A: Well, that is difficult to answer because that is assuming that thought centers are located. And, of course, this is a concept area in which you are not fully familiar as of yet. So, an attempt to answer this in any way that would make sense to you would probably not be fruitful. We suggest slowing down and carefully formulating questions.
Q: (L) At what level of density do these thought centers have their primary focus?
A: Thought centers do not have a primary focus in any level of density. This is precisely the point. You are not completely familiar with the reality of what thoughts are. We have spoken to you on many levels and have detailed many areas involving density level, but thoughts are quite a different thing because they pass through all density levels at once. Now, let us ask you this. Do you not now see how that would be possible?
Q: (L) Yes. But what I am trying to do is identify these conflicting thought centers. If two thought centers, or more, conflict, then my idea would be that they are in opposition.
A: Correct.
Q: (L) And, what I want to know is, was this in opposition to me, or was this an opposition in which I simply was caught in the middle, so to speak.
A: Well, you are drifting away from the true nature of your experience, because you are making suppositions. And we are not trying to scold you, we are merely trying to guide you and this is not always easy. But, let it be known again that the simplest way for you to gather knowledge on this particular subject matter is to ask the simplest questions without prejudice.
Q: (L) Okay, you said I wasn’t abducted, that an event of some sort occurred. What was the event?
A: We have already described this, but the problem that you are having is that you are assuming that the description we are giving is more complicated than this. It is not.
Q: (L) Okay, in the experience I felt a paralysis of my body, which caused this paralysis.
A: Yes. Separation of awareness. Which is defined as any point along the pathway where one’s awareness becomes so totally focused on one thought sector that all other levels of awareness are temporarily receded, thereby making it impossible to become aware of one’s physical reality along with one’s mental reality. This gives the impression of what is referred to as paralysis. Do you understand?
Q: (L) Yes. And what stimulates this total focus of awareness?
A: An event which sidetracks, temporarily, the mental processes.
Q: (L) And what event can sidetrack the mental processes to this extent?
A: Any number. In this particular case, it was an eclipsing of energies caused by conflicting thought centers.
Q: (L) What energies were being eclipsed?
A: Whenever two opposing units of reality intersect, this causes what can be referred to as friction, which, for an immeasurable amount of what you would refer to as time, which is, of course, non-existent, creates a non-existence, or a stopping of the movements of all functions. This is what we would know as conflict. In between, or through any intersecting, opposite entities, we always find zero time, zero movement, zero transference, zero exchange. Now think about this. Think about this carefully.
Q: (L) Does this mean that I was, essentially, in a condition of non-existence?
A: Well, non-existence is not really the proper term, but non-fluid existence would be more to the point. Do you understand?
Q: (L) Yes. Frozen, as it were?
A: Frozen, as it were.
Q: (L) Was there any benefit to me from this experience?
A: All experiences have potential for benefit.
Q: (L) Was there any detriment from this experience?
A: All experiences have potential for detriment. Now, do you see the parallels. We are talking about any opposing forces in nature, when they come together, the result can go all the way to the extreme of one side or all the way to the extreme of the other. Or, it can remain perfectly, symmetrically in balance in the middle, or partially in balance on one side or another. Therefore all potentials are realized at intersecting points in reality.
Q: (L) Was one of the thought centers me?
A: That is presupposing that you, what is defined as you, or how you define yourself as “me” is of and by itself a thought center. Part of what is you is a thought center but not all of what is you is a thought center. So, therefore it is incorrect to say: “Was one of these conflicting energies or thought centers me?”
Q: (L) Was one of these conflicting thought centers or energies some part of me?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) And was it eclipsed by interacting with a thought center energy that was part of or all of something or someone else?
A: Or, was what happened a conflicting of one energy thought center that was a part of your thought process and another energy thought center that was another part of your thought process? We will ask you that question and allow you to contemplate.
Q: (L) Does it ever happen that individuals who perceive or think they perceive themselves to have experienced an “abduction,” to actually be interacting with some part of themselves?
Part 9c
Copyright © 1997-1999 Cassiopaea org. All rights reserved.