“The Observer and the Observed are One” J. Krishnamurti
Who is speaking?
With regard to who is speaking, of course you already know, it is you who are speaking. Not just speaking the words but forming the words, forming the sentences. You have just crossed another threshold in this last year or two whereby you, as the observed have realised that you also are the observer. You have made the connection. Of course, while you are focused completely in waking reality the connection is extremely difficult to make but when you shut out physical reality the connection just re-forms. It is simply that you have rotated your gaze from physical to non-physical. You have just spun the dial. You have changed channels and therefore the information comes and of course for you to believe it, at present, you need to attribute it to another source. Not really believing that you yourself are the knowledgeable source because in waking reality you cannot access knowledge. So you have to go through this specialised ritual of sitting quietly and focusing away from the physical and waiting for the information to be delivered. Now what you are doing is no different to when you are practising mediumship, you simply open to transmission, but in this case you are allowing your, let us say, maternal/paternal or your non-aligned “ernal” to communicate with you. This is like giving guidance to a child in the physical world.
Now, because you are navigating to all intents and purposes 100% in the physical world your enquiries into the non-physical world are necessarily more like probes than structured enquiry. Now all the time you are both the interviewer and the interviewee it is obvious that a certain amount of information will be biased somewhat, sometimes to a marked degree depending on you, the observed’s, beliefs. Because you will find it hard to express an opinion which is diametrically opposite to that of your own. However, we do appear to be educating ourselves, did you notice we said “ourselves” rather than the somewhat benign “you”. We are basically bringing our “selves” into a state of coherence and if all goes well you may find yourself in a position of being able to observe our other lives, or at least, one of them. But again, you will have to take time to focus away from the physical world in order that you, as we said, probe, and probe means obviously looking where you cannot see, and with luck you may find the right channel of another one of our focuses.
We will do what we can to help. As for us, this is quite an interesting experiment. Also, as you found out with your golfing experience, our other “soul” found a new ability which previously he would have considered impossible. Let us hope that you receive the same benefit.
Now, with regard to the episode which unfortunately you did not record. The bodies which are seen by your clairvoyants and to some extent measured or, let us say, ascertained, indicated, by your electrical equipment, and here you are talking about the astral/ etheric body, if you wish. Then as we outlined last night, the body in each case is composed of consciousness. In the same way that your physical body is composed of consciousness. Your physical body has its senses and experiences the reality which surrounds it and of course when you are speaking about the first stage after death you say that the astral body experiences an even more real environment which surrounds it and meets all those who have passed on, who at one stage you may have believed were dead. Your astral body, being composed of consciousness, albeit linked to the physical consciousness, is also able to focus and enjoy its own reality and, like yourself, it can focus in another direction. As “you” focus and receive information, as you are presently doing, and you receive information from those who are deceased, so your astral self, shall we call it, can focus, and does of course, towards you in the physical and it can also focus in other directions.
We will use the terms that you are currently used to, of emotional, mental and causal bodies etc. It is not quite as it seems but for now it is good enough. Now, in each one of these “bodies”, or “frequencies” or “levels of existence”, call them what you will, there is the consciousness. These are not just inanimate electrical fields, not that anything is ever inanimate, everything is alive and everything is connected to many things. It is not just a simple hierarchical system whereby the soul sits at the top, if you wish, “the soul”, and then creates all these bodies in order just to operate the physical body. Each, as it is termed ”body” has a full life, and, explores in just the same way that you do. Just as the observed and the observer are one, as we have come to use in a simplistic way, so of course there will be no argument when one says that the physical, the astral, the emotional, the mental, the causal, and any others you may care to intersperse with, are all one.
You could say that the physical body is the “observed” and all the other bodies are the “observers”. And, of course, they are all co-creators. They are all co-experiencers but that does not stop them multiplying their experiences and taking other probable actions. Now you have been told that although you take a decision to take one road, one path of action, other paths of action are explored in order to see what would have happened. Various scenarios have been proposed as to how this happens. That each time you make a decision another universe is created. This gives rise to infinite parallel universes or multiverse theories and various others. That does seem rather cumbersome, doesn’t it? Wouldn’t it be simpler, and let us use Occam’s razor here, that the simpler explanation would be that your various other “bodies”, who exist, in what you would call a non-local area, and can process information, experience etc. instantaneously and being “part of the action”, cannot straight away project and process and conclude alternative actions.
As you can see if you have, five courses of action, in most cases there are only two and only occasionally would there be a large number, given the speed of communication and also just plain extrapolation of probabilities, you can see that these probabilities are explored, and note taken. Now you may say, why doesn’t every decision turn out to be right? But then you may as well go straight back to the question of why you are inhabiting a reality which is sealed off, in general, from knowledge which is available to those outside that reality. On the other extreme we can say that you can look at your own conclusion that once you know the outcome of everything, there is no point in doing anything.
And so this physical reality is created by you in order to enjoy the game. Once more, you may take a decision that does not work out but have you not learned more from that decision because you have learned what does not work and therefore you are able to conclude, or at least suppose, that another route followed would have worked. But you can only see that, by analysing the reasons why the other decision did not work. So, it is easier to learn from doing the wrong thing than from doing the right thing.
Now we have strayed a little from our explanation of last night but we feel we have added some more pertinent propositions.
