Live from the Afterlife

here is the text of this conversation: “Ok, let's talk combining into more complex entities. Does that mean your spiritual entity connects with other entities? How physical! Think about it in more sharing terms. All that you are spiritually is open and available to the other elements of the greater complexity, not individually but collectively. It's not like a frat mixer, it's like an anthology. And the identity of the new entity is only real within itself. So the elements can sense and know the totality of the other elements but only within the reality of the greater complexity. If any entity were to step outside… and I don't mean that literally… they would cease to have connection to all that. “I give you a flawed analogy—flawed not in being wrong, but in being incomplete. A group of people decide to dine. Each person decides on their own. They arrive at this little ristorante on a side street in Firenze. Si si. And they find themselves at a big shared table with a common meal and magic happens. Communications cross languages, lives mingle. There develops a common and familiar story. The new unit has its own identity. But if anyone were to step outside or even go to the WC, the new entity would no longer be and while they might remember being there they would no longer be part of that new whole. The new combination exists as meaningful only within itself and as others observe it, but not as qualities that can be separated. “The model I have used is of molecules but that is both too simple and wrong. Too physical. It is the knowing connection of being, not the being itself! Unpack that.”

here it the text of this conversation: “And now, a treat. Eri will pretend to be Rachel. “Hi, folks at home. This just in and I don't know what to make of it. I think I understand but then I get to a point where the best I can do is just shake my head. So here goes: “It seems that we all are locked in finite existence. I know I am and assume you are, too. What I have been told is that of course the physical realm is finite but hold on to your hats… the spiritual realm is, too. But there's more. Only at this complexity and those simpler. We can't say for sure about more complex levels. So this is what we have obtained from reliable sources of more complexity. I have the transcript and I will try to read it but I have been told it has been dumbed down for me. They really know me! I took three weekends how to use a paddle. Susan was screaming at me ‘Like a spoon, not like a knife.' I finally got it and let's see if you get this. “Can we have the graphic. Of course, the graphic is in 3D. Height, width, time, and we will see how much depth there is. Could get to 4D but I have my doubts. Ok. Here goes. The concept of the infinite is unable to be understood completely by finite beings. So, they create concepts like Creation and God--things which transcend finitude. But if you and I as mere finite beings try to fully understand infinity, we are like Buzz Lightyear: ‘To infinity and beyond!' We even make infinity finite. “So, the report continues with some redactions. ‘In the beginning'… then something redacted… ‘and it was good.' And then in a footnote: ‘There was no beginning.' I think that ‘in the beginning' was part of the dumbing down. “So, here's what I take away from this. I and you cannot perceive infinity because we are locked in finite existence and understanding at this level of development. And I am guessing this means that at the most differentiated level of being finite means just one. We are now where we can talk about billions of stars and even trillions in debt. But the distance from one to trillions is just a start on the journey of infinity. Stay with me here. If this is true, and our next guest will tell you why it probably is, then at some level of complexity greater than one and less than infinite, we begin to get glimpses or cracks through our finite understanding. I'm not good at math so I'll leave that to others but the question I have: Are we now at one of those glimpse moments or are we just at a level that is cracked? Stay with me and I will come back after the break with our guest who is an infinite spirit and you will hear me ask them if they can stay for a few more questions and they'll tell us they've got all the time in existence. Lawrence, we may run over. Watch this non-defined entity existence. “You take something for your joints and you take something for your mind, but what about your spirit? And so it goes. “I hope you can dig out the pith in there. [Thank you, Rachel!!] You bet. Anytime.”

This conversation is based on five questions which Rikkity had posed to us so we could prepare: What is the essence of existence.? Does existence have comparative states? Does complexity imply better? What if all existence is combined but there's one piece missing, or one piece left over? The Jigsaw analogy. How does an entity progress in light of the answers to the foregoing questions? and the text of the conversation: “Yes, I know we are attempting the daring, trying to do pith while Merc is on the rampage. I saw him leaving town.  “Ok. Have you pondered? [E: You might call it that] [R: Well, my mind meandered a bit – is that good enough?] [E: I tried I did real well for a few minutes lol] Have you printed out the questions? [twice! Three time] Show me. I just wanted to refresh my mind, ha. What mind. Let's get started.  “What is the essence of existence? Anyone. Buehler. [E: connections] Connections to what? This is going to be an idio-socratic model. [R: a long time ago you said the essence was information] I did! I did? But information about what? Ha. [E: meaning? ] No. [E: Facebook?] No no. Vladimir. They say Facebook, haha. [E: I thought of information, also meaning. Meaningful, enhancing connections.] Meaningful connections of what? [R: It's going to be a long afternoon, isn't it.] It is [E: Of spirit] Spirit is an expression. [E: energy?] Energy is an expression. [R: Hot fudge?] Don't I wish.  “Ok, the essence of existence is potential. There are an infinite number of possibilities and also an infinite number of constructive connections of those possibilities. But it is the potential. The information is about what to do with that potential. And meaningful info is about what to do with that potential that leads to more potential. If possibility is limited, then the info is limited. Remember your physical AND spiritual being are just singular examples among an infinitude of potential existences. It's not all about you! Ok, onward.  “Comparative states. [R: Does existence have comparative states? E: My thought was no, not unless they're subjective.] ‘Or unless they're West Virginia.' CT! [E: There are less enhancing, less self-sustaining possibilities.] Come on. [E: But that's largely subjective except the way they affect those around them.] Really? This is a trick question because the answer is yes and no. No, basically because all existence flows holistically from the same potential, so you can't say that is more real than that. But yes, as you said, expressions of potential are comparative not based on complexity but rather on enhanceability. And the simplest entity and the whole of All are measured by its enhancement of possibility. Next.  [R: “Does complexity imply better?] I just answered that. I anticipated. “[R: OK now - What if all existence is combined but there's one piece missing or one piece left over? Jigsaw analogy. [E: Do you want to answer that? R: I do! Can't happen, it wouldn't be true to its definition. So if there's one piece leftover or one piece missing it means the construct has not been totally achieved. E: It's not all combined by definition.] Righto old chap. Which is one of the struggles at every level of complexity. Come together into a new entity and if there is some aspect missing or some aspect not fitting into the realization of the fullest potential, and existence strives to be self-correcting. At each level of complexity the entities are either whole and complete or they do not become more complex. And the process at the first connection of totally separate entities and the ultimate connecting of All That Is abides to this. All That Is must be all–no holes and no leftovers. And to get to that grand unity, all elements of it must also be thus. O boy, I used ‘thus'! CT told me I would never use thus, and I said ‘Thou bitest thine tongue.' And he pointed out he had no tongue. It was a long eon. Ok, and the fifth of the foregone questions....

Here is the text of this conversation: “What were we going to talk about? [protopian models, thoughts, examples] Ah, protopian. Ok. “At any level of complexity of spirit there is a pattern of fulfillment and understanding and when an entity gets that, they move on. So. the implication is that all those entities at a level are somewhat unfulfilled—not getting it, work in progress. And there are a few which are works without progress, but they can't sustain so in time they go bye-bye. So the overall reality is entities capable of fulfillment but not there yet. “Dystopian models focus on the ‘not progressing' entities—the ones that don't get it. Mainline Western philosophy and theology focus on the gap between possible and real, so theirs is a sort of… hmm… metatopia with a focus on the failure side, not the possibility side. So given that the great mass of entities are capable of fulfillment, why focus on failure? Protopian models focus on the great potential. Give images of spirits getting it. Coming together. And let me differentiate between disaster movies and dystopian ones. “In most disaster movies people rise to be more than they knew they could be. Poseidon Adventure not dystopian, that ship has a minor problem… grrr… ok, major problem. But how the people deal with it is inspiring. Grim survival stories in a basically hostile world are not protopian. It's a Wonderful Life is. [So ‘The Revenant' is not, ‘The Revenant' is dystopian] Revenant is about many getting to their lowest levels. How about models which encourage the best? Imagine how the world could be on the pro side and tell that story. Sing that song. Make that movie. Create that candy bar. “That is the basic struggle of your times. Defend against the worst or create toward the best. And all I'm saying is the world needs more protopian stories. Get out there and spread them.”

