Do you have any questions, Joseph?
(“Well, you said once that we were your first lesson class. Are you instructing anybody else ?”)
No, for purely personal reasons I have my own way of conducting lessons, and I prefer to deal with one instance at a time . I am trying to keep this explanation simple, since the term “at a time” is somewhat misleading.
(“Why isn’t what you’re telling us common knowledge to most people ?”)
How many people? Very few would take this amount of their camouflage time to deal with it. It takes a peculiar set of abilities and interests for such work to be even partially successful or even accepted by the personalities involved; and for many personalities it would be difficult to maintain discipline and balance, while allowing for the necessary freedom that is necessarily involved. That is, this is a controlled experiment, with both of you allowing yourselves certain freedoms of control in certain instances and not in others. This is no easy trick. Is that what you meant?
(“Possibly. I was just wondering why a body of knowledge like this couldn’t have accumulated over the centuries , slowly.”)
It has. But it has been taken into various doctrines and religions that have grown up about it until it is almost unrecognizable . Bits of it appear here and there, scattered, distorted and misleading . It comes naked and everyone must put clothing on it, which usually ends up as either nonsense or armored dogma.
(Here Jane paused. Hands on hips, she stared at me in an undoubted humorous way.)
Your particular conscious and subconscious viewpoints are fluent enough so that they do not hamper the basic material or cover it with the rock of dogmatism so that it becomes impossible to find.
(“Are others on your plane watching as you give instruction to us?”)
They are watching these developments. Someone who was not a believer in any particular religion was needed. Actually more simply what was needed were personalities that were not fanatics along any line , including scientific fanatics who would object as much to the reincarnation data as forcibly as religious fanatics would object to some of the other material.
At the same time these personalities had to be disciplined and intuitive . These personality requirements are not easy to find; plus the fact that they had to be well balanced and intelligent , at least for my purposes. I did not want to just fill a vessel. Such was not my intention. I wanted a give and take between myself on one plane and you on another.
(“Are all religions distortive?”)
That is a beautiful question. How long did it take you to spring that one on me?
(“I’ve thought of it at different times.”)
All religions are distortive . For that matter much of your science is distortive . Both arrive at approximations, at best, of reality. Religion has been the cause of much prejudice and cruelty, but the bomb over Hiroshima was not caused by the Catholic Saint Theresa showering down any roses. The distortions in science and religion have been truly disastrous. I will go into this upon another occasion.
Science is apt to turn into another religion, if it has not done so already. Any fanaticism is truly vicious, one-sided, limiting, and causes an alarming shrinkage of focus that is explosive and dangerous. And I will have more to say about that later.
(“What others are watching these proceedings from your plane ?”)
Merely others like myself .
(“Have they tried to give lessons like this ?”)
In their own way.
(“How did they make out?”)
In varying degrees . I will not say more than I want to say.
Though you amuse me when you try to egg me on. This is the tail end of the session and I am not above pulling your tail. I am reluctant as always to leave you.
(“ What are you going to do when you leave us ?”)
There you go again. In one way I have been where I am going all the time . However it was a good try.
— The Early Sessions, Book 1 - Session 34