So who am I speaking to? Do you have a name that you would like to be called by?
What would you feel would be an acceptable answer because we can be whoever you want it to be or whatever you want it to be?
I, personally, do not think it is important for you to have a name. The only reason for having a name is to be polite. I suppose it would be quite nice in a way to think that you were a totality of our family, families, as we knew them. I will think of a suitable name for you if that is acceptable to you?
We are a reservoir of knowledge and experience. It is not as much a question of who, or what, because knowledge of all is available to those who seek. Therefore endeavouring to envisage a limited form with a certain amount of knowledge and probably with a background of human existence is what the normal enquirer is expecting. But if you are faced with merely an “automated” for want of a better word, source of information that has access to myriad sources of information, how do you give that an identity, apart from the fact that that source, in your terms, seems to be manipulating the instrument. If the consciousness that generally manipulates the instrument is able to place itself in such a position as to have access to a wide range of knowledge then again we are back to the consciousness that cannot even know itself. It can only understand the activity that it is engaged in, in this instance, operating this particular instrument.
Now, previously you have asked, “who is speaking?” and we have replied, “you are speaking” because you are now aware you are connected to the part of you that you would label the observer, the one who is watching on, the one who is guiding and directing and supplying energy, you might say, but that is only supplying of focus, and the focus is energised if you wish in order to create activity, but if you can imagine that this is all in the mind, not a word that is correct, it is all in the imagination of the consciousness, so, you could say, if you wished, it is part of the whole who is speaking because everything you consider to be separate from you is part of the whole and is connected to the whole obviously because it is part of the whole and as such has access to the knowledge that the whole has. Not only the interconnections. It is like finding your way up river, you may be the river that you are currently focusing in, if you worked your way back upstream and you found other rivers coming in, which one would you think you were? Not only that, if you thought I will explore this river and then you found there are more tributaries and then little streams, then rivulets and then eventually maybe we could say spring but then that would lead us too far into the analogy, so let us say you found a little bit of trickle of water from a rounded rock which was collecting rain drops and then we could keep going and eventually what would we come to, we would come to atoms and hydrogen and oxygen and then on as usual to the electrical charges coming into and out of existence but now follow that back the other way and you find yourself part of the river. So, who are you? You are all of them aren’t you? You are all of them but it just depends where you want to focus. You can focus on being the electrical charge, you can focus on being the tributary, you can focus on being the river, which one do you prefer? Because that is what it is about, preference of focus. I take it that you have understood fully what is being said, you create your own reality by your preference of focus. Wherever you find yourself is because you have focused on that. The reason you focused on that is because it has attracted you, you like it, it interests you and as long as it does so your focus will stay there and you will say, “this is me, this is where I live, this is where I belong, this is my home until you find that it is no longer as interesting as it used to be and you will make plans to move on and arrange for your exit in an acceptable manner to the rest of the cast and you will at some stage merely switch your focus to another, which you are already experiencing, of course, but that one is more attractive than your present focus. Now can you understand that? You simply move your focus from one reality to another reality because you wish to do so. No judgement, no blame, and you do it at the appropriate time in general to cause as least pain as possible to those who you love and care for taking into account the inevitability of you having to leave this focus at some stage.
Perhaps you would touch on the question of no time, everything existing all at once. I am going to be giving a talk on the survival of physical consciousness after death but that definitely implies one thing happening after the other. So can you enlighten me with regard to this concept, survival of consciousness after physical death bearing in mind no time?
When you speak to a child you use different representations to that when you speak to an adult. Different experiences have been assimilated at various times during the growth of that person. There are certain levels of understanding. Now, when we speak to those who are caught up in the illusion of time then is it easier to couch your words in a time-based linear format than to infuse those entities with a concept that they cannot relate to, in a process where we lessen the value of the information we wish to impart. So as far as your listeners are concerned, they see the termination of life as a moment in time, the movement, to those who have some understanding, to a new reality to which others before them have already passed. They consider that those who have passed to the new reality still exist in that new reality and because you create the precepts of your reality and so do those who have passed, we put together scenarios to satisfy the desires and the longings of the individuals that now have the ability to be, as they see it, together again. And so the message must be always presented in the manner in which it can be understood and give comfort and not sow confusion. Does that answer your question? When you are sufficiently, and we use time here for your understanding, in the situation where you no longer have a physical body then you will gradually understand the meaning of the “ever present”, I will not say timelessness, the ever present, and at that stage you will…… it is impossible in many respects to outline, apart from lame analogies, how it is to inhabit the timeless world instead of one where you can only see one moment following another.
“Is there someone there trying to speak through David? (Dave) If so we welcome you.”
We are pleased to be here.
Do you have a message that you wish to give us?
There will be messages, not necessarily that we wish to give you, though we wish to be in a position where we can explain to you, the answers to the queries that may arise from time to time. Now, that is not to say, that some of these may not turn out to be quite lengthy, so they will seem as if we are passing knowledge across. Messages is not the right word. Messages are for the mediums and the churches etc. We are here to impart knowledge. We have been working for many years, to be able to speak through David and until now David has not been aware that there are other personalities which comprise his being. But the advent of the one, you have termed David, has opened his mind to the possibility that there may be others.
Presumably, you are a group of consciousnesses speaking.
