20060416 prcjlo flow

16/04/2006 prcjlo flow


Prcjlo 20060416 Flow Through Peter

^We come on this occasion to bring love, to acknowledge the observance of the agreed meeting time and place, to bring encouragement into your minds and hearts as to the adequacy of your willingness in spite of the impediments imposed by your earth-bound lives. This is not a challenge to us yet a challenge for you. We simply wait for the right time, and this is one such.

Into this harmonious environment, newly created as it is, we bring investments of attention and willingness to communicate with you, as with others. The investment referred to is that of recharging the commitment to ongoing dialogue, as we have been involved with you for these many years. This dialogue is ongoing precisely because it is a necessary prerequisite for the conveyance, through you to others, as we have explained before, of our intentions to manifest into the domain of humanity, that which it has asked for. And so your service is welcome and adequate, and contributory, and based on love, and love of service, and love of humanity, and love of spirit, and that is adequate. Foregone though your time may be in pleasures otherwise gain-able, that investment is your contribution to this time, but only in part, for there are other investments of time in your future which will be welcomed by us, as it will by others. So this is the activity of service.

The content of service is more abstract, more hard to understand, more difficult to convey, more challenging, in its necessity for knowledge of abstruse functioning. Yet also, you are adequate for that. And for the needs of those who would also wish to gain understanding of that abstruse functioning. So we bring you now another short chapter in that description, partly conveyed to date.

The one through whom we speak is chosen primarily for this aspect of the conveyance of the information, on the basis of the wealth of obscure subjects which have come before his attention over the generational time periods purveyed thus far in his present incarnation. That set of interlocking concepts, influenceable as it is by us for the conveyance of this information, is a sufficiently loose mesh of ideas which can be sampled as required for the construction of metaphors usable in the transfer of this information. The utilisation of that is a creative act on our part.

This information should not be construed as ‘truth’. It should be construed as an adequate model; no more. We are at some pains to point this out repeatedly, for all too often in the conveyance of some similar classes of information over the centuries, there has been insufficient understanding on the part of the individuals through whom we have spoken, on the distinction between what the listener desires to call the truth, and what we desire to call the model. The breadth in the community now of the distinctions between ‘the truth’ and a functional model are now sufficiently widespread to enable us to have more confidence that, over a period of time, there will be sustained sufficient awareness of that distinction. And so we have some hope that the reality in which we live and have our being will be able to be approached in terms of the understanding in the minds of those incarnate who encounter our description of that reality, so as to avoid the dogmatic declaration of what is, in contrast to what is not or what should be, and the distinction between that and any other model conveyed historically. For we wish to not foster antagonistic discourse, but an open-hearted discussion about the relative merits of this model versus any other, understanding very clearly that in no description is there enough detail sufficiently described to preclude consideration, destruction of any other model, on the basis of dogmatic assertions.

We labour this point somewhat in order to make it abundantly plain in your minds if no one else’s as yet, that these distinctions are real. Each model is conveyed into a community, which predisposes, through the metaphors used, a degree of acceptance of that model in preference to others. That says nothing about its adequacy at any future time. At such future times, a modified model is presented in the light of the opportunities present for understanding to be created in the minds of those listening then, to the new metaphors, being part of the new model, which will again convey understanding into the minds of those who encounter it. It is not, of course, that the reality changes, but the language, and the metaphors used which describe it. And so enough has been said about these contextual aspects such as to lead into the presentation before you again, of yet another aspect of the series of metaphors which we bring before you. On this evening that concerns another dimension to be described in relation to the existing set of parameters described thus far.

So far we have the fundamental parameters, as requested and described, and the parameter we wish to describe this time is that of flow.

There are metaphors for flow utilisable in this domain, mostly by reference to the direct physical encountering of the fluids common in your environment. By this of course we mean wind and water. There are many others, and we need not enumerate them, for they are obvious. They serve as palpable models for their description of the flow of the energy referred to on the prior occasion, concerning the shape to which the energy may be crafted. But we have until this moment said little about the nature of the flow itself.

It is, firstly, to be considered particulate. By that we mean there are discrete objects of energy. The energy can be considered to be quantised, to use that term. There are packets of energy, to use another metaphor. These packets may be assembled in a linear fashion for a microscopic field of application. They may be assembled into the variety of shapes described on the previous occasion. They should be understood to be individually addressable, in the sense in which is generally understood, in these times, as the packets of information despatched across your information networks, each with an address, each with an originating location. The manipulator of the energy addresses the packet by their intention. They assemble the required number into a pattern of their choosing, add the required energy appropriate to their application, and despatch them. And they move within the field of intention by the designer of that field, which is the applying technician, if we may use that terminology. So the field is under the direction of the individual intelligence that chooses to manipulate the energy for good.

