RUDIMENTS, pt. 1,257
(usually and tellingly)
People give themselves away.
Always give themselves away.
I've seen it bandied about now
as a 'tell,' - what it's called in
shows and movies, like the
gambler's move or the nod
one makes in recognition of
a single situation. Whatever
it may be, a person's entire
personality is a 'tell' by those
standards. I've, over the years,
met people whom I've instantly
disliked, in a moment, because
of something perceived. In like
fashion, I've met a few, a very
few, with whom an instant bond
was perceived, an entire life
interaction between kindred
spirits from another world.
Just like that. No interaction
was even necessary.
-
Back when I was with Jane
Roberts, in Elmira, with the
Seth Books, and all the rest,
she/he often talked of how
waves of people (reincarnated
for their adventure sweeps),
come back through Earthly
times together. As a unit, a
group, spiritually fragmented
perhaps, but sweeping back
through as a 'group' to undertake
the adventures necessary again
for an 'advancement' through
cosmic time and adventure. A
way of saying, as it were, that
the same 'knot' of people works
their group-destinies through, as
a unit, yet individually too. Yes,
as an idea in function it's a little
hard to take, to fathom. The
esoteric value of the idea was
that - for instance - the
same group that went through
the Crusades, or Roman Legions,
etc., perhaps to re-unite again
as Mayflower Pilgrims, or
Vietnam War soldiers. The
premise being that such a 'group'
experience would bolster the
cosmic experiences and the
advenutres of that same 'knot,'
who were 'one' self anyway.
Thus this idea led perfectly
into things like love at first
side, family-groupings, and
alliances between peoples, as
they underwent their dilemmas
and crises anew. Nazi juggernauts,
concentration camp Jews, displaced
Romanis. It was endless, and at
the same time self-rotating : A
very difficult premise to accept, but
each of us knows we've had those
moments of recognition sometimes
unexplainable. (Or how did you
meet YOUR wife?). [or husband]..
-
Admittedly, that's a pretty
self-centered idea. Centralizing
oneself around the core of one's
character, events, and the world
around is referred to, sometimes,
as solipsism, or a form of it. Yet,
back in those days (1973-6 era),
I was able to somehow (perhaps
with a vigor of 'youth'), to overlook
those fairly apparent objections and
accept genially that idea. In fact, inn
some respects it still makes a very
fine sense to me - in retrospect and
after a long-enough life, I can see
where certain meetings and feelings
towards others have meant a lot and
offered me that 'connection' that
sometimes still rang fresh in my
soul. All very difficult to accept,
perhaps, but to an oldster now,
quite plausible as well.
-
I think of a cogwheel, with my own
notched 'grouping' preparing once
again and soon enough to check
out once more, a move that I can
arguably call 'in line' with this
premise. (That would, yes, mean
'waves' of like people coming
through, and exiting, at roughly
the same times, all having gone
through much the 'same'
experiences together).
-
Every alliance has its own avenues
of entry and exit. The same goes
for individuals and groups, as for
nations. Groupings and families,
nationalities even, cling together
like thoughts around an idea. The
treadmill of 'Philosophy' does touch
on this, but only tangentially. No
one seems quite able to approach
it rightly, and how would it be
defensible anyway for a 'History'
book to be covering the Holocaust
merely be saying those 6-millions
had, somehow, intermingling
connections and interests as to
harness the drama and undergo
the experience together? Truly,
absolutely beyond reason?
Well....yes.
-
I spin. I stumble. This is very
hard to verbalize, or at the least,
to sensibly write of. How many
passages like these would be used
to hold me to ridicule, based merely
on the ridiculous of the premise, in
common, ordinary, eyes. I think I'd
have to say, nonetheless, that I do
believe, and accept it. Actually it
makes vague and strong 'good
sense.' In 1974 it made even more,
and the small clump of people
who listened to Jane and Seth
and watched the resultant books
and ideas come forth, (as I did),
found themselves somehow
enamored of a theory that wrapped
up in a sterling fashion so much
of the ethereal nature of unknown
life-matters that we all face. Usually,
and tellingly, I found myself running
into evidences of all these things
more and more as I met new people.
No comments:
Post a Comment