical question and expect a physical answer.
Doesn’t work like that. Sure, I am everywhere but
nowhere. I am and yet am not yet. I can be
detected in energy but I’m not energy. I am beyond
and within. And is this communication a miracle? Not from
our perspective. I ask you, are cell phones miracles? And
if you say yes, well, give up your contract. What is
mundane and routine in your time, once was a miracle.
White bread: miracle; Miracle Whip: not a miracle.
“Stop trying to put us somewhere. We are beyond your
planes of being, but we are parallel and intersecting;
both. Hmmm, back to that again. Your center is
inside your sphere of being. Our center does not need to
be in our sphere because we aren’t physical. Ponder
that.
“It is a center to us, but from your physical
description it is not central to us. We have a different
geometry. Don’t assume the geometry of your world is
the geometry of all existence. That’s it.
That’s all. That’s enough!
“We have dimensions that intersect, and those
don’t always work the same for us. Like time.
We know it’s an illusion but you don’t. But we
can still pretend, so we are here when you expect us...
or is that the other way ‘round. Many of our linear
dimensions are circular. Ponder that.” (12/19/2010 -
I#181)
“So, little Effie of Effingham, Illinois, writes:
‘Dear Rikkity, people talk about crossing over the
Rainbow Bridge. Is it real.’
“Effie, it is like everything in physical reality;
it’s a metaphor. So no bridge, no rainbow, no
crossing over, but the experience of walking across a
corridor of peaceful promise to a place not yet known.
“ ‘O,’ Effie writes, ‘like walking to
Indiana.’ No... wait, ok, I’ve seen Effingham,
so yes.” (1/16/2011 - I#182)
Question from Glenda: Hi Rikkity... have been reading
about how we reincarnate into the same general groups,
life after life. Also that we may choose to be an angel
instead of reincarnating. Here is the thing....when we
reincarnate, do we cease to offer teachings as you do
now? Guessing that answer is "Yes." Were you
offered to incarnate as either of the new grandbabies in
your past family this year but chose to stay as an angel?
“Hi. I’m no angel! Any spirit who knows me can
vouch for that! But guide, yes.
“My little niephews... or is it nephieces, I
don’t know... are their own spiritual entities, and
we’ve been hanging as a group but not yet; coming
together in greater complexity for lots of lives. It is
not so much a choice of ‘life or guide’, but of
accepting one’s ability to guide, which will follow
in death and life. Actually, every
spirit (except those first-timers who are going to be
disassembled) are guides about what they learn and
remember. Only a few remember they have been alive
before, and fewer still remember they have been dead
before. And those who get the whole pattern can guide
more fully.
“By the way, being a traditional angel is a pain:
wings, halos, expectations, stilted language. I mean,
‘sore afraid.’ Get a death! We
humor them, but they are great at parties. You often are
what you think you are. However, the holier-than-thou
ones have a limited social life... or social death.
Remember, over here when it is thought that party was
deadly, it’s a rave review. Nobody acted like they
were still alive. Spirits who act as if they are still
alive are the ones who act as if boundaries exist--walls,
race, gender, religion, culture, types of fried chicken.
“If so many remember they were alive, how come so
few when alive again remember? Yes, Hindus think about
this, but don’t remember any better. Most people
need hypnosis to get it back. Why? Because they
don’t inherently remember. We... or I should say, you...
have created an understanding of life without that
memory. ‘Remembrances of Lives Past.’ Can’t see the
film images; can’t hear the melody. Words are just
jumbles of markings if we live in a world without films,
orchestras, writing. So, in worlds without general
commerce in such, it’s as if it were not. Go fathom
that.
“And I’m just speaking of that which I know.
And imagine how many other perceptions, realities, and
memories aren’t there because nothing points to them
and says ‘Look, see, remember!’ ‘There is more in Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of’,
etc., etc.” (1/16/2011 - I#183)
“Ok people, get your own phones and call your loved
ones. I’m here about the broad strokes, not the
specific folks. And if you make any wisecracks about
broads...
“So, let’s all take deep breaths. Now,
concentrate on the one we want to know about. Come on,
you can do it. Sense what you need to feel. Don’t
ask about specifics, just seek to have a sense. The
details don’t matter.
“Start by sensing how all is ok. Then listen
closely... ‘not for very much longer.’ CT. Listen
closely--not to your questions, but the whispers you will
hear when you stop focusing on your own needs. Listen. I
mean, listen!
“The answer you need may not relate to the question
you think you need to ask. So, sit and connect. Listen.
Hear that? Let it go. If you hear it but don’t feel
and sense it, you are still in the realm of questions.
Sense, feel, smile. Ok, you don’t need me.
That’s it.
“I am reminded of a painting in the Louvre.
It’s a big landscape of great metaphor, and
nearly every day someone wants to know about a tiny
detail in it, and that’s missing the meaning for the
details. And it’s not a cat anyway, it’s a
monkey, but it’s so small you can’t tell.
It’s a joke.
“Think and feel how much more you’d get from
experiences if you focused more on the big picture and
didn’t monkey around with the details.