The manipulation of the energy can also be done by those who wish to produce work for negative intention (bad), because the energy itself, the packets of energy are directable by those who apply their will. The only redeeming feature is the reality that those who are of higher energy in their nature and location, have at their disposal more energy than those of destructive will, who are always lower in the scale of both Agape and Hierarchy. This is the entire reason for the prevailing of good over evil. This is the ground, this is the context, this is the essential characteristic, which determines that outcome. The nature of your stories of the battles between good and evil demonstrate this in graphic ways, with a rich history of description in your various cultures, over the time of the duration of your existence in these forms, by which we mean the multitude of bodies which have existed and been animated by the spiritual identities indwelling.

The prevalence of good over evil, to use those traditional terms, is a product of the nature of the spiritual domain. The energy economy of that domain is as we have described so far, and that is a sufficient explanation and reason for that pattern of functioning.

The magnitude of the energy of each packet of energy, as we are choosing to call it, is infinitesimal. Therefore the number of packets required for any act are extremely large, and so the flow density, or the granularity of the flow, are such as to allow any degree of physical substance to be influenced. For the granularity of the spiritual domain is finer by many orders of magnitude than the granularity of the physical energetic domain. These aspects should not be unexpected to you. There have been many discussions in recent times about the pattern of interaction between the spiritual domain and its progeny, the physical domain, and so we give this information simply as another supporting metaphor by which to allow an understanding of the relationships that exist between those two domains. And the primeval and originating nature of the spiritual domain down to the finest level of the components of the physical domain, and we mean this to its subatomic particle level, for whatever degree of granularity can be established in the structure of the physical universe, there is a finer granularity available in the originating and source domain.

This being understood, the nature of the flow can then be understood to be extremely finely divided, therefore extremely finely dispersible in whatever pattern may be chosen by the manipulator of that energy. And so, any degree of fineness of the physical domain of any kind of structure, may be influenced at will. This includes the genetic level, and hence this is the means by which genetic components are structured in the physical domain. And they have been. And they continue to be. And that will be the case in the future, for the desire to manifest ongoing variation in form is not yet satiated.

This gives a possible release from undue concern in present terms about the species vanishing from the physical domain on this earth. There has never been a shortage of innovation in terms of the manipulation of species into favourable habitats. Expect it to be ongoing. Expect there to be new discoveries even as the demise of species is mapped in other locations and times. We say these things specifically in this context, to avoid over-concern on the part of the identity Janet and her cohort of concerned individuals about such matters.

This being the case, that the understanding is allowable of the capacity to influence the physical domain as a matter of intelligent will on those who are absent from the physical level, the issue becomes one of from what level the will is derived. Is it a benign high level will? Is it a mischievous will? Is it a will originating from an identity of darker intent? Because each can have their influence, not only in the energetic realms, but in the physical realms, and this is enough to identify the capacity of those in the realm of spirit to directly affect those whose awareness is confined to the domain of physicality. And so this is enough to adequately inform those who observe the variety of physical phenomena which have been observed over time, and continue to be discussed to this day. Therefore, for those whose attention is confined to what they can perceive through their physical eyes, this is the realm of magic, the appearance and disappearance of things, the shifting of the location of things from one place to another, apparently identical things in apparently identical form, even though in fact they may have been changed in some way. The manifestation into the mind of any individual, of images, of impressions, of structures, or the removal of structures. The altering of sensibilities, either quickly or slowly, the progressive gaining of faculties hitherto non-apparent. All of these aspects are explainable in terms of the skilled direction of these packets of energy. By this we wish to specifically underpin an understanding, which says that the manifestation in the physical domain is a possible product of will in the non-physical domain.

Now this has deep philosophical implications in relation to creation, both in a present understanding, and a historical understanding, and a religious understanding, and the denial of a religious understanding. So we enter into that domain of debate. And we do so willingly, and in a well-informed way. We seek to not deny anybody’s understanding, for everyone’s understanding is partial, including our own. We seek to not influence any person’s understanding, for we do not intend to proselytise, we do not intend to impose our understanding on anyone who would choose to think otherwise. This is not an indoctrination. It is explanation of the fields of reality, and we use the term fields in the plural form quite deliberately, knowing that there are many fields of reality, and they can extend from the individual to any level of adoption, by any number of individuals. This is the model that we are choosing to convey, utilising the metaphors available to us as a currency for communication.

(The dictaphone’s battery ran out seconds before the statement’s end !! I think)

[2196 words]


  • --:-- prcjlo flow

Peter Calvert - AgapeSchoolinz

Friday, 17 February 2017 (1)