All selves are a group of consciousnesses. But, what you must realise, is that a consciousness is not a singular unit in terms of being able to exist in any particular reality in a meaningful form. It must group together with others if it wishes to co-create the reality in which it can participate as one of many. So that there is a, what you might call, society of participators, where roles can be played, experiences can be conjured up, challenges can be set, laughter, enjoyment etc.
We refer to Dave as the normal Dave we have always known and David as the well-spoken, seemingly younger aspect that occasionally surfaces. Can you explain please?
The first point we must make is that this may be a difficult subject to put across as we have, obviously, a very interested party here. It may be more difficult to bypass the intense curiosity that is part of this.
We first, as came up earlier, have the nature of time involved. You think you are living one life at a time, whereas it is not too difficult to see that you split your attention between different lives and different times. Although there are no times there are different imagined scenarios, which because of the physical environment, you have just lined up in sequential order and believe that is how things happen, but in truth, they all happen simultaneously. Let us not go into that as it is something that is just beyond our capability to explain in terms that you would understand.
Now, most of those existing on the physical plane are quite happy to just receive information from their senses and in fact get discombobulated, in other words disturbed, when they are confronted with information that does not fit in to the established pattern of events. Events, being all sensory perceptions. So even when this does happen then the walls are set up so that they are not allowed to be breached in future. There are few that actively seek the experience of other than the physical. Most have explored through meditation or taking hallucinogenic drugs. Veils are breached but because when you enter into an entirely different scenario with different laws, different parameters, different frame of reference, it is very difficult to interpret them in terms of the one you habitually inhabit. In other words, if a scene is all in red it is very difficult to describe the same scene only using blue. A very simple analogy. But for those whose belief system enables them to have a conviction of the possibility of awareness of other lives they have been leading then, especially mediums who are aware that they can receive sensory perceptions of all sorts from minds other than their own and of course they allow the use of the physical instrument by those minds, you can see you (they) are already well on the way to having one of the personalities of the higher consciousness able to use it’s particular mind, shall we say, to blend with the mind of another instrument which is part of the same consciousness. In other words, both personalities are productions of the same consciousness.
So let us say a producer is producing two plays at once. There will be certain things, because of the techniques, skills, portrayals, points of knowledge, opinions favoured by the producer, that they cannot help but somehow showing up as a signature in whichever film they produce. Much as an artist, while even trying to hide his normal technique can often be picked up by somebody who is very skilled in the techniques of various artists and can differentiate between one and the other.
Same thing is happening here, much as a parent and a child, that the parent here is saying “well this creation, I’m letting it run but it’s showing a lot of enquiry here”. So, just as you would a child, you would introduce it to something which it has obviously been thinking about and you say “well here it is, now let’s see what you do with this”. Because if a child is showing a particular aptitude in one area, you may say, well let’s take it to music lessons and we will see how it goes. Well the same is happening here. One instrument is following a particular line of enquiry and is turning this over and over and over, so you might say “I’ve got this one going over here. Let us take this particular form of expression and blend it”. Much like a cook making a different flavour. Instead of producing exactly the same recipe they just try a different recipe. And what happens here? The instrument’s knowledge is expanded, but of course so is the higher consciousness’ knowledge expanded. Because it has been used to, it always has kept its various expressions separate. And as much as it knows it has to keep each expression separate there are times when, simply because each one is a reflection of its own that it can’t help but at certain times reach comparisons and this is what we don’t know. We don’t know whether the higher consciousness does or is able to make comparisons between all its lives. One can only assume that it can. That makes sense doesn’t it? But it would keep each one separate so as not to confuse each individual instrument. That does not mean that you cannot take an expression of one instrument and not blend it with another and in terms of consciousness that is not too difficult. It is just a question of operating an instrument in a different fashion. If we take the example of programmes then it is quite easy. One has a certain programme, as you see now, speaks in one way, and it is no different to inserting that programme in the other instrument and that then produces exactly the same expression.
So this is what is happening in this case. Of course a certain amount of confusion arises in the instrument, because in much the same way as the brain lights up, “where has this suddenly come from”? Think back to your first question, free will, “well this isn’t my free will, so whose free will is it”? If it is pleasurable then one accepts it as a boon but if it wasn’t pleasurable you would be most discomforted. In this case because the instrument was actively looking for said experience or open to the experience and formulating the theory, that this was, is indeed possible. Being open to the underlying truth of several lives being lived at once and as we said before, indeed as the instrument has said before, the experience was given to validate the concept.
It is up to the instrument now, because the instrument and the consciousness are one, to decide whether it is happy to accept, on a temporary or a permanent basis, the new expressions that have been provided. But, it needs to be in close harmony with, let us say, the controlling consciousness who, because of our previous discussion, you would have to say, holds the ultimate sway. The term, right to dispensation as to “yes, OK this can go on” because it may or may not be in the original plan for that particular instrument. It may be an amusing diversion or it may be something which is “well at this stage, why not? Let it carry on”. It could well be an alternative avenue of exploration much like the hybridisation of plants. Let us see what happens. Now, if you recall, if we are going to allow the vehicle to drive itself and see how well you programmed it, well why not this? No difference. It is another form of creativity and see the results of your creation. It may also be that you’re merely devising a whole new instrument to utilise in, what you would term, another life experimentation, because if you think about the hybridisation of the flowers then you have to put two together, then produce the seed to see whether the seed produces the new flower. This is the same sort of thing. Again, this is all open to just which belief or opinion you wish to adopt as to the process in motion. So, we would leave it with…. and because I am interested aren’t I so it stopped coming and I basically think that its left to the instrument that the instrument knows that really it is under the, it’s up to the part of it really outside of its control that will ultimately determine what is experienced.