‘Why,’ you should be asking, ‘am I wanting
to ask this or that. What difference would the answer
make.’ Most of our questions never lead to answers
that matter... unless it’s one like ‘Is this
cream cheese bad?’ Listeria (a deadly bacteria),
bye-bye and then ‘Hello, I’m your spirit guide.
Guess you won’t be asking that
again for a long while. Want a stale bagel to go with
that. Week old lox?’ ” (2/6/2011 - I#184)
“Just to clarify, everything I’ve ever said is
tentative. Could be recalled... or not. Just a legal
disclaimer TL suggested. I’m not a spirit, but I
play one on message boards. Actually, that’s true.
Huh. I’m not spirit. What? Then this all is a sham?
A sham, a bolster, an ottoman, whatever.
“But what I’m saying is, that if spirit is
understood as the complementary portion of existence with
the physical, then I’m not spirit because I am soooo
beyond that duality. It’s not physical or spiritual,
I’m a... just something else. And so are you and
them... but not him. Wait... yes, him.
“Existence of a thoroughly different nature, which
bleeds over into the inane physical-spiritual
dichotomy. And if push comes to shove, we’d say we
are spirit... but who wants to be defined by being pushed
and shoved, which is so physical. Remember, spirit is the
creation of those who are obsessed with definitions of
physical existence. We, doing whatever it is we do,
don’t think that way. Just as death is the concern
of those obsessed and possessed with
living.”
MCP: “I give-a you-a
an-a example-a. When-a first-a explorers find-a America,
they say-a ‘She no-a Europo.’ And the first
mate, he say-a, ‘What’s-a Europo.’ I say-a
‘Europe’. And he say-a ‘O.’ This she
went on for about 20 minutes-a. By that time-a, the hound
he was-a laughing... f f f f.
“America was not what they found; it was what
Europeans called what wasn’t Europe-o. See, it
starts again-o. This could take awhile-o. Where do I
work? Milano... f f f f f.”
“Thank you, MCP-o. Grazie. Molto.”
(2/13/2011 - I#185)
“Ok, serious... deadly serious. All of the models I
have shared of planes, matrixes, matrices, matri, I try,
CT is trying. ‘Hey, is that an insult?’ I
don’t know, is it? ‘I don’t know.’
“All of those models are really translation tools.
What kind of books did I have the most of? Language
dictionaries. And did any of them contain the essence of
existence for those who spoke that language, no. They
were tools, but the words were simply symbols and
representations for understandings. Just like my
models–ways to convey understandings, but not
inherently true or meaningful. They offered a way of
seeing what can’t be seen. Don’t try to
extrapolate to other systems of symbols. One of the ways
religions go awry is when they try to use spiritual
symbols to do politics and science and rap music.
“So, always remember... no no no no... never forget
that these things are just symbols, and the reality is
larger than any physical symbol set. Ok, hold onto your
hair. There are also spiritual symbol
sets... dare I mention spiritual cymbal sets, no. And the
spiritual symbol sets help the spiritual conceive and
understand what is more universal than spirit. What?!?!
Is she really saying that there are existent existences
other than physical and spiritual. You bet your bippy!
“Primitive religion in the physical world was a form
for understanding physical existence for those newly
arrived from a pre-existing state of being. What?!?! Is
she saying that the physical is only a step on a
continuum, and there were other symbol sets of
understanding before the physical, and there will be
others beyond the spiritual. I am saying that! Now, try
to get your physical and/or spiritual head around that!
“We have always moved on from simplistic singularity
towards universal connection, and every expression of
that progression is its own complexity which is illumined
and understood... which is not the same as standing under
(there’s a difference between understanding and
standing under a leaking toilet). Digression sequence
activated. Begin recall to reality. O.
“Each level of complexity has its own sets of
symbols and understandings. And each senses and makes
comprehensible the sets that pre- and post-exist the
current existence set, but no more. You have an innate
sense, at your level of complexity, of something less
complex and something more complex. You have chaos,
physicality, and spirituality–that’s
your three. But for other levels of complexity, your physicality
was their spirituality, and your spirituality
is others’ chaos. I think I have done
enough damage.” (3/6/2011 - I#186)
“Now meanwhile, chaos is struggling to
become order and order is struggling to
become visionary possibility. Why do I say chaos?
Because all the less inclusive and comprehensive systems
of understanding always appear to be lacking in order and
reason.
“What happens is that the normative places new order
which appears to be more universal, so the old or less
complex system understanding seems to lack cohesion. Yep,
this rational scientific understanding will, from a more
complex perspective, look like chaos. ‘What were
they thinking? Or were they?’
“So we dream spiritually of realities yet to come,
growing out of our best understandings, but those best
understandings grew out of prior best understandings. And
all that Heaven is is an invitation to continue
the process--to convert the speculative into known and
proven and experienced, so the old limited system can be
relegated to chaotic quicksand of the spirit, while new
heavens can emerge as dreaming clouds of possibility. O,
I wax poetic.
“But which would be worse: Having an endless process
of growth that always beckons, or a finite system of
being in which a prize could maybe be won and then the
game be over. Most theologies and spiritualities seem to
promise a point of fulfillment, rather
than a process of fulfillment. I think
this is enough for now.” (3/10/2011 - I#187)
“Chaos, order, vision... and ham on rye and
hold the mayo.