Here is the text of this conversation: “There may be two paths or more to a conclusion of meaning and the meaning is the same but one may be derivative and the other initial. Chuck had an initial meaning of Mach One plus, and there were others who speculated on it and thought it so, but they approached it from the side of not more than Mach One. “Ok, I will try another analogy. Someone who knows her herbs makes up a sauce based on their knowledge of herbs and their cultural traditions. Another person just tastes and cooks. Wintergreen. Would you eat a wintergreen candy? If you were a Brit, you would consider it a disinfectant scent. So if you were a Brit, you would never use it in cooking, but if you simply tasted it, you might. “So you could reach a point of meaning based solely on external understanding that was the same as experiential, but one would be derivative and inorganic and the other original and organic. “Now, conflict can arise when people talk about the reason why something is meaningful and the disagreement usually is based on whether the understood meaning has its own origin or is dependent on other systems of thought. “ ‘People are basically good.' For someone who bases this on their own experience to be told it is true because of the infinite goodness of the Creator creates a conflict. Both may say the same thing, but ascribe it differently. ‘Don't tell me it's not about my experience, but about your God.' ‘Don't tell me, you think your experience is better than my God.' Slap, slap… guns drawn… 100 Years War. [And they agreed as to the conclusions, but it does make a difference in your experience] Because organic is radical and inorganic is traditional. [So from inorganic, you can't go anywhere. It can't lead to anything else or develop into anything else.] Stuck."

Here is the text of this conversation: June 14, 2020 “Ok. We are going to talk about organic meaning and inorganic meaning--or what might be called deductive meaning and inductive meaning, but I won't call them that! “Organic meaning is the meaning which flows from experiences without interference of other systems. Inorganic meaning is the meaning, which is suggested by other systems. I will use a physical reference, but it applies to all meaning. “Everything that the prevailing systems of meaning said was that one could not go faster than sound, based on some kind of supposition. But then one person, Chuck, experienced it and meaning changed. The presumption was inorganic meaning. His breaking the sound barrier was organic. Sounds simple (pun intended). But the trick is that most entities don't know the influences which may create inorganic meaning. “We live, and even filter, our experiences through patterns of culture, religion, ignorance, family, nation, and so much more. It is hard to know what is inorganic within a system because the system seems the norm. In fact, the pre-existing meaning may render inorganic meaning. If Einstein had stuck with Newton and his very complete theories of motion, we would not have the advances of thought we have. “Now mind you, one of the hallmarks of organic meaning is that it is often seemingly speculative. In other words, it poses a new way of understanding that can be discovered to be real in experience but the experience follows the speculation. Almost every system of meaningful understanding that exists once was a speculation: ‘What if?' Organic meaning is always looking beyond what is assumed to be given. And those who propose it are seen as dangerous because they do not take the givens as givens. “I invite you to watch and listen as people try to justify actions based upon some notions of inorganic meaning, and see if you can trace the false fronts of their understandings. Lots of inorganic meaning in your world right now. And no system of understanding is immune to this problem. “Unmasking the assumptions is the challenge, with an understanding that just because something is inorganic in meaning does not mean it is wrong or false, but just not independently grounded in experience alone. This will take more unpacking once you have pondered it for a bit. [That last sentence did not, could not compute it.] Which one, about inorganic not necessarily being wrong? [I can understand how it's not necessarily wrong, but the part after that about it being not completely grounded in experience… I think that's what you said.] Ok.”

Here is the text of this conversation: “There is this push at the human level of spiritual complexity to be productive--one of the cute eccentricities of that state. But spirit does not have to be productive because it naturally is. So, it doesn't have to keep busy to pretend. The very act of spiritual connection is its own productivity. Being is sufficient. ‘But,' they say, ‘Rikkity, don't we have to learn and remember?' Sure. But without the pressure of time, what's the rush. And I ask you, haven't you ever discovered meaning only after stopping your trying to find it. And also, productivity is such a physical concept. By that I mean, it is derivative of creating a product. Ideas are rarely products. “Let's talk inspiration, in which that which seems outside comes in--like a breath inspired. To be inspired is not the same as making something. [It's almost like it makes itself] Poof. And it opens doors beyond the limits of the known. To be inspired is to radically let your spirit be open without goal or thought of reward. “Spirit in connection has the openness needed if it is not busy with trying to fulfill itself. Remember, the spiritual journey is about fulfilling yourself, not striving to fulfill yourself. And that's a big difference. “[would you give an example? Perhaps an analogy. A metaphor?] No. A tuna fish sandwich on toasted rye… without seeds. Have you ever had such a sandwich without making it or seeking it. Sure. You were hungry and someone said ‘How about a tuna sandwich.' Remember how good it tasted. But you didn't seek it or hunger after it. So it's surprising taste was all the better. “That is why spiritual moments can be experienced, but not sought nor manufactured. You can't will one. But a radically open spirit can receive one unbidden and unexpected.”

Here's the text of today's conversation: “Hi. [hey, sweetness.] So, pith or business. [your choice.] Pith.  “Ok, what's this nonsense about life forms. They keep speaking about trying to find life forms elsewhere in the universe. What do they mean, carbon-oxygen-based sustainable entities? Or do they really mean sustainable spirit entities. If life is defined by what you get on Earth at this level of physical development, I would say two things: Who cares! and I hope not! Because to seek out more of the same as some form of validation is so limiting. And all it would mean is the equivalent to saying, ‘Hey, I found another brand of toilet paper.'  “What if we were instead looking for systems of sustenance that persisted in diverse situations. Like really looking… and I don't mean just sight… into worlds different from our own and asking what's going on there--not as compared to “life” but in its own right.  “Do we, can we, should we, could we find patterns of meaning and continuity elsewhere. Note, I don't say ‘intelligence.'  “And why not recruit and use the ethereal arts for this? So don't get caught up in the ‘life form' scam. I will ask just one question: If they were to find life of a Earth-like nature on Mars, what would that really prove? But to detect some other form of continuity, ahh. And then to ask how many other life forms are there… [opens up a whole world] And do any of the rest of them use drive-throughs. CT. [And if they did?] Taco Bell, universal or just a particular. Krypton Fried Chicken. It would allow us to compare recipes and find out if it really is a secret, the secrets of the universe will never be revealed as simply a duplication of our experiences. That's the pith.”  

Here is the text of this conversation: “Let's try some pith. I talked about eyes and ears and skin and even taste. But you see in your existence, it is the senses that gather information for you. Long ago, those simple creatures who let part of their neural network wander away from the brain found that having means to ascertain physical reality would ensure survival. ‘If I can't see the bad thingies, they might eat me. And if I can't hear you, you can sneak up and on me.' So the physical forms created means to apprehend the physical realities.  “You are, in your bodies, well-tuned receivers of the physical data. Have any idea how much it takes to walk down a street and survive. Try it blindfolded and with ear plugs. But hey, you developed the apparatus to deal. “Ok. That's for this physical level of complexity. Your spirits can develop likewise. So, in a non-physical realm, slowly but surely, you develop other organs of sense--spiritual organs of spiritual sense like the eyes and ears and skin that learned to reach out and perceive. So, the spirit can reach out and perceive, and it's not in physical ways but it is still an extension of your being. “What would spiritual perception be like? You already glimpse it in what are called ‘spiritual experiences' in which nothing is seen or heard or touched or tasted or smelled, but still you know it happens and you are aware beyond your physical senses. So ponder this: What do spiritual eyes see, what do spiritual ears hear, etc., etc. And what senses have you no names of, which are cognizant there. [such a great question. Cause you know, I have had spiritual experiences. I have felt things physically, but they're not physical.] That's not the spiritual side. That's the physical relating to your experience of spirit. [Right, right, right, right, right. And it's important to know the difference.] And often peeps confuse and mistake one for the other. [I can totally understand that the problem is separating them] And in more complex beings, there are both glimpses of what is beyond spirit… another topic… and vestiges of what was experienced physically. Here I might say ‘I know,' but then I remember when I could say ‘I saw' even though I don't see now. Ponder all that and come to talk about the ‘beyond spirit' comment."

Here is the text of this conversation: “Ok. We have been speaking of fulfillment being dependent on a perceived lack of fulfillment. Let's unpack that more. “So, somebody suddenly finds themself (I use the plural to avoid the absurd binary gender restrictions and the impositions about gender stereotypes, right Pat?) They find themselves on top of Denali (and note, I don't use the imperialistic Mt. McKinley. I am so SC.) [spiritually correct] So, they are suddenly atop Denali. Have they achieved anything other than a great view? No. “The top of any mountain is only meaningful in the ascent from below. See what I am saying. Fulfillment is not meaningful if spontaneous. It must grow from a perception of possibility through the trials of achievement. That's it.”

