20060118 prcjlo water model_candle 2

18/01/2006 prcjlo water model_candle 2


Prcjlo 20060118 Model extension in water

P If I may begin by asking for a clarification of the manipulation of the candle flame; the reasons why and an explanation of how?

^We wish at times to reassure you of our presence.

P Thank you. It was unmistakeable.

^We wish at times also to bring levity to certain situations ...

P And indeed you did!

^ ... for our hearts are full of love and laughter, and we wish to give you clarity on this, for it is only in your earthly incarnations that you experience the degrees of fear and sorrow, anger and anxiety, and all of those other human emotions, and we stress that these emotions are human. They are experienced only by those that dwell on that plane, and they are given to you to elicit reaction to the different experiences you encounter. And the way you react reflects the level of your awareness of what life is about. Of what your purpose is for being here. And we brought your attention to our presence on the earlier occasion to which you refer, in order to remind you of your pledge to work as spiritual partners, and to avoid distractions, however pleasant they may seem at the time.

We challenge you not for your affectionate responses to one another, but we would that you devote as much time as possible to spiritual pursuits, without the drudgery of intellectual analysis, but with frequency, which spills over into your time apart and influences each step that you take in the fulfilment of your purpose in this journey. You asked for an explanation of our ability to manipulate the flame. We simply cup our hands about it and manipulate the amount of oxygen available. A simplistic trick, activated with more subtle energies than you on earth possess, but sufficiently simple to explain the phenomena to you.

P Allowing for the fact of the actual absence of hands, but with acknowledged capacity to affect gaseous flows, presumably.

^Our abilities are limitless. We now intend to move away from the one through whom we speak, and will make ourselves available for the utilisation of the other.

P You spoke of purpose, and I would seek more on that? (Then in role ...)

^We gather ourselves into your energy field for the specific purpose on this occasion of enunciating a new beginning again for this year, for the specific purpose of an expansion of the documentation currently begun and in existence for the furtherance of our intention regarding the model of spirituality. There are several features yet to be adequately explicated. There are several aspects which remain obscure, and we would wish for a more full and simple layer of the explanation, as well as a more detailed, sophisticated and complete explanation. So, we begin at once:

The comparison between the numeric metaphor presented in the form of a graph and the reality it intends to represent, is rather distant. It is truncated and constrained into that numeric metaphor. We wish to add a layer of detail through the mode of explanation of an undersea construction. This is easier to imagine than the atmospheric construction, although either medium would suffice, both being fluids, and occupying 3 dimensional space. The ordinary untutored human mind has almost invariably experienced some depth of water, and visualised items within that as 3 dimensional space, viewed as a depth, often measured against the body and its dimensions. The more highly visible metaphor is therefore a more suitable medium by which to engage the understanding. The awareness first is that there is a medium, within which a construction is possible. There is a volume, within which a volume-occupying construction is possible. There is differentiation between materials essentially occupying the same volume, and that one may displace the other, hence allowing for the concept of flotation through displaced mass or volume. This flotation model is essentially 3 dimensional, in contrast to the nominally 2 dimensional aspect of the graph on a page, and so some advantage may be gained from the distinction between the two, although the difference is in fact small. So if we can begin by stimulating the perspective of being outside a volume of water, situated above it, looking into it from above, one may see a degree of depth. One may postulate that it is essentially clear, but perceptible as a distinct and distinctly different medium from that occupied by the external observers. This viewed volume can therefore be given whatever parameters one may wish. It is the equivalent of the tabula rasa, the blank slate on which one can project one’s feelings and perceptions and thoughts and understanding. It is, moreover, an opportunity to be specific about what attributes are to be cast into it. The volume may be given a colour. It may have more than one, in different layers, or in gradients, and to have other qualities superimposed on that, such as lustre, shininess, sparkle, texture, and gradients in all of those. So it is intrinsically a more complex medium by which to illustrate the intended attributes for which we seek to provide explanation. It suffers the drawback of having a magnified opportunity set for misconstrual, hence every aspect requires explicit description, and accurate designation of relationship one part to another. In this it is little different from the reality of the world which you occupy, which you can now so accurately, and occasionally succinctly, describe to one another.

So this expansion from the 2 or 3 to the multiple level of description of the model is by way of leading into understanding that the reality which you inhabit is exactly such a model. It is not an ultimate reality in itself. It is an experiential mode of interaction with a deeper and underlying reality, and this distinction between the two is the opportunity we have to make explicit the presentation of it as a model, with the clear understanding that there is an explicit parallel between this stepwise model creation, and the stepwise coming to understand in an experiential way the parameters of the world in which you construct your experience. This is progressively and will be more completely understood to be the reality for the human experience, and the understanding of this at the philosophical and the conceptual level is the way in which a more detailed understanding can be given or allowed or constructed, for a person who is untutored in the perception of the distinction between their lived experience and an external explanation of that as being a metaphor in which they live.

The distinction between that metaphor and the underlying spiritual reality, is our task. Your task is to assist the ordinary person with that distinction, making that distinction plain in their mind so they can gain some understanding about the relationship between their lived experience, and the distinction between that and ultimate reality.

This has been the task of the mystic in every generation, so it is nothing new, it is simply a deeper layer of understanding of your role in relation to others who may question you about these things. For they will come, because we will send them. In some of the descriptive work which you have encountered in recent times, (Walsch, ND. Tomorrow’s God) there has been an explicit expectation created that there will be an exponential increase in the number of people who are significantly curious about these things, and it is proceeding to plan, and it will come to pass within your lifetime. Therefore it is merely appropriate, given the already extensive understanding of the domain you inhabit, and your advanced age relative to that of others who are in the process of coming to represent that curious generation. And they are coming already prepared by explicitly engendered curiosity about these aspects.

So you will have a rich old age in these bodies should you wish to avail yourselves of the many opportunities to come in which you will be questioned in these ways. We therefore are arming you with relevant metaphors by which to make plain these perceptions. And with that beginning we leave you for this evening.

J Into the fish tank! I couldn’t help having visions of Nemo. ;-)

[1389 words]


  • --:-- prcjlo water model_candle 2

Peter Calvert - AgapeSchoolinz

Friday, 17 February 2017 (1)