(Q) So, Rita, I am fascinated to see you making sense of things I started to get more than a dozen years ago, but couldn't bring through coherently. I spoke of crystallizing but could never make it clear and plain because I couldn't understand it clear and plain. But yesterday did it almost offhandedly, by saying that people either can or can't hold it together when the bonds of the body are gone; and, if they can't, it is not the constituent parts but the organizing principle of that soul, the personality that had expressed in 3D, that goes away. You didn't say it in so many words, but that was the unspoken essence of it.
(A) Another example of "the better the question, the better the answer". And merely by us seeing the question straight, a lot of perplexities fell away, did they not?
(Q) They certainly did! At least, for me. Maybe others would need to go through our sessions to see how hard we struggled with the question of what happens to the soul that doesn't crystallize, with the guys assuring us that nothing is lost, but unable to show us why not.
(A) And you see that your assumption that the answer to Suzanne's question would involve left-over associations was wrong. I think probably I'm just making you up.
(Q) It's interesting. In life I rarely say, "very funny", but it feels like I'm always saying it here.
(A) Here, as opposed to life?
(Q) Yeah, I heard that too. I don't know where that came from.
No comments:
Post a Comment