M: Immediately connected to the intellectual-curiosity question, “how many make it?” comes the next extension “and at what level?”. There are, in my experiences (far more intense than simple perception) several striations of “ability” for those to qualify to the point of making it beyond the eagle (metaphor). Although this has been hinted previously in my transmissions, this elaboration is offered. Suppose we make a scale, it could be any scale, one to one hundred, one to ten, but for simplicity consider a scale of one to five. Although this description will take (for brevity) the form of step-level-descriptions, that it not the case in reality. These are metaphorical examples.
M: At level “0” (below 1) the eagle is not thwarted. [One of the proteges both professionally in technology and an apprentice in “the way”, as a form of humor was irritated with a co-worker and referred to this individual as “food for the eagle”. Later on, referring to someone else who was even less capable, he said that this other person wouldn’t even make a meal for the eagle, so he coined the term “eagle snacks”, a sort of humorous encryption that we’ve used in public for some time.] Back to the point: at the analogy of Level 1, the eagle is thwarted but there is not much ability. The “inorganic beings” CC described are generally rather dependent, can observe, but are rather dependent and accordingly do not possess any real attributes other than “continuing”. Jumping ahead, since this is only allegory for description, to Level 3, at this attribute set, the individual can navigate around in the third attention, make decisions where to go and what to observe. An analogy for this condition would be something like that of a librarian: able to study and observe, but not particularly dynamic. Level 5, still by analogy, represents the power of the Arch-angles (at the higher end of Level 4) and of Christ and others like him, at Level 5, with the ability to truly make an impact – Level allegorically 4+ and above.
M: Experiences have provided indication that these attributes are gained ‘in the now’ as preparation for the ultimate evolution in the third attention. When I have used the term “of biblical proportion” in prior E-mails, these descriptions are what have been intended. For some, probably driven and derived by and through DNA, there seems to be a predisposition toward ‘the way’ with essentially a “no choice” imperative in order to survive even in first attention life. For others, ‘the way’ is enabled, but not quite with the intensity that others have to deal with. Many, unaware and uninformed, perhaps and sadly, do not become engaged into ‘the way’ that they could execute.
M: The important element is that if one can, then one MUST evolve (the ultimate imperative) as that person must in order to be impeccable to themselves. How many are cloistered in the religious orders, as another example, we can never know. How many are trapped into organized religions that seem to be determined to conscript their energy into forms of organized dependencies, (the antithesis of freedom) cannot be said. How many escape these and their own boundaries to prosper as sentient individuals, we cannot really know.
M: For myself, and those like, I have no choice: it is survival itself.
M: Whew.
R: My main reason for doing the compilation was that I thought I had, not proof, but the next best thing to proof, that the teachings were true: I’d found my hands in a dream, as instructed, in about 1975. Those experiences always fit so closely to what I was reading in CC’s books, and there seemed to be a very basic logic to the books, but it was the fact that I knew that dreaming as described was possible coupled with, and this had much to do with why I did the compilation, my belief that volitional dreaming was not thought to be possible by the scientific community.
M: Science, in all manner of speaking, only “observes” then “writes rules” for what it observes. Science, although it is said that it “discovers things” really only observes phenomena that already exists. In research medicine, it “discovers” interactions – that already are primed in nature – and “discovers” compounds that cause interactions as manipulations to better humanity’s lot. This is a process of evolution of understanding, of course, and it is natural for the inquiry of man. Sometimes, science becomes locked into an accepted theory that it cannot explain so it begins, in typical human form ways, to attempt to write more theories to explain in compensation for what it hasn’t discovered yet about the first theory. Science does not understand or provide metrics for far more than it does understand.
R: I don’t understand “metrics,” or the sentence.
M: “Metrics” in this context really means “measurement parameters” either as an approach to “measurement” or as a “criteria set”. What the sentence means is that science understands, or believes it understands, things within certain boundaries and parameters. Beyond that, there is much more, in quantity, that it DOES NOT understand, than that which it would claim that it DOES understand. Since it (probably) doesn’t know yet, or rather admit, just how much it does NOT understand, it does not know how to approach setting a criteria for parameters or an approach to the parameters that it does not yet know is “out there” to “discover” (meaning observe and explain).
M:**When the notion of quantum mechanics came around, perhaps “only” between sixty or seventy years ago, it drove a quantum leap of possibilities into the classical systems of Newtonian Physics, which are now known to be quite limited.
M: (For example: In the “big bang” theory of the beginning of the universe, for example, the problem is that about 95% of the matter derived from the energy is missing, which actually disturbs some researchers. A major component of the “big bang” theory is because at a rate described by “The Hubble Constant”, the universe is said to be expanding. This is based, in normal human form, on a observational data points made during “only” the last seventy years or so. Well, seventy years of observations in a process that is billions of years old, it not much of a data sample – only a microscopic and myopic view – BUT much energy is expended in attempts to understand. In objective logic, the universe could exhibit a form of outward/inward oscillation that perhaps has an oscillatory cycle of perhaps as little as 1,000 years or perhaps a billion years. Nature, in everything, always seeks an equilibrium, and this is observed in virtually all interactions. The concept of a universe “flying apart” into infinity, just doesn’t make sense nor is it logical and based on a microscopic small time-relational data sample.)
M: In the matter of telepathic communication, for example, there are hints that known science facts has not coupled to metaphysics. For example, in any propagational media, it is found that maximal efficiency of energy transfer can occur when the energy within the media is in complementary resonance. In resonance, there is a relatively uniform distribution of energy throughout the media, and this is accomplished with optimal power/energy efficiency. Suppose we were on this planet to exist and evolve within a media that tended to match as a matter of electromagnetic field energy, patterns from our brains? If this were the situation, then we could take point positions of transmitters, and point positions of receivers essentially anywhere within the media, and have efficient energy transfer.
M: It turns out that we do exist in such a media. If one takes the boundaries of the planet’s surface itself, terra firma, one finds an inner-sphere. Beyond this sphere, is a layer termed the ionosphere. The ionosphere is electrically conductive, and radio amateurs and others in radio communication, have ‘bounced’ signals off of the ionosphere for decades in order to achieve longer distance communication around the planet that could not be possible because of the tendency of radio signals to propagate in line-of-sight (and the planet’s a sphere). If one studies the intrinsic resonance of the coaxially based spherical cavity caused by the boundaries of the ionosphere and the surface of the planet, one finds that it matches certain properties of brain waves! Any report of empathic responses or telepathic responses tend to indicate that they are not distance dependent. In a coaxially sphere bounded media, the media would be uniformly illuminated and there would be no distance dependency and the energy required would be optimally low and efficient. Perhaps it’s possible, then, that telepathic connection is simply a matter of learning to ‘tune’ to the media and the other.
M: (Apologies for the babble. Please forgive my verbosity on occasion.)
M: Back to the point of our dialogues.
R: ** So in my introduction, I note that I’d considered that perhaps Castaneda discovered volitional dreaming, perhaps through library research, and concocted the whole story around that, but that was really not something I believed, just something I wrote to be “open-minded looking,” you know, being as a true warrior, and considering all possibilities.