“Chaos is infinite possibility. We impose
order, and then that which doesn’t conform is called
chaos. Try to explain football without reference
to the imposed rules. It’s just chaos. And those
dancing girls, what do they have to do with it. And the
two giant rodents. See.
“Picture a field with the yardage lines exactly
parallel with the midpoint line at 5-yard intervals.
Sounds like the normal football field, yes? Ok, so then
make the mid-field line a wavering squiggle. Why not?
Much better game. ‘He goes for long yardage and only
gets 3. That’s the way the lines break.’ Much
more thoughtful game. Trust me.” (3/13/2011 - I#188)
“Chaos is the pre-stage to our ordering, but a fluid
quality dependent on a present understanding of order.
“Superstition seems chaotic only in the light of
later understandings, but was deemed insightful compared
with the prior levels of understanding. Hey, not walking
under ladders is a great improvement over falling off
roofs because of a lack of ladders.
“Lots of downheavals and upheavals and sideheavals
and in- and out-heavals–the whole Heaval family.
Don’t try to fit the future into the molds of the
past. Just saying.” (3/22/2011 - I#189)
“Qualities of being are manifest and
multiple. And what one considers normal is often balanced
with another shadow side. But don’t read
‘shadow’ as bad, rather as the missing aspects
by which the one expression is made whole. Could be more
than just one other side.
“In every system of being, there are
multiple aspects of the whole; yet usually only one or
two are experienced as normal, regular, ordinary. So,
physical is balanced with spiritual... grrr...
and doggerel... ARF... in this system of being,
and both expressions need the other to be whole. So, too,
in other systems of being. The only whole,
complete system of being in one... ‘is Geritol.’ CT. ‘One A Day’? No... is the whole shebang.
Anything less than the whole is experienced as systems of
multiple dynamics: this and that and that and those.
“Many smaller elements, glimpses, pieces that
don’t seem to fit but are real, a thought that is
not from a physical stimulus nor from a spiritual
encounter--pure genius is always connected beyond just
the usual two. Genius is the connection across
many such dimensions of being within a single
system of being. Being smart is figuring out the
main points of a single dimension of a system, and wisdom
is doing the same across the two main elements, but
genius expands the components but not the system, and
spiritual progress expands the system but not necessarily
the components.
“Your entity finally glimpses the wholeness of your
existence, which allows the window to open on a more
complex reality, but that more complex reality is viewed
simply. And onward, so to speak, forever, until the
complex is seen as the simple unity of All. And in that
moment, there is no separation, no differences, only
connection. And the meaning of other dimensions
dissolves. It’s all one, baby! Just behind the
veil... or over the ridge and the vale.
“A person lives on a hill, so they see more? Not if
they don’t look out. A room is just a room. Being
spiritual doesn’t guarantee squat. So, it’s not
about me being spiritual; it’s about me at this
point in spiritual development. And it’s you and you
and you... but not you. ‘O.’ Stop trying to
bestow special status. Some who look cannot see, and some
who can see will not look. But to look and see, and then
remember... not an honor, but an enhancement.
“Neither is superior. What you think of as physical
was once considered spiritual. O dear,
boundaries and separations! Give them up. Flow, babe,
flow. The confining aspects of the
physical were once perceived like the freeing
appearance of the spiritual. Ok. It might appear
that having money would open doors of experience not
available to the poor. But being rich is not a portal to
getting it all. Just because an aspect seemed to offer
wider views, doesn’t mean it is panoramic. Too many
words. So there!” (4/28/2011 - I#190)
“Ok. You have a room. There’s a door to the
room, and a window. Some people like to live in the room
with the door closed and the blinds shut. Others are ok
with the blinds open but the window shut. Others throw
back the blinds and throw up the sash, and even lean out
to get a fuller view... ‘and a Fuller Brush’... no no no no, CT,
peddle your ware on your own chats... and draw in
draughts of fresh air, while staying in their room. Some
keep the door locked with deadbolts, and we wonder if
that’s to keep others out or keep them in. Some
leave the door ajar... don’t even think about it!
And others open it wide. And some even remove the door to
make it a passageway. Even then, there is nothing to
compel them to leave the room, but some do choose to go
and explore. And of those, some go to sing the praises of
their room, and others keep directions handy to get back
home, and still others find new doors and different rooms
to call home. But simply because there is an out
there out there doesn’t mean one can’t be
in one’s room.
“However, so many fear for what they would do were
the windows open and the door open, that they bar the
door and shutter the window and claim the naked bulb to
be the sun. And if you slip a Chinese menu under the
door... or, dare I say, a PtoP... they freak out and try
to install a new lock and heavier drapes, not knowing
that nothing can force them from their room, but they
can turn their room into a prison cell.
“As Hank said, I do not wish to live
what is not life.
“And so, spiritual notions are very very très
frightening to them because spirit has no regard for
windows, shutters, or doors. And we are only partially
fond of The Doors.” (5/28/2011 -
I#191)
 Page 1 Page 2
|
