Dear S,
Thank you for your kind communication of July 31, 1990. Absolutely no need to apologize whatsoever about the questions on mathematics because I think there were more general pieces of information Q’uo was able to move into so that other people would find the communication interesting also. I haven’t read those transcriptions yet, I’m not even sure they’re even transcribed—you probably got an actual tape. At any rate, I haven’t seen the transcriptions.
Now, first of all, I’ll answer you linearly on each of your questions because it might be a little confusing if I went right directly into the bottom line.
I would imagine, as David Jacobs asked, Q’uo might be willing to answer specific scientific and mathematic questions with general answers. I would probably have to be in trance for them to be able to get questions which use a vocabulary about which I know nothing answered. Unfortunately, because of the fact that paradoxically I’m very bright, I was admitted to college as a junior which meant that I did not have to take the core classes of the first two years of college. I never took any math—I never took anything but the arithmetic courses of algebra and plane geometry.
Solid geometry, trig, calculus, the basic tools, physics, quantum physics, all of these things are a mystery to me. I am aware that I have a good deal of ability in mathematics because I scored in the 93rd percentile in that part of the graduate record exam which I was taking along with all of the people from Arts and Sciences that were applying for an advanced degree.
Surprised the heck out of me—must just be very strong logic circuitry. That’s all I could think of, because when I took the test I basically eliminated things that looked wrong and put down the one that looked the least wrong.
But it would be very doubtful that Q’uo could do that. Q’uo could probably, if asked, solve a recreational puzzle or problem, but that has no spiritual significance whatsoever (I thought I’d point that out.) Q’uo would know the definitions because part of Q’uo is Ra aiding Latwii. Ra is the most sophisticated of the contacts I’ve ever made, but it was a trance contact, so I didn’t have to worry about being the one to decipher what I was getting. I think getting the word “achromatic” would be difficult for me since I don’t know what it means. If I were in trance that would not be a problem, except that when I am in trance, I have a problem—it is very dangerous for me for reasons that are boring and long.
Q’uo could look into any question whatsoever of a specific nature and express itself in a healthy manner. However, Q’uo could tell us about our cats, Q’uo could tell us what was wrong with the car; Q’uo could diagnose if I was in a deep enough state. All these questions are specific—the answers to several of them, perhaps all of them, interfere with free will in one way or another.
Further, it is a very deep tuning process to answer a specific question with a specific answer. If the question does not have the stuff of spiritual principles in it somewhere, the answer, if given, will necessarily detune the instrument because this particular contact is a specialized contact. It is a philosophical/metaphysical contact. With the influence of Ra who is also Latwii’s teacher, it would be far more likely to get verifiable answers—but this is strictly against the policy of the Confederation. Many times there was a refusal in the Law of One to answer questions which would necessarily or inevitably create change in someone’s behavior. That interferes with free will.
Further it is unacceptable in metaphysical terms to furnish proof of any spiritual or proof of any other question because we are all on our own path of choice. If someone were convinced of this entities’ authority, then this entity would be very likely to forget to take the grain of salt the next time he read a transcript of Q’uo. Q’uo is very very careful to remind all of those who listen to them to use discrimination—to accept only that which seems true as a personal truth and to accept nothing on authority.
You said you thought it would be interesting to hear Q’uo’s thoughts on the nature of such mundane questions, and that strikes me as a general question and so I will put it in the question book and if we come up with a Sunday and we don’t have someone in the group with a question that strikes me as an acceptable one, possibly very useful.
You do understand that the basic principle here is that there is no wisdom or knowledge that will aid us in climbing some sort of Gnostic stairway to heaven. Q’uo is not interested in dazzling anyone with fancy footwork. If you told Mr. Jacobs Mr. Jacobs’ social security number, Mr. Jacobs would be lost from his own chance to listen to Q’uo as a colleague. Yes, there is something of the teach/teaching to Q’uo, Ra would have called it teach/learning rather than learn/teaching.
Though it would remove Mr. Jacobs’ freewill from the equation, he would then be convinced that Q’uo had proven to him objectively that Q’uo was able somehow to have access to information which could be reported in an accurate manner. Please share with Mr. Jacobs my opinion, if you will, about the nature of actual proof, metaphysically speaking.
It is my opinion that each of us lives in our own creation—each of us has our own time, our own space, our own galaxies, constellations and infinity. We each have all of this because the entire thing is an illusion—an illusion that works with certain rules, but nevertheless, an illusion, which means basically that we, when we look at our hands, are seeing fields of energy, we just don’t have the instrumentation in our eyes to be able to catch that fact.
What we’re seeing looks solid—if you knew exactly how solid it is, you’d be a physicist. It’s all motion, held in fields of energy. Consequently, everyone’s universe is his own. That does not mean that some universes are significantly awry—it means that the nuances of life for each person, metaphysically speaking, because this is an illision, are subjective.