Here is the text of this conversation: “Let's revisit the central maxim of SP: ‘Live and Enjoy.' “Until you can live and enjoy, learning and remembering is empty, and without learning and remembering there is no complexity enhancement to the spirit – and so forth. “Live and enjoy. But some say that their lives are in such dire straits that they have nothing to enjoy. Which begs the question: Are you the product of your life or the creator? Tell me about any life circumstance and I can show you many spirits for whom that situation was filled–to some degree–with joy. I am not saying glee, but at least a sense of meaningful understanding which brought a sense of well-being. “So, it is not life circumstances that dictate if that circumstance is to be enjoyed, but rather the spiritual experience of it. “You want an analogy? Ok, licorice-flavored ice cream. It is up to you, and not the ice cream, as to whether you will enjoy it. Likewise, caviar… and everything. When I say ‘live and enjoy,' I mean to live in such a way that one is always looking for the potential bits of joy and focusing on them. “To truly suffer is to find all paths to joy blocked by one's approach unlike to life. Life, like all existence, always has some positive element. And each spirit has the choice to recognize it or not. That's the message.” After hearing this podcast about "Live and Enjoy" you might want to explore more at: http://www.spiritualpersistence.com/whatis.htm (http://www.spiritualpersistence.com/whatis.htm) and http://www.spiritualpersistence.com/pointsarch.htm (http://www.spiritualpersistence.com/pointsarch.htm)

From time to time, we have what we call a “bench,” a conversation with several spirits. Back in 2017, we talked with two spirits in such a bench session.  “Greetings, o temporal ones. People often think of schemes in a negative way. Schemers are seen as bad. But isn't All That Is a scheme and a schemer of which we all are a part? Do we not blend our own dreams and plans into the cauldron of being? Do we not shape and are we not shaped by the shared creation of all the dreams and plans?” “Here's a thought: All dreams and plans are for naught in the fullness of All, and yet the fullness of All is NOT without the plentitude of dreams and plans. And lest you think your dreams and plans count the most, the simplest Jurassic worms' sense of being and becoming count as much as yours. It is not a hierarchy, and not a competition, but a sense of holographic unity and necessity and cooperation. If you at your level of complexity can dismiss or diminish another's, then what value do yours have? “Unless you are All, then you must be a contributing part. No better or worse than any other part. Got it?!” “Ok, next. ‘Me?' No, her. ‘O' “ “Hello. I don't understand why he calls me ‘her' because HS is an entity of essence beyond gender as am I, and you and them and Sandy... woof? Yes! “The markers of identity are useful for the earliest building blocks of any complexity, but they must be overcome in the process of development. At less complex levels, they too had dividing and divisive categories which seemed to propagate their identity but look, hey, if they had been essential you'd still be living them out. But you don't! And things like gender will fade away before you move on. And then you can try to use new identifiers of difference until you learn and remember to focus beyond the differences. And so on and so on and so on.”

Here's the text of this conversation: A Tale of Gratitude  “It is about the poorest person in a town--or at least the person with the smallest house and the least amount of money. But before I get to them, let me tell you about the neighbors.  “The mayor lived in a great mansion. But when Thanksgiving came, the mayor decided not to have any guests because guests always seemed intimidated by the great house.  “Next door was the butcher, a jolly sort, who made sure everyone had the proper meats and poultry for the occasion. But when the last bird had been sold, there was none to be taken home, and how could people be invited in to an empty table at the butcher's house?  “And the same at the wine merchant's. How could anyone with wine left out of their own list, host an event?  “The greengrocer had a large bird, but no side dishes. And so it went: baker, candlestick maker, and the like. Even the carpenter had sold the last chairs, but to the house which now had chairs but not a table.  “So, everyone was at home alone--some with a bird but no rolls nor butter, and others with a great number of side dishes but no turkey. And over the town, there was a collective sigh… aww. But then the smallest door on the smallest house with the fewest chairs and no table and no food banged open and a voice called out: ‘My door is open. My heart is open. My life is open.' And so the town all packed into the little room with nowhere to sit and nowhere to put down food and the platters were passed again and again, and everyone ate crammed in like sardines. And they were all happier than they imagined they could be. And then a small voice called out: ‘This is the best!' And a cry arose: Amen. And the owner of the littlest house was filled with joy. Do you know why? Because a holiday of abundance is always not about what you don't have, but what you do have.  “As the stars filled the heavens and the sated townsfolk filled the street, it was a time of shared spirit that none had planned and all had loved. For the mayor didn't need to set a gala, the butcher didn't need to cook a roast, the baker didn't need to knead anything, etc., etc., but they all could share the spirit of it all.  “Happy T-giving.”

Here's the text of this conversation: “Fabric of being, strands of experience, woven fine but durable. Point out to your clients that the durability of their memories indicate the strength of the intertwining of their lives. If it had not meant something for both of you, the memory wouldn't be so strong and lasting. We move on, not because we cease to remember, but because we remember and understand.”

Here is the text of this important conversation: “Each entity has its own equivalent of physical senses, but you can't say you experience them the same, yet you get glimpses of the sensate items of entities just one level of complexity away--both more and less. And get ready for this: You experience all other sensory input of all levels, but don't understand so you don't perceive. [Elissa then mused: ‘You often say that if such and such were true, then it wouldn't be logical …'] “When I speak of logic, I speak not of Aristotelian nor even anyone else, but in terms of ‘does the possibility allow for the spiritual understanding of the whole which I paint. Does my reduction to physical terms remain consistent or not. The important word there is ‘reduction.' Yes, I speak in terms which you can understand and apply or else what's the point of all of this. Remember none of this is meant to be taken literally, but symbolically. So, it appears literally true in your existence, but that is a true illusion. As opposed to a false illusion. “A false illusion if applied to all existence would either deny all existence or reduce it to absurdity without meaning. True illusion always points to higher, more inclusive, more universal understandings. I could tell you things in ways that make sense at other levels but which don't at yours and those would be false reductions. If it is not universally true, don't peddle it as such …”

Here is the text of this episode: “So, a time of doubt and worry. “If I had given up during G's many campaigns, I would have lost my mind. I had to have hope and faith or else life would be without meaning. “Hope provides the image of the possible and faith keeps the spirit focused on that hope. When we said ‘faith,' it was a faith in Providence—the divine progression toward the good and away from evil. Our Creator did not embue this sphere of existence with failure. Now, that same source did not embue it with success, either, but did inculcate in humanity the potential to be hopeful and faithful in the gradual but continual, if not consistent, progress toward the good. “Providence does not remove the stumbling blocks along the way, but does promise there will be a path. I held that faith close so often, and the path did appear even when the way was seemingly cluttered with obstructions. “And I share this little insight: When I focused on the obstructions, I found no paths. But when I focused on that faithful promise, a way would begin to appear.”

Here is the text of today's episode: “In all things, look for allies with whom to share both the struggles and the victories. I think you will be surprised by some who will claim to be party to the victory when they raised nary a hand in the struggle. The best friends are long term. “There will be a period of reconciliation coming. We French failed with that, but it is essential. When the proper democracy is restored do not take revenge, but be diligent in setting the boundaries for the future. And don't be daunted by those who reject the changes needed to create those boundaries.” 

Here is what President Jefferson said: “I don't know if I dare to enter your times. My friend, Mr. Paine wrote that these are the times that try men's souls. And now women, too.  “But I have faith in the institutions of democracy. Most of the most flamboyant expressions of passion which might lead to disruption are of a very small minority. In my time, while many knew of the pamphlets and tracts, few were authors. Your history portrays great masses influenced by them, but if one in 10 knew of them, it was amazing. Don't take the stars of the press to be the fixed constellations of the heavens.  “There are qualities and sensibilities which transcend the times and circumstances. And I join with Mr. Parker on the moral arc of the universe. Be of good spirit. Hold fast to American principles. And remember, when I was elected we didn't know the outcome for weeks. Just because communications are faster, that does not mean issues will be complete sooner.”

Here's the text of today's conversation: “Let's just remember this simple equation: that of the things you learn you remember more that are sustaining than not. See, simple. Ok. Talk with peeps. They often dwell on things not worth keeping and remembering. Sustaining does not always mean idealized. Actually, reality is better remembered and then sifted for that which sustains. “Angers, let them go. Great travail without learning, let it go. Walking three miles to school uphill both ways through two feet of snow, let it go. Real learning is apparent, not milked. That's allowing other learning remembered to inform you. But to have a struggle point and say ‘I am going to stew over this until I understand it,' does no good. “Isolating such a time to analyze it is less helpful than trying to connect it into a larger field of meaning. Let's just put it this way: Don't obsess. In fact, when a period of travail is fully integrated into larger understandings and meanings, one stops remembering it in detail and only in context. And one then stops speaking of the details and can speak of the learning. Unconnected events are remembered as details. Connected events are remembered as understandings for what they reveal. Listen to people. Some will recount every little goddamn detail but without any synthesis. You both did that when I died, but with understanding you stopped focusing on the details and so could be open to larger meaning.”

