Limitations on communications
(Q) ["Let's say the 'limitations' imposed by 3D conditions vary wildly from individual to individual, but still obtain across a wide spectrum. Based on your work (and Rita's help here) and Monroe's and countless others, of course, we have some sense of the benefit of these 'limitations' for non-3D and beyond. Now ... let's say a significant 'limitation' for 3D humans here and now is a constraint on perception based upon 3D conditions generally, but also the specific historical conditions operating at present. This constraint on our perception presumably prohibits (some of, most of?) us from readily perceiving and interacting with the non-human intelligences all around us ('aliens' may come to mind, but I am thinking more of Earth-related intelligences: plants and animals for sure, but also cryptid beings for which there is lots of anecdotal evidence but little physical evidence like Sasquatch, 'faeries", and other apparently even stranger beings).
["So, keep in mind for the questions that follow the presupposition I'm working from: it is incumbent upon humans to widen both their sense of 'community' and 'intelligence' to include nonhumans in those perceptions and definitions; that it will make us more 'human' not less to do so.
["1. Through what effort or process can we learn to perceive and interact with nonhuman intelligence more consciously?
["2. Why do nonhuman intelligences (allegedly) seem to be less 'constrained' by 3D limitations than humans? Is this a matter of historical-developmental conditions (modernity) into which we are born? Are non-3D factors also determining these constraints on us from the 'outside' as it were?
["3. Does Rita interact with some of the intelligences I'm alluding to in non-3D?
["4. Are there 'risks' or potential 'dangers' we should be aware of?
["5. Is (over-) reliance on thinking linguistically a specific constraint that limits perception on this front?"]
(A) I agree that there is much more for humans to become aware of. I agree that to do so makes you - not more human perhaps, but more fully developed as a human (always bearing in mind that you as a human are inherently and inextricably connected to your non-3D component - that you are therefore no less connected to anything you connect to via 3D). In fact, to add to that parenthesis, you never know whether you are functioning "via 3D" or "via non-3D" for the very simple reason that it is a matter of interpretation, or viewpoint, which way you see it.
As to the specific questions:
1. Increased awareness is always the same process regardless of what it aims toward. The effort to live more in the present moment, getting out from behind filters and scripts, clarifies the screen and makes it easier to see.
2. That ismostly a "seems". Nonhuman intelligence of any kind - be it plant or ET - has its own inherent possibilities and limitations. You cannot expect the intelligence that governs your body's autonomic system to study astronomy, remember. Don't envy others their abilities if you are unwilling to envy their limitations.
3. Yes, and so do all of you. But it is one thing to interact, and a different thing to recognize the nature of the interaction. See #1, above.
5. This deserves a larger answer than we can give here, so let's begin next time with this one, and we can move on from here. It won't take an inordinately long time to answer, but it offers the chance to say a couple of things, and I shouldn't like to miss that opportunity.
Words and the non-3D
DeMarco, Frank. Rita's World: A View from the Non-Physical (Kindle Location's 4671). Rainbow Ridge Books. Kindle Edition
(Q) ["5. Is (over-) reliance on thinking linguistically a specific constraint that limits perception on this front?"]
(A) Well, as I said, I could have answered, simply, "sometimes it is". But it will be more useful to explain a little more.
Bob [Monroe] stressed that NVC - nonverbal communication - was an essential skill if people were to communicate with what he thought of as the nonphysical world. This is because of just this problem of sequential versus intuitive perception.
(Q) I take it to mean, thoughts, words, are sequentially processed and can only be sequentially processed. Nonphysical reality is, by definition, outside 3D and therefore is, by definition, not easily even described, let alone experienced, as a sequential 3D-time-slice-limited process. Therefore, the habit of communicating in non-3D helps develop the ability to experience non-3D with fewer filters because it doesn't involve silently and unconsciously translating everything into 3D terms, which, of course, is a process that involves a certain distortion.
(A) I thought you were worried about not understanding the material.
(Q) Very funny. Sometimes I get it, sometimes I don't, but what I just said seems clear enough in light of what you've said before this.
(A) Don't forget - and this is for everybody, Frank, not just for you - what you get while you are linked to other minds always seems obvious, always seems yours, except when you are groping for new material. It may not seem as obvious when you are processing it on your own afterward.
In any case, your summary is good enough. Any sequential process is going to impede perceptionof the non-3D. But it is important to remember that you will make sense of that experience only by integrating it with the rest of your life, and that will be done through 3D means of processing; in other words, sequential processing usually involving language. The whole point of 3D existence, as Bob used to stress, is the simultaneous balanced employment of intuition andlogic; perception andinterpretation.
(Q) First wallow in the sensation, then use the worm of thought to understand it, he told our Guidelines program.
(A) That's right.