Yes, your feeling of being “semi-detached”.
The first intimations that you are more than what you previously thought. You have realised that you were, let us say, part of something, hence the feeling of “semi” detached but not fully detached because, through a glass darkly, you were beginning to sense the connection to your “higher self” or the larger aspect of who you are. Gradually that has built up and you no longer are using that term of semi-detached. And as we are speaking now, it is you who are speaking now or I that is speaking now or me that is speaking now because all are one and the same. And you, the instrument, we might say, is now seeing the world and yourself more and more from the position of the higher self.
It is now getting very difficult to explain because of the use of the language of I’s and you’s and self’s because as there is no differentiation we must find an encompassing term which will not constantly throw up references which confuse as to where perception and motivation arise. So let us say that we will use the term “ego” and describe it in the way that the higher self or the consciousness that is you, that directs operation, is the “ego” sense of the ultimate director. But the instrument also is a part of the same ego sense that carries out the idea conceived by the director.
A reasonable analogy would be of you having an idea and then putting it into operation. In other words “I’ll build this” and then building that. So you could say that the higher consciousness has the idea, has the intention and then gives itself the permission to carry out that idea. Can you understand this? It is all one, you are doing the whole thing, you think you have the free will but it is you all along, from start to finish. It is only that we feel that the doer is also the decision maker and you are but not in the way that you think. Your expanded self is the decision maker, your non-expanded self, your focused self is the doer. That is a better description.
The expanded thinker, rationaliser, weighing up consequences, a chooser of probabilities, all emanates from the total of yourself. But once you decide on exactly what your next actions are going to be that focus comes in, narrows right down and then executes the physical motion. So you can rest assured that you do have free will, you simply have to have trust in that there is a part of you that knows exactly what it is doing and even though you appear to make a mistake you could look upon this as having the intention to execute a particular action in a certain fashion but while doing so become momentarily distracted or less mindful of the task in hand and not executing it in the envisaged manner. Is that clear?
Let us take an analogy with which you are familiar. You intend to hit a certain golf shot, you go through you usual pre shot routine, but you let your attention be momentarily diverted by noticing a twig on the ground or whatever, but your mindfulness just varies that fraction even though you don’t realise and you don’t consider it makes any difference whatsoever and yet a poor shot results. You had every intention and were doing all the right things as you always do to execute that shot in the desired manner and yet simply by an unseen microsecond of inattention the action was not carried out in its normal programmed manner. You might just say something as if there, in the vast number of intramuscular connections that have to be made to execute a golf swing, there was a slight interruption, any analogy you wish here, in the electro connectivity, a bit of atmospheric disturbance shall we say? Which caused one connection not to fire and therefore threw the whole sequence fractionally out, the consequences of which were magnified many times over because of the distance between the muscles and the head of the club. Can you understand that? Yes. Then you can apply this to everything, so that you must be aware that your consciousness, which is you, is not infallible and is using this physical playground to experience and to enjoy and to experiment.
Can I just mention an observation I have made, when David is himself and talking his arms are moving about all over the place and when you are talking his hands do not move at all.
I don’t know when to say I here. (Sounds like Dave speaking rapidly.) That’s interesting because it came out as me straight away, didn’t it? It did. I did notice that when I stopped and spoke to you I waved my arms about (obviously out of trance) I was aware of that then. And when you said… I knew what you were going to say when you said about there is something you noticed. I could feel my hands here, my nails were digging into one of my fingers, the thumb’s clasped between the other thumb and finger and I was aware that everything was absolutely dead still except my lips. Of course Louise was like that, nothing moves does it? So it is obvious I am able to go in and out of trance at will almost, it is a conscious trance. This is all stemming from being the observer and the observed. You see this is another thing I am realising that I can say let’s try this and then the stillness comes over. “I” start to speak and when the speech stops then, let’s put it this way, “me” returns. Then when the next question comes “I” come back. “I” and “me” are both part of the same thing, except that “I” seems to know a lot more than “me”.
I am not convinced of that but…
Well where’s the stuff coming from? You’re not convinced of it but I am in here listening to what’s coming out, it is like listening to Ludwig and I am thinking yes, hum, because I seem to be able to, I won’t say think, but I can listen and absorb and I don’t formulate questions but it is as if it’s fitting nicely in to understanding. It is slotting in, without raising red flags. So you think, well that’s quite, see that’s me again isn’t it? That’s quite a reasonable explanation I can live with that. And as I said with that one there’s concepts I never thought of before. You seem to think that I can just, as your observation, why does my whole body expression change?
Yes, that is the big thing.
Because you are finding it hard to accept there’s “little me” and “big me”.
I am accepting there is a “little you” and a “big you”. As I say there is a difference in the bearing of the vehicle.
I don’t really want to call it vehicle any more, I am just realising that…
The bearing of “me”.
Yes, the body I could say as the instrument, but the person talking is all part of it except that it is a question of focus again.