Here's the text of this podcast: All of the models I have shared of planes, matrixes, matrices, matri … 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. 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.” “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)

Here's the text of today's conversation: August 20, 2016 “So, this could be a hard day, or it could be another of the ongoing saga of the Moo who is endless. I choose the latter. “You know, I would never have chosen this path, but now I do not see any other. And we all remain bonded forever, along with a curious gang and entities to be named later in a trade with the universe. “Once I was pissed, but no more. You know, there are kids whose parents move them from Detroit to Reno, and some never get over the move and believe it or not, they consider Detroit paradise. And then there are those who compartmentalize the two cities, and remain split. And then there are those who say ‘I liked this about Detroit, but I like this about Reno.' I liked being alive, but now I also like this side of the equation. Beats Detroit or Reno.                                             “I don't miss the physical that much, but I do miss Mommy's hugs and her food... but not her sauces. I miss Papa's car seats because they always slowly formed to me. I don't miss getting up. Or sand in my sandals or bee stings. I don't miss Aunt Bea, either. “One of the challenges is to be present. To be in one's existence, not in one's memory nor in one's antici... pation. Wait for it. You can have dreams, but don't let them rob you of presence... ‘and never let anyone rob you of presents.' Good one, CT. Is that all. “I have been Bramblating. Whispering. He is an old spirit. Long in the spiritual tooth. [connected to us or Lee] Later down the road, and yes. He will be a ponderer. I don't see Little League in his future. Debate Club. [less physically stressful!] Except for that chemistry experiment. ‘Bram, it's awfully quiet down there.' Ooom. That's better. “So, to learn to be who and what you are, follow both your bliss and your spirit.”

Here's the text of today's Live From the Afterlife episode: “This will be a combined philosophical and practical session. Let's start. “When I talked about expressions of spirit and experience of spirit as being of an entity but not physical, I need to add that expression of spirit and experience of spirit may or may not be the same. Peeps often experience spirit as if physical even if the expression is not physical. The experienced is subject to the realities of the perceiver. You live in physicality and that's how you experience except for the usually rare times when you experience something as nonphysical and then that's what is called spirituality. “Now, on this side we usually experience expressions as spirit but rarely we get to experience spirit in physical glimpses. And we don't have a word for that because we are spirit and don't use words! But it happens. A sudden awareness of a physical metaphor. Ponder that. “[does that happen when you're connecting with us?] Sometimes, but not always. Just as rare on this side as spirituality is on yours. There but rare. ‘But what if I want mine well done?' CT. But I must say well done, CT!" For more about these conversations -- discussions, transcripts, and more -- visit us at sp-blog.org

Here's the text of today's Live from the Afterlife podcast: “Let's talk about connections. There are experiential connections, which are the stuff of the physical world (like that scene from Hot Shots) where you connect in terms of time and place and family. And then there's idea connections, in which you find resonance about concepts (you read a book and think ‘spot on!'), and those curious concepts that can't be negated out of hand, so they fester until you see their connectedness. And then there is spiritual, or essential, connection. You just sense a connection with an entity. Notice I didn't say just ‘another person.' It is a sense that one and something else have a shared spiritual identity--already or not yet. It is easy to trace the patterns of what has been already appreciated and understood, but it is harder to discern what isn't yet appreciated or understood. “So, folks often think and talk about connections to people of the past, but what about entities yet to be experienced. This is the exciting work, because spiritual connections transcend all others. Get my drift. It is like knowing most of a word, but antici... pating the rest. “So, don't get all hung up on the usual connections to the point you miss the essential ones. Might have a great opportunity for complexity but miss out trying to figure out if grandmothers in Topeka knew each other. Always look for the largest, grandest connections. But most people settle for the smallest. ‘You like vanilla ice cream, too!' Big nothing. “But to sit silently with another entity and feel connected, ahhhhh.” (8/13/2016) come explore more at sp-blog.org

Here's the text of today's podcast if you want to follow along: “Ok, let's talk combining into more complex entities. Does that mean your spiritual entity connects with other entities? How physical! Think about it in more sharing terms. All that you are spiritually is open and available to the other elements of the greater complexity, not individually but collectively. It's not like a frat mixer, it's like an anthology. And the identity of the new entity is only real within itself. So the elements can sense and know the totality of the other elements but only within the reality of the greater complexity. If any entity were to step outside… and I don't mean that literally… they would cease to have connection to all that.   “I give you a flawed analogy—flawed not in being wrong, but in being incomplete. A group of people decide to dine. Each person decides on their own. They arrive at this little ristorante on a side street in Firenze. Si si. And they find themselves at a big shared table with a common meal and magic happens. Communications cross languages, lives mingle. There develops a common and familiar story. The new unit has its own identity. But if anyone were to step outside or even go to the WC, the new entity would no longer be and while they might remember being there they would no longer be part of that new whole. The new combination exists as meaningful only within itself and as others observe it, but not as qualities that can be separated.   “The model I have used is of molecules but that is both too simple and wrong. Too physical. It is the knowing connection of being, not the being itself! Unpack that.  “So, that's a Point to Ponder y'all. Do you want grits with that? Grits. One of the foods that requires something else to be palatable. [True. Butter, cheese, salt… ] Pepper. ‘Chocolate.' CT! When did you come back? ‘I never left. I can't leave. None of us can. We are here forever.' No, not forever, just until we learn and remember enough to be filled with knowing that will enhance others toward greater experiences of knowing. Was that a pith double header? Or just extra innings. It's going back, back, back and she hit it out of here. Ouch.   “Too many people live in the bleachers and not on the field. It's easier but way less rewarding. Triple crown. I'm done.”

Here is the text for this conversation: “So, we were talking about the inherent incompleteness of every unfulfilled entity and how that is not brokenness and certainly not sin, but opportunity. Without any degree of being unfulfilled there would be no spiritual progress. SP is based on a premise of greater always greater spiritual complexity reaching toward unity with All That Is. Less than All That Is is not failure and not sin.  “Say you have never been to New York. [R: I've never been to New York] Dad! And you get a chance to go. When you hadn't gone yet you were not bad or evil, just not yet complete in all the experiences possible.  “Remember you don't have to have every experience, just the ones that will help you learn and remember in ways that disclose your spiritual truth. “If there were no New York to go to or you didn't feel the need to go even though a piece of your spirit might be revealed there, then you'd be stuck. Being incomplete is not failure but possibility. [wait, if there was no NY you couldn't experience it, so you'd be stuck forever?] Yes. But the universe is infinite so there is a New York and a Schenectady but one is easier to spell. [that's the main difference] It is. As well as a few minor other differences. Pith for the pithless. [this whole area is intriguing. What about what you said way back when that in order to connect in a healthy way to others to form a new entity at another level of complexity then each spirit has to be fulfilled] Yes. [so, fulfilled by connecting?] No. So that each entity must have some fulfilling to do or else they wouldn't be at this level. But if there were no openings for fulfillment then nothing could happen. So many religions focus on trying to achieve a higher spiritual level but that doesn't deal with the spiritual tasks here at hand. O goodie, another analogy.  “You sit in college and dream about being in grad school and you even sneak into a grad lecture or two and try to think like the grad students. But as an undergrad you need to fulfill the undergrad courses. Maybe you could eke out a C in a grad course but if you don't know how to ace the intro course you'll never move on to grad school. That's enough."  

Here's the text for this conversation:  “So, the question is always about already but not yet. Your entity contains all it needs to find meaningful connection into greater complexity.  “There is nothing lacking and there is also something lacking. Huh? Ok, a story. A poor family lived way up in the mountains. They tried to make enough to live off the simple things they made, while all the time their house sat on a vein of gold. They had it all and they had nada. So, too, with your intrinsic entity. You have it all but may not realize it.  “Each life go-around is about discovering and remembering all those spiritual assets which are you and could be yours. The ever-expanding complexity is not built on what is possible but on what is realized. We all can be loving beings, but nothing changes unless we are loving beings. A can of chocolate syrup does not a milkshake make unless it is opened and added.  “So, whenever you think you are insufficient, that just means you are not aware. And the assets… and I mean spiritual assets… of any other entity cannot substitute for your awareness. That's why saints aren't of much help, but simple teachers can be. Not because they share their wisdom but because they help students see their own. I think that is a-plenty."

