More from Rita on the Explorers program

Explorers (continued)

From DeMarco, Frank. Rita's World Vol 2: A View from the Non-Physical (Kindle Location 2573). Rainbow Ridge Books. Kindle Edition".

(Q) The sound of rain on the roof, or against the windows.  Is there anything cozier?  Yours at no extra charge, Rita.

(A) Yes, but you get it only one day at a time, which gives you focus at the expense of diversity, and us the converse.

(Q) Shall we proceed? Several of us are all ears, waiting for your ideas on the new Explorers program.

(A) Recapitulate the points I made, if you will - that is, the four overlapping priorities.

(Q) These were:

·     Access to information

·     Learning to obtain that access

·     Demonstrating new possibilities

·     Creating a new support system

(A) That will serve as a reminder, but equally instructive will be the subtle changes that crept in to your description.  Thus I said "new possibility" which seemed to you to mean "new possibilities", and said "support systems" which you took to mean "asupport system".  This is not meant as a chastisement, of course, but as a pointer. First, it is easy for unmeant changes to creep in; second, really new information often seems like grammatical or stylistic awkwardness.  As we'll see. You and I have a close and easy-going connection - think how much greater these potential pitfalls for others in various circumstances.  I don't mean communication between others will always be harder, but it will be sometimes, as it will be easier for other combinations.  Just something to note.

Steering the conversation

(A) It is demonstration and support that I wanted to devote this new session to, and this may take a long time or only a few paragraphs.  We'll see.

(Q) Interesting that you don't know.  Didn't you write out your lecture notes?

(A) It depends less upon me than upon your reaction as we go along, for different reactions will move us along different timelines (as we're calling the different possible futures you may choose among), in the same way that Q and A develops in 3D as each person reacts to the previous statement or question.

(Q) Obvious, as you say it - and this explains why sometimes you seem to say something requires only a few words - but then go on at greater length, or vice versa.

(A) Yes.  It isn't wool-gathering from here, but wool-gathering (if it may properly be called that) between the two of us.  Your own mental process is as loud to me as your written or spoken word, and so sometimes we proceed down side trails I hadn't necessarily intended.  This is the great temptation, or hazard, in that the so-called side trails are as valid as the so-called main trail. Everything connects, as you've heard once or twice.

(Q) An interesting refinement.  I hadn't quite realized how much the person in 3D helps steer the conversation. Clear now, though.  Okay, so it's up to me to keep you on the straight and narrow, or is it straight and narrow?  I will try to limit my own discursive tendencies.

(A) You re-read yesterday's "catch", as you put it, to have the trend clearly in your mind, and I would recommend that others do so as well, because one disadvantage of providing information in bite-sized amounts is the loss of continuity of - what shall we call it? - emotional framework.  That is, I build up a certain thought-bubble, a momentary form for our shared mind, but then the bubble pops as you go off to live your days; the form has to be recreated or at least brought back into mind.  It causes slippage.

(Q) "It" means, the non-3D/3D situation surrounding communication, I take it.

(A) Yes.  It may be overcome, and at various times or in various combinations it may be a greater or lesser problem, but it is always a factor. Re-reading to have it in mind is one way to reduce the scattering effect.

On-going joint exploration

(A) Now, this applies directly to what I want to advise TMI about in this regard.  It is specifically the difference between the joint mind on the one hand and the dead record of what was accessed by a joint mind, on the other, that has been a major unrecognized limitation in communication - not of course particularly at TMI but everywhere and always.  The problem may be overcome if addressed, but only if addressed, and that implies awareness that the problem exists.

(Q) Are we on the main trail you wish to set out?

(A) We are.  The third and fourth priorities I set out - not third and fourth in importance, just in the order given - were the demonstration of a new possibility and the need for (and opportunity for) the creation of a new way to support the process.

The new possibility is the creation and maintenance of a continuing joint mind holding a steady focus on a given issue.  The way this may be done is by engaging several people at the same time in an overlapping effort, so that the advantages of 3D focus may be brought to bear to overcome the scattering effect of 3D impermanence of attention.

(Q) Let me paraphrase, to see if I have it right, because I feel like I was just about hanging on, there. I think you are saying, if TMI organizes a group endeavor, and that endeavor engages different individuals so as to stretch out the time that the group mind functions, larger chunks of information can be retrieved, and at the same time those participating can learn by experience to stretch their capacities by joining hands with others. This isn't what you said, but that's the underlying sense of it that I got.

(A) You are in the right direction, let's put it that way.  Communication between 3D and non-3D has several endemic problems, and this is one way to address and overcome them.

First, of course, is subjectivity.

(Q) You don't need to persuade me!

(A) No, nor anyone attempting it as a solitary individual, even though you know you are really neither solitary nor individual.  But that is how it seems, and without external support, that is how it must seem to others [observing or reading the results], no matter that they trust your intent and your skill.  Anyone with first- or second-hand experience will recognize that the question of contamination [i.e., personal elements mingling unnoticed with material being brought forth] must always arise.  But group exploration reduces that danger (or let's say, that flavor, [so as] not to be dramatic).

TMI has programs that engage in group exploration, and it is always a big moment when a participant first receives validation of what seemed a strictly subjective experience from another person's report.  Then they realized that "strictly subjective" may not be the way to think of it.  Well, so here.  Structure joint exploration of information, rather than join exploration of experience(such as "experience the reception center", etc.) and you will smooth out perceived eccentricities of perception, you will correct for eccentricities of perception, you will provide automatic reinforcement of belief in the accuracy of perception, and you will achieve much greater volumes of information transfer.  That is a lot of upside potential.

(Q) It certainly is. Is that phrase taken from my mind, or are you speculating in stocks, over there?

[And here is an example of the nuances of such communication.  I heard "upside potential" quite clearly - that is, I didn't hear audio, but the words were quite clearly what I was to write - but I hesitated, because I thought, that had to come from me.  I never heard Rita talk of "upside potential" or anything like it.  She didn't have a lot of interest in money, and none in speculation.  But like a good boy I put down what I got, and like the skeptic that I am, I made my reservation about it into a question, which turned out to lead where she wanted us to go.]

(A) Funny you should mention that.  Remember the investment group that speculated in the [silvers] market by means of cooperative remote-viewing?

(Q) I see. That's one practical model of how this might be organized.

(A) In the one aspect of organization, yes.  Not necessarily the remote-viewing protocols.  But the new Explorers could easily begin as a six-day residential seminar devoted specifically to creating the conditions for continued joint-minded exploration.

(Q) Aimed for specific information, I suppose.

(A) The specific aims are less important than clear understanding of why it is being done, which is, to facilitate the creation of an ongoing continuous joint exploration which people could enter, leave, return to, as they were so moved and as they were enabled by their life circumstances.

(Q) That's very interesting.

(A) And let's leave it there for the moment, with the additional comment that I invite questions either for the public domain as here or for private consumption by those who are in charge of installing the new program.