Trance personality returns. When you stand back and you observe, then to use your favourite phrase, you do not get caught up in the drama but when you walk down to the front of the theatre and up onto the stage and the lights are on you and you are surrounded by the rest of the cast and the conversation is going on and you find yourself a part of the conversation, then how do you expect to view the scene as a whole when you are part of the scene?
That is as good a description as you can get with the higher consciousness and its focused point of consciousness. The part that you find difficult to understand is that both can exist at the same time, the observer and the observed co-exist at all times.
And are in fact one.
Depends on where you want to be, you can be on the stage or you can be in the back of the audience. Either one is party to all the sights, sounds, emotions, everything. Do you understand?
But yet in the focus part all those sensory perceptions are enhanced, felt more, more immediate, more important, whereas to the observer they are items of interest. They are something to be viewed instead of experienced. Something to be assessed and we can only say related to, rather than, the best word is, owned. You will save your experiences, that effectively they were your experiences, you own those experiences. Whereas the observer can say just that, I observed this experience, I understand, I can understand the feeling but the feeling does not, has not…
It’s like somebody watching the play. Somebody watching the play knows that it is a play and by knowing that it is a play you haven’t got that emotion and also the observer can see the whole picture whereas the person who is acting in the front of the play cannot see what is going on behind or to the side whereas the observer can see the whole thing, above below and even in front.
It is part of the survival of consciousness that you will be all that you ever were or that you are, however you wish to look at it. You will lose nothing but it will no longer have the importance to you that it does at the present and yet the things that you wish to have importance to you will still have importance to you. Now this may seem as if it is a form of assurance that you will not lose your connections to those you love but also remember that many in spirit, and you have read of enough of these returnees or ghosts as you may call them, to know that some have attachments to material objects. So it is no different, that to which you are emotionally attached will continue until you no longer wish to be emotionally attached and that is the same at this level as at any other level.
If you love somebody here when you move over you will love somebody there, but again just the same as here it may last, it may not last, the same applies. You can have a short relationship here or a very long relationship here and the same applies no matter which dimension of mind you find yourself inhabiting. So you can accept that if you continually think of somebody who has passed on then you know the bond exists and they will be there to greet you and your paths may continue to follow the same route or in a later time they may diverge but that is part of the ongoing life. As long as you feel well disposed toward another then you will continue to enjoy each other’s company.
Dave back. Where did that all start?
It came from the observer and the observed and the play
And we just moved into using that……It came from the free will to start with didn’t it?
Right at the very beginning it came from the free will then moved off it.
It is basically understanding that the individual is all one with itself. It’s just a question of what position it thinks it’s operating from and whether you can have enough discipline to, and this is about raising your vibration I suppose, where you have enough discipline to be able to move yourself into the position of observer and try to hold your attention in that position and that is extremely difficult.
Yes it is because it’s not what we are meant to be doing at the moment.
I don’t think it is so much what we are meant to be doing, it’s a question of the focus. As soon as you switch the focus back, I think this is why I keep my eyes shut all the time because if I open my eyes I’m here. If I’m keeping everything, without knowing it, absolutely still and eyes shut then I can be in the higher consciousness because I’m not aware, other than like in a pre-sleep state, of any focus in the physical and therefore the thoughts can just be spoken directly from the higher consciousness.
Basically that’s trance.
Earlier we, David and I, were talking about the interaction between the mind and the brain, how responsibilities are shared, or are they? Is it the mind that is in complete control?
Now, you presently use lots of labour saving devices, which did not exist in prior ages, and yet now, of course, you are free to spend much more time in other activities, whereas previously you were, and as some are still, in various parts of the world, fully engaged upon obtaining enough food and shelter to sustain themselves through the seasons. You have now been able to negate an awful lot of requirements through labour saving devices, shelter, mass production of food, and so on, and so on.
Now, you are your consciousness, your mind, your brain are all engaged, we are not saying there is three, from the point of your understanding. All are engaged on constantly making life easier. Yes? So once more if you were creating a physical body and you are improving it from generation to generation then why not also make that body a labour saving device, in this case a control saving device. Which is why, it is often speculated, that the human being is little more than a robot, or a puppet, being controlled by a non-physical mind. But as we were talking with you in the car, we say we because there is a very fine division between David and ourselves.
Now, you will program your instrument to do all the things that you really do not need to get involved with any more. You wish to be able to turn your attention to more interesting things. So gradually the operation of the body/brain is being improved. You used to have, and to a certain extent still do, many people, the vast majority, who take on one task at a time. Now you have invented the term “multi-tasking”. So what are you doing? You are shifting your focus quickly over several areas but you manage to keep all the balls in the air, all the plates spinning as a matter of course. You understand? Which gives you satisfaction in that you get a lot more knowledge, a lot more experience through handling a far wider range of activities than your parents were able to do. You have done this using more, labour saving devices. Quicker information transmission, quicker answering. If you had to wait for a letter and write a letter back, it could take you weeks to come to a decision or an agreement. Now, often this is done in seconds. How much more experience have you gained? Yes?