Here is the text of this Point to Ponder: "Again, picture the infinite-dimensional matrix: All the dimensions with different points connecting in an infinite number of ways. So anything which was, is, or will be is connected to anything else. Now, picture a journey from one point to another through an infinite set of junctions. That journey path is a probable parallel reality to any other journey between those points, and is a probable adjunct reality to any other journey involving either of those points. And there are an infinite number of probable realities which also do not involve those points primarily and secondarily. So there are parallel universes which are not about you, but which are as valid as yours. And all of them together make up the whole. Such a mess! “But just as there is no single way to get from A to B, so, too, for any 2 points. And every path of connection is equally valid, but we may only recognize the most direct or most probable. “From where you are to Utica, there are many routes--some even by way of Calcutta, but you are unlikely to use that one. Or are you? You drive to Albany, fly to New York, and on to Calcutta, then fly back to DC, take a train upstate to deliver a lecture at Utica College about your trip. So you went from there to Utica by way of Calcutta. Our paths are often like that! “Understand the connections more than the complexity, and marvel how the more complex reality offers more potential connections. “The shortest route between 2 places may not be the most meaningful. And in spirituality, efficiency is not a virtue."

Here's the text of the conversation: “Window spirits are spirits through whom we can sense what other realities are. They are like translators. What they do is so minimize their own need to dominate the scene, that they can facilitate a glimpse beyond their physical beings. “They seem spiritually transparent. They usually use little, if any, jargon or technical language, and speak in the common vernacular. They claim no special powers nor status. And it is often as if, in a situation, they had stepped aside but you see both them and something more. And the poorly initiated will think it is they, but it is not about the other person but about their ability to be without claiming the spotlight. “Most people are like magicians who, by their center stage actions, misdirect your attention. Window spirits are just the opposite. By their lack of center stage activity, they allow you to direct your own attention. The great spiritual teachers all did this. That's why there are so many, and so varied, descriptions of them. “And now, down the path a little more. You will remember, I hope, that part of the living and remembering of lives is about moving beyond holding onto the past, and being self-generative of one's own energy. “So, when one is no longer relying on past and others for energy, one becomes, in a way, transparent. Physical black holes which cannot be seen through are suckers extraordinaire. So, too, with black hole spirits; can't see through them to nothing but the suckiness. And they take you in, and all your energy... And even the future. “So, a spirit that is not sucking energy and is not focused on the past can be seen through, like a lens. And through that lens of empowerment we see new possibilities, which are the glimpses of greater complexity, so they appear like windows. They have little to block out our view with their own issues, and they are forward facing and so the lens of their being gives us the glimpse. “In fact, window spirits aren't born that way. They learn and remember into it. Otherwise, they'd be gone. “We see greater and grander possibilities through them, but not of them. Some are great because of what they show of themselves, and others are greater because of what they show of us."

Here's the text of today's communication: "It's not an ending if you can see a future. And that is not about time, but perspective. Can you see a wider reality? Then it is not an ending. And some of those wider places may be in a past remembered, because without time, who cares. "Grief, which mimics depression, does so because the person can see no wider vision. We know it is not depression because, over time (I know it doesn't exist, but hang with me), over a sequence of learning and remembering, the person in grief is able to see wider and wider until they can see around or beyond their loss. The trick is to keep them looking when the desire and energy is not there. We companion them, not to give them answers, but to encourage their looking--if only a part of a degree wider. A glimpse of a possibility is as good as a cure. Never underestimate the immense power of a glimmer of hope. "Don't give them the sun, or even promise it, when all that is asked for or needed is a small ray of light. Too many want flashes, when sparks will do." 

Here is the text of this conversation: “As I was saying, yesterday's heresy becomes today's orthodoxy. So, yesterday's chaos becomes today's normal.  “We are adaptive creatures and spirits or else we couldn't exist in an organic existence. Where there is any form of becoming, there is the potential to be totally befuddled. ‘Hey, I don't get it.' But you could. Stop looking and feeling and understanding with what you now know and ask a simple question: What would it take to make sense of this? ‘Yea, that's simple.'  “Applying overlays from the past cannot interpret the future. Always be open to what doesn't fit the formula of understanding and ask what would it take to include that?"  

Here's the text for this conversation: "I am constantly reminded that, at this spiritual level, the great question is if we will in courage reach out and find larger connection, or in fear retreat behind the walls of difference. It keeps coming up... just like a bad bologna sandwich. "The test is not knowing, but believing, because too many people know, but by their actions show they don't believe. And here's a challenge: how to live, such that if you were to die right now, it would be ok. We haven't found a substitute for Heaven which is compelling enough. But I've given hints... hell, I've given blueprints. So I want you should ponder that for awhile. Ok, time's up... no, just kidding. I tell a joke. "Did you know I'm black on the inside, too? It goes all the way in... but only here. Oops, I'm chartreuse... ecru... teal... periwinkle... mauve... scarlet... mango... key lime... aubergine. It's fun being other colors, but only if you aren't wedded to one for identity. I have fun sometimes saying to KKK members 'My, you're looking yellow today (or red, or brown).' They turn white as sheets... or dark as shit. We have a game with newcomers: Guess the Race. Most of 'em are off balance. "You think a balanced person uses physical properties for identity? I don't theeenk so. Male, female, child, adult, brown, big, black, deaf, red, short, yellow, fat, white, stupid... I don't theeenk so. [We identify with those things] until we get our act together. And in the last go-round at this level we see beyond it all, and seeing beyond it all, we have two choices: To proclaim the vision or to fall into despair. But if one falls into despair, then one doesn't have their act together anymore. "It's like climbing to the top of a mountain and seeing the view, and finding it so beautiful that one desires the valleys again, when one could just as easily have stood atop the world and shouted the truth. That's why the only way forward is to proclaim the truth you sense, even if that be perilous. We often think that such proclamations of faith are all fundamentalist or conservative. But that's only because they dare to speak out, while the ones seeing the more courageous, wider view think it arrogance to speak, when it is actually fear to keep silent. "So when you get a vision that takes you to a new and more generous place, speak it! Write it! Share it! Live it! Dream it! No, don't just dream it, be it! And that's all I have to say about that!"

here's the text of today's conversation: "[Most people] want confirmation, not challenge. And those who get with us through loss want to be assured of what they've found, not of what they have yet to explore, because the loss was so painful they want to avoid other change--which is, as we all know, loss. So 'Confirm what I have learned so far through my losses, but don't push me to maybe lose more.' "How comfortable we become with our healing, and don't notice the scar tissue. Scars are hard and without pores. "People need to realize that having changed doesn't mean they're open to change. And not all the world's lessons will be understood in one session. Like spiritual accidental tourists: 'I'll go if I can keep it the same.' "And don't focus on those who don't get it. Know the role of the catalyst. 

Here is the text for this conversation: "We are entering a field of dangerous possibilities--which is always true. The ones which ultimately will be the safest will be the most dangerous ones.  Huh. Ok, an example: "When the Cold War was at its hottest, there were 2 dangerous options: build up defenses, or nuclear disarmament. And disarmament was the more dangerous, it seemed, because it held the least control--or illusion of control--but in the end, it was the safest. "The path to a reduction of fears will always be paved with its own fearsomeness. The appeal of the apparent often leads astray the lazy. How do you get to a quiet and easy retirement. Hard work. How do you get beyond fears. By doing some seemingly scary stuff. Not all is as it appears. If it were, you'd know it all. And when the hawks claim you need war to achieve peace, they forget how easy war is and how hard and scary peacemaking is. Drop all of your defenses and you'll see what I mean. "Great leaders have always been those who could drop their defenses and thus gain unimaginable power. Defend nothing; express all of value." 

