Diagram 047

Re Talk: 117

   Regarding that other source at which to look, I am going to present a diagram referring to triads and "I". Before I present that particular one, let me refer you to my Xross with the long horizontal and the short vertical line.

     Consider this to be a time diagram.  The horizontal line represents the apparent past to the left of the vertical line.  To the right of the vertical line it represents the imagined future.  Picture the little vertical line as in some way representing the level of instant awareness.  But even though you are moving in space-and-time, as it is called, in a sense, in relationship, that Xross within you stays the same.  It just moves with you.  The purpose of what seems to be "I" is to cut up this time Xross, and "I" cuts it up in a particular way.  

     In this  new map, there are two circles.  The first one I shall call "I want" which would apparently be one of the Three Forces.  Then there is always an observable resistance to what "I want"; this is the second circle.  It is not difficult to see two of the Three flows, that which "I want", and the resistance to what "I want".  You can always see two legs of a triad.  Everything that can be conceived of by human consciousness must be supported by a triad; it must be on a three-legged platform.  But you can ordinarily only see two.  The third element is elusive, at the very least -- to be most charitable about it.  The two forces you can see are a desire and then its resistance.  You can see this personally and on a larger level among groups of people, from theoretical movements to political persuasions.  It is easy to get two of them down; the problem is always in finding the third.  Maybe you expect that there should be a third circle in my diagram with a question mark in it.  I could call it everything else that is not relevant to the first two, to what "I" want and the resistance.  

     But what if you could separate what seems to be the desire into two flows?  What if you could remove "I" from the circle of "I want" so you just had "want" and the "resistance" to want.  What if "I want" is not one thing?  What if there are at least two realities existing within that one circle?  You would then have something left over which, at first glance, would appear to be "I".  But if we separated it, I suggest you try to look for what "I" was standing on.  What if you could see that there is almost a blind, like a hunter's blind or a false front on a theater set?  

     It is easy to identify the two forces of "I want" and its "resistance", but the Third force is always difficult to identify.  What I propose to you is that the First force, the "I want" might be separable.  That which seems to be the constructive force, to be "my desires" is actually two forces at work.  What if you could separate them?  It appears that your desires are one thing.  What if they are not?  What if the thing "I" was standing on in the first circle were removed?  Perhaps you would find something else.  

     So now we have got it down to "Want" in one circle and "Resistance" in the other.  Then we have something left over.  What if that were the E flow?  What if that something left over is where "I" was standing?  On my time Xross it appears that the vertical line is "I", but what if it were not?  Can you make an attempt to Neuralize, or even just remember, that there could be a difference between every feeling, belief, motivation, and combination of desires and the energy that fuels them?  What if it were not one thing?  What if it is two things we are talking about?  

     I have not changed the subject from earlier on.  (But of course, I have not changed the subject for years.)  There is a nourishment, there is a kind of energy, and then there is this thing attaching itself to the energy that calls itself "I".  In this map I have drawn, "my desire" is First force.  And then anything that opposes it, be it right or wrong, is the Second force.  Where is Third force?  What I propose to you is to examine the question of what if number one was actually two things to start with?

     I will not attempt to tell you much more in words, but I shall hint one more time.  If you could divide up what would seem to be one of the flows, the "I want", "I believe", or anything having to do with "I", if you could cut the "I" loose and still preserve the existence of the other part, you would then have three possible legs to the triad.  But than the third circle is no longer necessarily vacant; it is no longer necessarily just lumped into "everything else".  What if "everything else" and one of these elements is one and the same thing?  What if "everything else" is the Vertical line?  What if "everything else" is the apparent observer, this commentator?  What if "everything else" is somewhat like a great pipeline and as the oil flows through, a gauge measures it.  What if instead of just being calibrated in numbers, it is calibrated in what seems to be human thought, human feeling, human desire, human belief, human imagination? JC talk 117