So would you say, from the point of view of organising a system, there is more interest in coming to this system now than there was, say, 500 years ago? What you can also say, “Is this the answer as to why the population is increasing so rapidly”? Because it is an attractive place, or shall we say, a more attractive place to enjoy, gain experience, learn, whatever phrases you wish to put upon the desire of consciousness to come with their peers to experience a certain period of activity in a dense physical plane. We are throwing in many connections for you to think about. Everything is connected, not just the consciousness but all the events and objects and progressions. As you care to sit and see the lateral connections then normal, you might say, human desires will be seen as the planners and instigators of what is happening. And of course you must substitute that for consciousness or rather the other way round.
How does the brain/mind fit in with what you have just said?
A labour saving device. The brain is a labour saving device, and as we said, many years ago it was programmed to do one task, now it is programmed to do many tasks, so giving the mind…… we have just explained how so many more activities, experiences, learning can be derived from one sojourn in the physical now, as against what could be experienced, say, 100 years ago. A lot of this is due to improving the labour saving device of the brain. Now you have the ability, through other labour saving devices, through other information transitions (transmissions?), through aeroplanes, telephones, cars, the ability to be in several places within several hours whereas previously it may have taken several days to get to one place. So, can you see that the brain is a part of these constant improvements. Yes?
That does not mean that the brain is conscious in the way that you conceive it. It is still an instrument just like the physical body, which it is part of. One tends to perfectly accept the fact that the physical body is referred to as an instrument or a vehicle and yet wants to think of the brain and the mind as somehow separate whereas there is a constant feedback loop between the two. The brain is indeed a collection of consciousness…..all the time you believe that the physical body is, what you would term “a solid reality”, it is difficult for this subject to be explained. If you can take the physical body as merely being a collection of, what you might term, electromagnetic energy which, when you go further, is conscious, although you cannot see it, and understand that what you term “the mind” is composed of exactly the same substance, then it is no different to certain of your consciousness groups having the designated functions of liver, heart, leg, toe, eye, Yes? and others having the function of controller, director, Yes?. One is a mental function another one is a physical function. One is the engine room one is the bridge. And yet they are connected, and part of the whole. It would be easier for you to understand this if you take away the view that the body is solid, is physical and the mind is non-physical. As soon as you realise that all is non-physical, you merely are using the created senses to give you the impression of physicality. Look at it this way; try to step outside, look at the body as totally invisible and just a set of moving waves, and then look around for where the mind is and likewise look at that as a set of moving waves enmeshed with the other set of moving waves. You will realise that all is consciousness. Can you see that?
Try to visualise that in your mind and then try to separate them. And for what purpose?
You must not try to see the body as one aspect and the mind as a separate aspect. They are one and the same.
I would like to ask you about free will please.
Can you frame that question a little more specifically?
I wasn’t being specific because I really wanted to get your thoughts on whether there actually is any free will or whether everything is decided before we come here right down to the last little bit. So really it is a question of how much free will do we really have?
So, let us draw a comparison once more between parent and child as we did last night. Knowing that you are both part of the same thing, in which case as the parent and child are locked together for the, you may as well say, lifetime, but obviously in the formative years until the child leaves home, then the parent has a very strong influence upon the decisions as to the action taken by the child. Would you agree? Yes. So, what did we say last night about how the consciousness who resides in the non-physical and has put a part of its consciousness in the physical but without access to the knowledge of anything outside the physical. Now, the child, in many respects that does not have the knowledge with which to argue, still accepts the dictate of the parent. So, you can immediately use your mind to see how that the, what you would call, higher self has a very strong influence over the part of it that you term lower self. Would you agree? So, shall we say free will is partial, which is why I asked about the framework in which you posed the question. Free will is free will up to a point. Now, free will, you only have free will within the constraints of the societal rules in which you live. Yes, you can do something but would that be unacceptable to those with which you wish to keep a harmonious relationship. Would you agree? So your free will is circumscribed, in much the same way the free will of a child is circumscribed, from a young age it’s severely circumscribed and as they reach the age of reason and the age where they can be trusted it is loosened and loosened into where when they leave home they are only… their free will is limited by what they wish to believe they wish to do and also by their feelings as to what their parents, relatives, friends will think of their actions. Can you see what I am getting at? So, free will is free will up to the point where you find that the costs outweigh the benefits.
We will move onto the next part having established that free will is subject to all your self-imposed constraints and also there is a restraint put upon it by your total self. Now let us draw another analogy whereby when the lower self is put under hypnosis it will agree to things that it would agree to generally in the fully awake state but it will not agree with things that it would never agree to in the awake state. So, once more we move to the higher consciousness, for want of a better word, and we say, ”that the higher consciousness is responsible for forming the physical and using that instrument for its own, what you would call purposes and influences the same. Again, when we go back to last night’s discussion with regard to the delay in conscious decision from when the brain has already the action into motion, in other words, the action comes before the decision, which most people would think is impossible, but it is totally evidential. We may say,” the machines do not lie.” Therefore, to any reasonable person the instruction has already been delivered to the brain from we know not where, so we have to posit that there is an extra physical entity which is outside time and has made the decision as to what to do. So, would you say then that the lower self has free will in that case? Because its decision was being taken for it. It thinks it has made a decision. In which case we have to then follow the logic through, the decision has been made, the brain goes into action and yet, the lower self then thinks it has made that decision. So, where has the thought come from? You must take this one stage further and think OK you might say, “the brain has lit up” but does that mean that the thought to take the decision has been put in? So, then you would say, “who has taken the decision and before you know where you are, you could say, “well actually there isn’t any free will.”