Here's the text of today's podcast: “As we have shared before, the progression of spirit at any level of complexity moves through stages. We have said this, haven't we? I don't know. First is Discovery. ‘O wow, I'm me. This is different!'  “After Discovery comes Exploration. ‘What is this new entity. I know some of its aspects but not all.' And then… hmm, what to call it… Expression. ‘Ok, together we are this and together we can do this.' But wait, then comes Differentiation. ‘I'm me and not them.' The newly experienced entity tries to understand itself by not being any other entity. Subset of this is radical independence. The new entity senses it has so many more possibilities than before. So, it wants to believe in its ultimate uniquity. I always wanted to use that word. [That was the second time. you've used that word.] I know. And so it's not a uniquity anymore. So stand apart, declare independence, not rely on others… until that doesn't work to generate more meaning.  “Slowly it dawns on entities that are aware that such radical independence may lead to a great deal of self-expression, but limited fulfillment. If and when that awareness comes, the entity seeks to find new and larger interdependence--because by sensing the limits of the single entity, a wider potential is glimpsed and then the process moves toward the possibility of greater connection.  “What you are living with is the collision of those still in the radical independent mode and the more inclusive interdependent mode.  “So, the masks, the rules, the number of people gathered, becomes symbols of this clash. And when you have leaders who are still enjoying the feeling of being singularly special, this is a time of tension.  “I invite you to apply this model to the birth of nations and the lives of individuals and the history of spiritual movements… and, dare I say it, the theories of science. And I think I have pushed the limits for now.  “There will always--at any spiritual level except the final union--be more stages of differentiation than connection, but the superficial appearance will be of connected differentials. Ok, you got your gun rights people and the anti-vaxxers and the radical religionists and the homeschoolers and the flat-earthers and the know-nothings and the like, all shouting the same but for different reasons.  “Only in connection is there a new harmony and a shared vision. [So those groups… are you saying they can't connect unless they find a larger harmony to connect into?] They think they are connecting on things like social distancing, but they don't really agree about that.  “If your mode is Discovery or Experience or Differentiation, you may reject the larger coalition of interdependence, but for far different reasons. [Right] I'm done

Here is the text of today's conversation: “There appears to be so much empty space in your reality--between all thingies, at both the biggest and the smallest levels. “When we finally become aware of our oneness with All That Is and the complexity of Allness of which we are a part, you won't find any emptiness. Ultimate unity will not have any emptiness--which implies that something else would bring completion. When we get our act together, there won't be any gaps physically or spiritually or in the infinite number of other ways which describe all the dimensions beyond our present knowing. And in some other awareness, our very place in it all appears to be an emptiness. If we don't share any dimensions, it's like we aren't there. And with growing complexity, which is the unification and connection of realities sharing at least one common dimension, we begin to perceive more. Just like in marriage: One perceives another set of family perceptions through the in-laws. The acts of inclusion are always acts of attempted complexity enhancement, by which that which is shared opens the windows to that which was previously unknown and seemingly empty. “So, the process of Spiritual Persistence, as well as spiritual enhancement (and they go together as one), means that we are always opening ourselves to the potential of greater dimensional awareness and, therefore, greater manifestation of the universals which wave by us and 'hi' to us. When we sense something luminous but ineffable is calling us, we are experiencing that waving but we are not yet ready for a full awareness of either the manifestation nor the dimensions. “When we get a sense of the fullness of All, we are being prescient of the abiding reality in which we have our very partial existence. “The grain of sand, miles from the shore, can sometimes feel the call of the ocean and sense its place in a beach--even while it sits alone, part ways up a mountain, without any concept of ocean or beach to guide it."

Here is the text of today's conversation: "Why are all the theories of spirit physically based. Of course, SP sounds like it, too--atoms to molecules to complexity--but remember always, I use that as a metaphor, a model, a teaching tool, something to hang your hat on. Complexity of spirit is not the same as the complexity of a carbon-based molecule. "The physical gives a hint, a glimmer, a point in the right direction, but it is not it. Nope, not it. So, what's the problem with all the spiritual systems? Nada. But when the spiritual system is subverted to the physical analogy, you got trouble in River City. “This is the absolute, concrete truth: There is no absolute, concrete anything. “So, be aware that when you stop an idea and put it into words or symbols, it is now in the mausoleum of human thought. How many pinned butterflies can fly? “The trick is to see the picture but not be obsessed with the paint. Method means squat with the eternals; methods have to do with what has been. Teach a person the fundamentals of Renaissance painting and what do you get, copies of long ago. But let a person use the media of choice, and something new might happen. “Why, I ask, would you want a Heaven which is just a better Earth, when you could have it all. People don't dream too much; they dream too little."

here's the text of today's conversation: “I want to talk about responsibility and the two main camps of thought and then my position. “On the one hand, we have those who argue that the responsibilities of spiritual development belong to forces outside individual lives--gods, saviors, gurus, etc.--that we must give into them because they are ultimately responsible for the spiritual meaning and progress. On the other hand, we have those who argue that each spirit is ultimately responsible for its own development--that each of us entities, if we fail to develop are irresponsible. And both are absurd on their faces. “If we are simply spiritual pawns in some larger plan that really does not depend at all on our choices, then what's the point. Yet if we are totally responsible for our spiritual development, what's to stop all from simply winding down and kerplop. “If we will, at points of exploration, fail to do what we need to do does that mean all meaning collapses? No more than trying to say we are the sum total of all meaning. But I boldly suggest another understanding: that we are each responsible but not ultimately. And at the same time there are no enduring sources of ultimate meaning… yet! “Ultimate meaning outside ourselves implies a static reality. Ultimate meaning within ourselves implies a limited meaning. But if we… and by that I mean all spirit… seek to find at least some measure of meaning, then the ultimate meaning will dynamically come more into being. We are only responsible for taking part, not creating it all nor abdication of all responsibility. Like a good game of anything, show up! Be there! And the score at any moment or level doesn't matter.

Here is the text of this episode: “Many things we take as particular and significant are only contextual and relative. The problem at every level of complexity save the last, is the universalizing of particulars. In a level without heads, hats would make no sense, but still the concept of hats could. And one of the great spiritual challenges is glimpsing potentials that are not part of your complexity. Easy looking back along the scale, sometimes with a smile, but looking ahead is harder. For example, look ahead to a level without sight. Would you be able to look ahead at that level? Only if you can reframe looking out of physical terms as you know them and... wait for it!... the sight that is possible at a more complex level beyond eyes may not be any more universal than what you have. "Every level has its equivalent of the physical representation of the embodiment of the spiritual, but which is not the spiritual. Always and forever, cul-de-sacs of understanding which are not part of the holistic universal but which appear so in terms of that level. "Transcend the particular if you are looking for universals–even if the present particulars seem universal. Just because something is true to all of human nature, does not make it universal. It just makes it human "Not figuring it out, because all solutions are particular, but finding a radical openness that what appears universal may not be, but at the same time may be offering glimpses beyond the present particularity. It's not to be solved but experienced at the spiritual level. "Dealing with great loss is not a problem to be solved or figured out, but a set of situations to be experienced.

Here's the main text of today's podcast: "While I talk about both inclusion and connection, they are not the same. "Inclusion is about the field of possibility, while connection is the fulfillment of the field of possibility. "Think of a small room, just big enough for 12 people. Now, also picture a room big enough for 1200 people. So, the second room would be more inclusive because fewer would be excluded. But if the 12 really connected, they might have tighter bonds than if the 1200 just stood around. And the difference is important. In order for connection to occur, each of the people must be willing to be open with the others AND be willing to be changed by the connection. "In any real connection, there is change! The edges of being become permeable, and points of connections arise and reach out and reach in. "There are in a room of 12 connected people, more than just 12 people. In an inclusive but not connected room of 1200, there are only 1200. And nothing more, but over the interactions of the 1200 without connection, there ends up being less! Each person who is with others but doesn't connect is lessened. That's the pith for today. Lots there! "And I point to Edward Hopper's Night Owls for not connecting. Visual aid."

Here's the text of the spirit message featured in this episode: “Point to Ponder: If there is no time and all states of complexity coexist, what's the point of complexity development.  “Remember, the All of All That Is is the total of all that is and it is dynamic and organic So the sum total is always in a state of development—even beyond time. It always contains the promise and probability and possibility of more. If not then it would be static and any slight failure of fulfillment would cause it to crash… be gone… over with.  “It is always in a state of positive flux and so though there is not time there is potential. “Instead of measuring existence in units of time, measure in units of fulfillment. Ponder that!  “[so even though happening at once, there's always possibility and potential that's not determined] Already but not yet. Here's an analogy: would you expect any less. It's a road atlas of the USA. In it are all and every journey you might make. But you won't make them all. And because you are making one along this route, the map may change because your car caused a bridge to collapse. See. The atlas of the now is both different from the one of 1950 and the one of 2043. Plus the vehicles change, too. Each map is all there is and yet not all there could be and will be and were. With that pith I sign off"

Here is the text of today's conversation: "So, why is it so hard for peeps to get the concept of moving toward the universals. Because it means change. Having to let go of the familiar. So there will be grief and most people try to minimize grief. They do not yet perceive the greater meaning that will come, so they feel like there is loss only. "This then is a point of faith: to believe that more inclusive, more complex, more universal will always mean more meaning. Most of the world's religions teach just the opposite, while their inspirations all taught this. Religions believe in single set patterns, while spiritual explorers always know there are many routes and all of them are good. Can't go far wrong following a path of connection, but easy to go wrong following a path of differentiation. And most people settle for the single path of differentiation because it promises to be free of loss and pain and grief. The greatest journeys of being will always involve some pain and loss or else it wouldn't be a journey, it would be a staying while all creation journies on. [discussion of spelling … journies vs. journeys]. That's my pith o' day. Dial 800-MOO for Pith O' Day. " ‘I've come this far, so?' You think the road stops here? Here be dragons and dogs... f. So, if this is the end of the road, where are all those other spirits going? I don't know. So, the pundits of faith say the others are going to delusion or Hell or a hell of a delusion. They, meaning the others who journey on, are under some kind of spell and that spell is spelled courage and vision. Those who stop not just to rest but to stop, have lost vision. And if SP is about anything, it is about the abundance and reality and infinitude of vision. Around that bend is always something more beautiful and wondrous than has been known. "So, sit it out if you wish, but don't stop. Rest, yes; end, no. That's SP. SP in a nutshell."