There is no objectivity. It is very difficult—it is a very difficult concept for scientists to grasp, that they have been studying, all this time, the rules that govern the manipulation of an illusion, but everything in science involves and end in mystery. Where does the speed of light come from? Don used to do this. I don’t know anything about physics but these are the questions he asked. Why does it show up in both the equation for gravitational power and electromagnetic fields? Why do both of these things fall away as they receive at the same time? Why do the two equations look so alike to a mathematician or a scientist, but not to me. How does electricity really work? What is it? What’s a photon—a wave or a particle? We don’t know the things that make the foundation of empirical scientific methodology. We know how to manipulate it, but we have no way to find it, because it is an illusion. We can find what is there—paths of energy.
So when a person begins seeking metaphysically, begins feeling that there is an area of nominal concern, that is overridingly interesting—when that person accepts that he cannot understand it but merely observe it and listen to information and inspiration concerning this mystery, he begins, especially if he meditates daily—the key always to listen—stop talking—start listening—he begins to change. The biocomputer that is our brain starts discovering that the ruthlessly programmed brain is going to have to dump a program or two.
This may happen very quickly, it just depends on how sensitive a person is to silent meditation, how much he really wants to change and to learn in a different way than science can offer, he will find his point of view expanding, he will find himself changing, he will find himself rather uncomfortable—you can imagine the computer having to dump a program and painstakingly create a new program which chooses in a different way what will be attended to by the self. You can imagine how obvious it that there’s going to be difficulty and pain.
Computers don’t like new programs, not if the computer itself has to make them, but that’s what our brains do when we give them the chance to get in touch with deeper sources within ourselves. Of course the whole universe is within ourself and we have a lot to learn.
If a person is persistent with this process, going on faith, doesn’t have to believe a thing—absolute belief is the death knoll of faith—go strictly on faith, no intellectual content, nothing to put in your hand and say “this I believe and it has to be true and everybody who doesn’t believe it is wrong”—nothing like that. Erase all that from any possibility. That kills spirituality faster than anything I can think of. Just keep an open mind, just keeping listening, even if it’s for only ten minutes a day. Just listen in silence. Not outside, inside. Occupy the mind by following the breath—you can depend on it to go in and out—it’s not going to stop, if it does you’ve had it anyway—nature has said check please and you no longer have to learn anything. (Laughs) so it’s a very trustworthy thing to do—to occupy your intellect by following the breath.
If that is not enough to occupy the intellect, one can visualize something—a rose—something that speaks to that person of beauty or truth or honor or spiritual values.
After a certain amount of time, things will start happening in odd, coincidental ways that seem more and more to happen. Synchronicity keeps striking again and again, and the longer you go on with this journey, the more this synchronicity occurs. Eventually, spiritual coincidence has piled up on spiritual coincidence in one’s own experience, to the point that one no longer thinks “something’s going on here”. It may be a mystery but something is going on. It is against all the rules of randomness that all of these coincidences take place. They get to be quite frequent. The more one meditates, the longer one meditates—I don’t mean the more per day, meditation is very powerful stuff and should be taken in small doses, and it should be taken very seriously, very reverently if that is at all possible.
It improves the desire to listen rather than to talk inside, otherwise you can find your meditation time day after day planning your class or what you’re going to eat for dinner. Even then, the desire you had that sat you down to listen and meditate will cause changes. Even if you can’t meditate worth a darn, and usually people can’t at first—it’s quite foreign to the occidental work ethic to sit and listen—to be inside of yourself, which is, of course, silent. So you are sitting and listening to silence. So for a work ethic person there’s only one question to be asked here and that is “why?”
All I can say is try it—try it for a couple of months and if it’s a matter of Mr. Jacobs with Mrs. Jacobs or his significant other, as they say these days, it would be extremely helpful if they both meditated because if one changes and the other doesn’t, there is much trouble. More or less, depending on how articulate both people are and how motivated they are to communicate about their growing differences.
Subject proof is the ticket for metaphysics. These other questions have little merit or none except for the general question on the nature of these questions. What good is it to ask questions like this? It’s a very simple question. Q’uo might have something interesting to say on that so I’ll keep this out and get Jim to write this in the notebook of questions that we keep.
Meanwhile, as I said, thank you very much for your kind words. It was a joy having you—I certainly hope that you take this position—it would be a very pleasant thing to have you stop by from time to time. You are an extremely welcome addition to our small group. There are very few people who are interested in such substantial metaphysical material. It is too difficult for them. You can’t get it all the first time. You have to go over it. This is not what people want. What people want is more like the questions that David Jacobs is asking. Either prove yourself to me by giving me my social security number, or “I believe, I believe, now tell me Mother, should I sell the house” which is another kind of channeling which I do not do.
So I hope this answers your questions clearly, if there are any other questions, I would be happy to attempt to tilt at them and see how close I can get to giving you a satisfactory answer.
Meanwhile, God Bless, take care, looking forward to seeing you whenever. And as I said, it would be a fine thing, as far as I’m concerned, were you to accept the post.
God Bless and lots of love and light,
Carla