Yes. Because, what about, what we call for want of a better word, higher self, has that got any free will?
Well we are back to the turtles aren’t we? Now at the moment we only know when we think that what is being spoken at the moment should be coming through, or one would only think it must be coming through the higher consciousness of the individual, what would that consciousness have to say about this. One can only say, that as far as that higher consciousness is concerned it is still influenced by its own, you may say, prior conditioning. We were getting some realms of conjecture here because it is not prior conditioning as such, it is knowledge of, you might say, the illusory nature of existence any way. In reality it is doing what it wants to do, but, of course, that can be influenced by suggestion, by the arousal of desire, the arousal of curiosity from communications with other, what you would term, higher consciousness. Before we go into the realms of one consciousness, one mind and the aspects of god. It makes more reasonable sense that whatever the ocean of consciousness is, there arises hot spots, cold spots, waves, different temperatures, etc. different ”locations”, different states of being and that will give rise to different opinions, different views and therefore different courses of action and so there will be an influence on, for purposes of this discussion, upon the higher consciousness. But, again, you can still argue that having taken the decision at the bottom level, the lower self, then you can say, “ah, but I don’t really like that, I think I’ll change my decision.” But we are back to the chicken and egg, did the brain light up at that point and therefore signify that came from the higher self. Now if taken to what would seem to be a logical conclusion, we go back to the parent and child and at times you give the child free rein to see what it will do, how it works it out for itself, because you wish to see what the personality of the child is like, and its creativity etc. Much the same applies to the, what you might call in parlance, the brain child of the consciousness i.e. the instrument. As we said before you sit back and you let it drive itself and you see just how good a programmer you have been and how good a teacher you have been. I think we have covered your question, but again there is no just yes or no.
So where does this leave free will? If you assume once more that free will comes from your higher consciousness….the human being seems to think that free will exists at the physical level and yet we can go back to the brain experiments which show that by all logic and reasoning that the brain is being instructed to transmit to the senses that which is desired by the instructor even though the instrument decides [thinks] that they are making the decision.
So following the line of cause and effect backwards, “what caused the brain to light up?” Something knew, something knew even though ostensibly to those in the physical the target picture had not yet even been chosen [by the computer]. We can go further from the half second delay to the experiments where the whole sequence was brought forward into consciousness several days before the sequence was run. Almost as if to say “work that one out”.
Once you can accept, albeit reluctantly, the idea that free will is an attribute of your higher consciousness you have to trust in the driver of your vehicle. Let us use the concept of a dual-controlled vehicle. The instructor, who has the main controls, tells you “your controls are now working, you drive”. You start to drive and you think that you have all the control but you are unaware that the instructor decides, say, to turn right and because his wheel is connected to your wheel, the movement starts, the light comes on in the brain and you think “I’ll turn right here”.
There is a faint impression of the car starting to slow and you think “I’ll brake”. In other words, the law of cause and effect is operating but you are not aware of the cause, you think you are the cause. But what has happened is, the cause comes from another source, you feel the effects and you then translate that effect into your impression of cause.
Do you understand? I hope that we are making this relatively simple.
To summarise. Free will does exist but in your higher mind or higher consciousness, the total you. It is indeed, your free will. But only if you can understand that you are your higher consciousness and not the instrument. It is to understand that what you call “self” is your consciousness, your higher self. If you can take on board that what you are looking at, what you are hearing, everything you think you perceive, is being perceived by what you would call your “your out of body self”. Now imagine your out of body self, which you know by now, can see and hear and record, transmits to the instrument, the brain, for later reiteration.
Once you can understand that and say to yourself “I am that out of body self and is that out of body self my higher consciousness? Then it must have all the faculties that I think the physical has.”
“Therefore it activates the brain and it activates what we consider to be our visual and hearing faculties”. It would be like you using a megaphone or a loudspeaker, speaking to a microphone in one room with the loud speaker being in another. Is that a good parallel for you? So your out of body self, your higher self, has the microphone and the physical instrument has the loudspeaker. In other words the physical instrument is a pass through mechanism for the observations, actions, all the attributes of the senses. But this is all being sensed by the higher self which resides in the area of no time. It obviously has enough intelligence to ensure that what passes through the instrument is compounded into a structure which fits with the belief in linear time. Is that clear?
So we’ve hopefully explained how clairvoyance/remote viewing can see the present, the past and the future because all arise from a world of no time in which all consciousness exists.
Seth said:- “Listen to me now and in so doing listen to yourselves. You come through as I come through. You are not non-beings in a god stream, you speak and the god listens. You are the god that listens. From you that god, that ”all that is”, learns what is happening in your corner of reality. You send messages backward through the fabric of time and space which is also, in your terms now, the fabric of that god’s being as again the smallest cell in your finger or toe sends messages to you and you, even if unconsciously, make adjustments in response. So in those terms and using that analogy do you send messages to that god as to what is happening in your corner of the universe and that god makes adjustments accordingly”. Would you comment please.