Here's the text of what you will hear in the phone call portion: “[I was wondering whether our emotions are time-based] Surely… but. Because otherwise they would not be connected to events. And you might suddenly feel something for no apparent reason—which is what happens in grief when time fades from prominence. “[when you see the bigger picture, if there are emotions they would be more balanced I would think] Part of the process of traveling through grief is the re-syncing of emotions and time. Depression is often the experience of being out of sync. Sadness when there is no cause. “All emotions are appropriate when linked in a timely way. Ok, this begs a question about our timeless state. Are we spirits emotionless? No. But we are connected to emotions through relationships not events. Can't say more because it would not compute to you time-based entities. And they are different emotions… and don't even ask about our emoticons. “We feel things with the flow of relationship but flow in a different than time sense. Huh? Let me give an analogy. There is a river. It has banks. ‘The banks are full of money.' CT! The banks experience the river as flowing by. That's the time version. In another version the river and the banks are relational so the banks define the river's course, even as the river defines the banks. “So, leave it there. No, let's do more. At times the river is thwarted by the banks and at times the river eats away the banks. And while the flow is involved, it is not the definition of either thwarting or defining. The flow is like time-based emotions getting upset with a rock that interrupts the flow, but the totality of the river and its banks do not focus on the rock or the flow. I'm done. I'm going fishing down by the riverside. “Here's a bon mot: The same picnic item that causes some to get angry will make others happy. Deviled eggs. ‘You know I hate those'… or ‘You know I love those.' But the eggs don't care. “And another bon mot: Our emotions run highest when we are forced to relate to events or people we are not in relationship with. That's why a stranger can evoke strong feelings. And events and people we are in relationship with can evoke such strong feelings when they seem not to relate to us. An imposed connection and a broken one have the same extreme affect.”

Here's the text of the message shared in the podcast: “We talked before about how the spirits here seem to be familiar, but in fact every spirit except for in their first time at this complexity have lived as many. You get the familiar once. But here is another piece of understanding. “Each spiritual entity, in living through various lives, does not follow a sequential path. So the most recent version in a time-based reality may not be the most fulfilled. How can this be. I will use the analogy of a great chef. ‘Thank you.' Not you! “Great chefs start out as cooks. They may, for example, work for years to master sauces. Then put them in the role of baker and they start over in that work. Accomplished bisque makers may not be accomplished biscuit makers. [R: that's pretty good.] Thank you. And so it goes until they have mastered all areas of the kitchen. A true chef is a master of all culinary tasks right down to making radish roses, but at any point in their development it might appear they are just starting out. It is in the whole presentation and preparation of a great meal that they excel and are complete. So, too, with spirit entities. Never assume the person who appears as a spiritual novice is really one. Just take a Buddhist monk and ask him to say mass. “It is not linear, sequential, hierarchical. It is holistic. And true, some pieces of understanding will not fall into place until others are there and understood. But it could be the other way ‘round, too. “Don't make any assumptions about any spiritual maturity or fulfillment based on only one perception of a spirit. Thus endeth the pith."

Here is the text of the message as received from Rikkity: It's not a dichotomy. There is no separation between the Divine and the other. In most perceptions, one strives to become one with the Divine or the universe or whatever. But this is how I see it: You and I and all will become the Divine because we are all already part of it. It is in us, and we are in it. No separation; no hierarchy. A physical parallel: hydrogen is an element, water is a compound (see, I did pay attention in class), and polymagnesium carbohydrate is a complex compound, and a house is made of thousands of compounds, and the universe has many houses. But which is real. All of them are as real as the next, and all are part of the universe. Complexity is not a measure, but a description. So with entities, is the level before this less valid; is the level to come more valid. In spiritual terms, no. Everything is! And everything will be! It has always been! How it relates and forms in ever-more complex ways is the process of all being. And some day--or maybe night--it will all be unified, and that is what some would call the Divine: All That Is in one being. But we are never separate from it. Nothing exists outside it... or maybe not. Maybe there are other realities, all moving toward their own unities, and when each and all are unified, the process repeats all over on a grander scale. But All That Is is! It's not! about any individual act of communion with the Divine; it's about infinite acts of union within the Divine. Save yourself and miss the whole shebang. Those who seek their own fulfillment simply delay the larger processes. It's not about differentiation; it's about integration, connection. Together we can move on, separately we are pitiful. So the task is not to seek the Divine and find a personal connection; it is to feel the Divine and make eternal connection with others. You can't build if you don't get together. That's all.

Here's the text of what is being shared: “So, when we talk we often have others here as well as me. And it would appear that this side is populated with familiar spirits. Let me riff on this. “Let's take Papa. ‘Hi, babe.' So, you consider him Papa but he is also all the physical representations of his spirit that he has been and will be. Remember, no time. He will not be this spirit entity in a more complex connection and he was not this spirit entity in less complex connections. So we leave those for elsewhere. This is just about the spirit--his spirit—at this level of complexity. But that spirit entity has been represented in many ways and they are all real and present. “You know what I mean. You go to Grandma's and she has a few photo albums and you look inside and there's little Eri and bigger Eri and young adult Eri and even obituary Eri. And each is its own and yet I was the same. “So, too, with spirit. If you met one of Papa's other incarnations at this level of complexity he would feel familiar but not quite the same. He might seem more fearful or something or he might seem to have his act more together. He might think the Rosicrucians had the answers or he might be sending the Rosicrucians the answers. And still, the same spirit entity. “In the evolution of the spirit at any one level of complexity, it is basically the same spirit with more or less learning and remembering and incorporating. And at this level all those spirits are co-existent (or is that with a ‘a'?). “So, the currently living by your standards will see and experience the version of the spirit they knew best… unless they have blinders that keep them from sensing spiritual evolution and see the spirit as less developed or have an openness to see the spirit as more developed. “And here's tonight's kicker: Some spirits when on the physical side, open people to see their potential development and not just their remembered and familiar state. I think of some like the Buddha and JC. ‘Hi.' And the like, who were able to open minds and hearts and spirits to familiarity with the potential of what would evolve. [like you] Awwww. So, that's that…. or is it? “Over here in spirit world it's not like Disney where Mickey and Goofy are always there and the same. We exist on grand spirit spectrums. And that is so inadequate a description. We appear to you in a form familiar for reasons of connection. “I'm sure there will be questions but not now. Ponder deep and hard and with laughter. [I'm still back on that point of sensing less complex or more complex. That intrigued me.] More on that later, dude. “Ok, I won't leave you hanging. Sometimes you meet a spirit either as spirit or as a person, who gives you a glimpse of your more developed self. And now, later dude.”

This the connection between the discussion begun in Episode 1 and completed in Episode 2. Both of those deal with understanding closed versus open groups, what she calls tribes. As she says in this episode, Basic to this understanding is the concept that anything less than All That Is is incomplete and any barrier to seeking that completeness is thwarting the spiritual development of not only the entity but also All That Is.  We invite you to ponder this understanding, that any and all circles, groups, tribes that do not seek the infinite possibility of All That Is are spiritually not just incomplete but counter to the potential of spiritual existence.  Here's the text of the conversation: “Now to follow up. Tribes, that is not to imply it's only about people. It is a human term for any closed group of entities. Could be rocks. Listen in: ‘He's so sedimentary, nothing igneous about him so keep him away.' See. “Basic to this understanding is the concept that anything less than All That Is is incomplete and any barrier to seeking that completeness is thwarting the spiritual development of not only the entity but also All That Is.  “Any tribe that thinks it has arrived is deluded. Because if there is anything against which to define themselves, there is the assumption that they are not yet fully one with All. When the Hebrews heard the commandment about 'there shall be no other gods before me,' who were those other gods? By defining the closed sets in terms of things outside the set implied a lack of fulfillment. Maybe within the laws it was fulfilled, but since it admitted to other ways of being it was both fulfilling and lacking. “Ok, let's leave that here for now."

Here we are talking with two of Riikity's spirit friends, with a brief comment by Rikkity. We should note that with a few exceptions, the various friends are known to us by their initials. So today we will hear from PS and MW. They are speaking from their perspectives on the current pandemic crisis and the power of our choices to make a difference. They also offer messages of spiritual hope. We would note that the spirits who communicate with us do not make predictions about the future: they are not oracles. But they do offer us ways of thinking about life's events to better inform our own decision making and find our enduring values.  Here's the text of today's conversations: PS: “Hi. I want to give you my grim history. I have been a physician several times… ‘but he never played one on TV.' Rikkity is right, as usual. I had the opportunity and the misfortune to live during the Black Death plague and the Spanish Flu pandemic. So I know about such things. “Here is what I know. Foolish self-confidence about one's health was always a problem. Whether by reason of religion, diet, location, lifestyle, or whatever, some thought themselves immune. And they fell just like the others but taking more with them. I tried to convince people that no one was invincible. “If each and every person with a disease is segregated away and if the rest avoid social contact, any and every disease can be diminished. It's that simple. No exceptions. “And I dare to remind people that any worry greater than health will prove fatal. The store owner who could not imagine being closed never lived long enough to enjoy his profits. “The world's economy will not perish, but the people might. “I am worried for you in the general sense but not for the two of you specifically. [good to know, thank you] Good to be of service. You are following the wise path, not solely for yourself but also others.” Rikkity: “He speaks with a flourish. [eloquent] I thought we needed him. [yes, ty] BTW there are many new arrivals and are they pissed! People they considered friends gave them a final gift. But on a better note, your favorite tea companion. [M!]” MW: “Gracious good day. I hope people in your time might remember mine. There were so many times when it appeared that our endeavor was doomed and we would pay the ultimate price for our beliefs and actions. But my dear Mr. W. was always resolute. He would tell me ‘Until death has taken all my options, I will still believe that we might choose paths of success.' “Many were the voices of discouragement and often we were told to give up the cause. Settle for something else. His resolve was strong and I love him for that. We had long ago decided that we would not return to life as it had been. “Those who argued for our end of course thought it was possible to go back. We knew it was not and trusted the future more than a corrupted past. “In your time, some or many things may end but that does not mean an end. It means a new beginning. All that you cherish has been built on as many failures as on successes. The world is not essentially flawed; it blossoms forth even in hard times. “I leave you with a memory: on our land on the neck we had a great forest fire. All was consumed. But the next spring new shoots arose among the ashes and seed from some of those became the stock of our fields because we knew them to be the heartiest. Look for where the new shoots are coming up, even when all else seems gone. I think I want a pekoe. Heavy cream, please. “As always, your friend in both loss and growth.

Rikkity sums it all up in the simple yet profound notion of the unity of all. And listen for her metaphor of bisque! Here are her words: “So, each entity has all possibility before it as defined by its entity history. Infinite does not divide. More than enough. And All That Is contains both all that is and all that could be. And it's in a constant state of becoming in which the two merge. All possibility and all realization and fulfillment become 1. “Many many many paths to there. Nothing of value left out. The end. There's no wittle wee bit sitting outside All That Is. And you couldn't do that even if you tried really really hard. It all comes into unity. “And just when you have them all together, wait, there's more! Don't you get it: infinite connections without end but always with progress and meaning. “Unity of All. There is this persistent rumor that only some frequencies connect to spirit, and other rumors of Heaven and Hell, as if there are any parts of existence from which other parts are excluded. But I come to share the really hot news: It's all One. The most separate entity and the most connected one can each and both sense the whole. “Every level of complexity can touch the whole, even if it is not always perceived nor understood. There is no Realm A over here and Realm B over there. There is no then and now and yet-to-be. There is no up nor down. It's all One. Yet until we have connected into the complexity of All, and in the process created it, we may sense separation but not differentiation. Go ahead and think of some part of existence you can't connect to. See, you can't! But you are. “Cosmic soup of being, kind of puree. While most like to think of stew, I think of bisque. I am the only spirit guide to speak of bisque… with loads of butter. And here's the secret of purees and bisques: While very diverse in the constituent elements, complex in taste with no one element dominating, and if one is missing it just tastes wrong. “Existence requires the inclusion of all to be meaningful and complex and fulfilled. Either it's all One or what's the point? That's it.”

Rikkity shares some of the basics of a Spiritual Persistence perspective: here is the text of the message: “So, let's get back to basics. The whole concept of SP is that by learning and remembering, one is able to bring greater understanding into the essence of one's being and that increased essence—or enhanced essence—is what makes a spirit entity capable of connecting into more complex spiritual entities.  “Now, let's think about how most religions work. They point to deficiencies and suggest faith and practice can fill those deficiencies. They hold up perfection and ask what of that is missing in you. So SP is offering a different take. It's not about resolving deficiencies but about fulfilling potential and enhancing realities. If someone were to ask me what they need to complete so they would be capable of spiritual evolution I would have to say I don't know because there is no one set formula for meaningful connection. If I said everyone must do A, then no more complexity would arise. It's in the meaningful connections of mutually supportive and sustaining relating entities that complexity arises.  “Now let's also disabuse you of the notion that there is only one more complex entity that you could complete and fulfill. And that would mean the other elemental entities are just waiting around for you. Hey, do you think Godot will ever show up?  “There are an infinite number of potential more complex entities into which you might connect in a sustaining way. And if you were to learn and remember A but not B, there would be just as many options as if you learned and remembered B but not A. only as it all gets closer to All That Is is there any limit to what will fulfill. But since there are an infinite number of All That Is scenarios for All That Is, it as a goal is also transforming and transformative. Ponder that shit. I think I've done enough for today.

Rikkity continues to ponder some of the basics of SP, and this episode explores how our specific fulfillments may limit other possibilities but that through connection we may find the fulfillments seemingly loss when we stand alone. Here's the text of what she shares: “So, as we have been sharing, the entityship question is not resolved by appeal to free will or determinism. You have choices to make. And this does not readily reduce to theology, either. “If you try to appeal to theists you either have it all controlled or you have chaos. Deists don't do any better with the clockwork notion. So, let's try the tried and true organic reality in which there is no act of Creation but eternal creation by which existence is always being shaped by the participants. And therefore, there is no set endpoint conclusion, except for what arises in the process of complexity and the melding of infinite fulfillments of potential. Which leads me to contradict myself. “You are offered infinite potential. But at the moment that any part of that potential is realized, the possibilities drop from being infinite. Acting on any one possibility eliminates some others… with one big exception. The ability to connect is never lessened. The key to the spiritual progression is not achievement but process, and another name for that process is ‘connection.' How so? “Ok, let's dwindle down the infinite possibilities to just 5. I know that's laughable… but let's say you or they or him… but not her… opt for 1 and fulfill that. So 2, 3, 4, 5 drop out as options. So you fulfill 1 but lose the others… unless you connect to other entities which have focused on 2 or 3 or 4 or even 5. If you can connect to their fulfilled reality, then those potentials are not lost. “No one ever said you had to do it all or alone. The ultimate act of connection brings the infinite paths of potential fulfillment into unity and whole fulfillment. “So, it is never about what you don't do, but about what you do do and your connection. Thus spake the Moo.

Rikkity continues to provide an overview of the principles of Spiritual Persistence, this time pondering free will versus determinism, with the idea that maybe it is an "and" situation more than an "or" one -- here's the text: “So, we have been discussing the role of individual entity development and the fulfillment of the cosmos. “Ok, let's try to delve into some classical issues. Free will vs. determinism. It's both. Huh? Ok, follow along. “If the evolution of existence is not dependent on a set of certain entity combinations then determinism is out. But then, does that mean it's all free will? No. You have your own–just like any other entity–set of potentials to fulfill in order to be sustainable and ready for connection. Doing Herman's work does not fulfill you. So, there is a determined part at each level of complexity, but wait just a sec… you as your current entity with your current potential waiting to be fulfilled is the product of an undetermined set of less complex entities—each of which add to fulfill their own determined roles based on their potentials. So, it is a mix. “Each entity has its own potential to fulfill, but how each fulfills that is open. “Just as there is no one complex combination for the next level, but an infinite array of places to meaningfully fit in, so too there are infinite possible fulfillments of the same potential. And the potentials are each a product of prior fulfillments which were freely fulfilled from determined sets of potential, etc., all the way down. “The binary of ‘free will and determinism' is false. And proceeding as if it were true will yield seemingly true results which are false. Complexity is the name of the game, and it is this complex at about this level. But don't ask about what is yet to be.