The terminology used in that paragraph is not one that I would particularly use, when I say I, I mean whatever intensity is coming through at the moment. Everything is connected as we said earlier. Now, because everything is connected then everything will have different focuses, although connected, and as an intensity of feeling is felt then the focus will move to where they feel that intensity is beckoning, is of interest and if it is they will add their intensity to it. Of course, what we are effectively saying is a message has been sent, has been received, the focus has turned and therefore a message is then sent back. Because if it is of interest the message will be sent back and even if it is not of interest it will just turn away. That means the intensity goes up fractionally and then fades away again. Now, when we use the word god one can say that is the total consciousness that is in that particular area of focus at any one time. Any consciousness that is focused within that particular event or object or whatever is learning, is experiencing, feeling what is going on in that event. So, messages are being sent backwards and forwards and each consciousness is learning, experiencing, feeling at the same time. Does that answer your question? Or do you need further elucidation?
Seth said:- “Man did not have to learn by trial and error what plants were beneficial to eat and what herbs were good for healing. The “knower” in him knew that and he acted on the information spontaneously. The knower is always present but the part of your culture that is built upon the notion that no such inner knowledge exists, and those foolish ideas of rational thought as the only provider of answers, often limit your use, your own use of inner abilities. You will end up with, if all goes well, a new kind of illuminated consciousness, an intellect that realises that the source of its own light is not itself but comes from the spontaneous power that provides the fuel for its thoughts”.
We are talking total interconnectedness. Every consciousness is part of the whole. All knowledge is available to all consciousness. Each gestalt of consciousness is quite able to speak, to link, with the other gestalt of consciousness that happens to be the poisonous herb and it can understand that it would be detrimental to the physical instrument but you must realise that we are in the business of uncertainty and excitement. You can add to that, “experiment”. You must also accept that it is a co-created reality, a co-created play. The intensity of feeling is to ingest the poisonous herb, for what reason? because it is part of the play, that is the decision that is taken. The human species has developed this belief that the human is there to survive from birth to some kind of averaged death of the particular instrument at some point in time. And yet this concept is held even though the same groups of consciousness set about killing each other at a very early time (age?). They do not say “we have all got to live till 70”. They are busily killing each other in their teens and twenties, en masse. And why? Because of the experience, the excitement and the uncertainty. The experimentation of war and battle, games, winning and losing, all the things that are not available when you are aware of every possibility. So of course the knowledge is available but the whole point of visiting the physical plane is to get away from that situation. If we all knew (everything) we would be back over the other side and there would be no earth or universe.
Everything is a construct. Everything is a construct of consciousness, consciousness in motion.
We spoke earlier about the imagination of the human species, it is the imagination of consciousness, imagination focused. Focusing on an idea can lead to intense desire to experience same and generates the will to manifest. Belief and will are sides of the same coin.
I have another question, freewill, do we have freewill on the earth plane or is freewill on a different level altogether?
Freewill is an inviolable, unassailable, inherent quality of every single, we use the word, unit of consciousness, or thing that has consciousness, whichever definition you care to entertain. Now, it is only because you identify yourself as a separate body that you consider that you as this separate body have a freewill that is constrained. Now, let us go back to the fact, and we will call it the fact that your physical reality is the manifestation of a fantastically intricate, consensus agreement between an unimaginable host of consciousnesses which are focusing upon creating and participating through their thoughts the manifestation of your physical reality. All of those consciousnesses are exercising their freewill now, through agreement but, of course, they agree in much the same way as you agree to pay your property taxes in return for your roads, schools, etc. You agree to your laws, and say you must only drive on the roads and not on the pavements and so you can think your way through many of these. Now, would you say that you have no freewill in that matter? You have given away, we will rephrase that, you have agreed to certain disciplines of behaviour because it actually suits you and you actually wish to have that. Now, that is not constraining your freewill that is an expression of your freewill. At any moment in time you can if you wish step up from where you are, walk out the door and never return. But other elements of your freewill say to you that it is comfortable here, I don’t want to lose all this I worked for and where would I go? So, are you exercising your freewill?
Yes, but then has that been agreed by multiple others?
Just rewind the disc and listen to what was said a few moments ago. Nothing that you experience happens without your prior agreement. You have agreed to the smallest, the largest, the most enjoyable, the most unenjoyable of your experiences.
Therefore, it would seem to me that freewill is not on the earth plane, it is where the agreements are being made.
Are you on the earth plane?
I suppose my higher consciousness is not, it is just a physical body experiencing the earth plane. But that’s what I am really talking about. Has the physical body got freewill? It seems to me the answer to that is no.
If you rewind the disc you will then, first of all consider, what exactly is the physical body other than a perception, other than a thought form agreed in manifestation by all the consciousnesses that are involved in participating and being a part of that thought form, the pattern has to be fleshed out in whatever terms you wish to think of. As we spoke of before, they can be from the most dense to the most clear visible reality to just being a product of the imagination in the mind’s eye that doesn’t actually even have a thought form. For example, imagine, we are digressing but, imagine how the thought arose for a motor car, one had a thought that riding horses is slow, uncomfortable, dangerous and wouldn’t it be nice if we could just really sit in comfortably and quiet whatever, and just sail along through the air at high speed until we get to where we want to go, so that was the wish, shall we say. But as thoughts were applied to the wish, the thoughts gradually changed the intelligence, the associations were thought about and carriages appeared, pulled by the horses and so on and so on until you get to where you are today. Then only do you not have to ride horses but you get in jet planes. Thoughts not only exist, of course, but they mutate and change and grow, much in the same way as you grow, thoughts grow. We hope we have given you food for thought.