Page Content (OCR)
"So when it comes right down to it, there's always a very deep factor of creative indeterminacy residing at the heart of even the most carefully tailored patterns. And that means there's always a potential for the 'best—laid plans' to go awry. I've heard in fact that quite often there are higher—density incarnations that take place in this world, which ultimately fail to take advantage of the timed opportunities and encoded 'swings of the gate’ when they come around as supemally—planned, so that — as you would say — the irreducible prerogative of the ‘unpredictable free—will variable’ in conjunction with assorted, adversarial influences has served in such case to produce a real setback in consciousness, a real collapse to an identity—equation with an altogether lower order of existence. And in this sense, it seems that the higher—density being who takes embodiment here with the intent to wake up in this context for whatever reason, is genuinely jeopardizing all the 'ground' that he's gained through higher—density advancement on the 'roll of the dice', so to speak; he's taking a real gamble, with very high stakes, and has something quite definite and precious to lose. "And even if you take into consideration that 'all the King's horses and all the King's men' of the higher densities are going to try very hard to put this Humpty—Dumpty back together, retread an optimum patterning potential (given the newly issued karmic currents being generated by the 'fallen soul' in its recidivist opacity), the original fateful rule of the 'free—will variable’ prevails in all cases; when all is said and done, what's lost is lost and any 'recovery' depends on precisely the one factor that can never be determined with certainty, and therefore never 'coded' into the patterns beforehand (though it's function can be taken into consideration by the patterns, no?). So the 'gamble' of the incarnating teacher is a real risk, and much more can be lost in terms of the whole than is accounted for bymerely personal measurement. Theoretically, a Buddha of the higher densities can be lost, a Christ or Krishna, a Lao—Tse can take an unceremonious nose—dive into the tarpit with ey wat a ' a4 1 aoa 1 14 na 1 recovered again!" "Well, even incarnations taking their points—of—departure from higher Sth and 6th density levels are given variable priorities — even in the higher positive framework some are considered more essential, or critically ‘central’, than others and are accorded correspondingly greater values of supervisorial Attention; but of course, you are right, Colonel. Even those with the highest 'priority' are taking the same risks, and ultimately depend upon precisely the most unpredictable of variables. "Then I begin to see what your question is," MT laughed. "If higher—density positive beings are taking such an all—or—nothing gamble by incarnating, they're at least doing so for understandable stakes, as a gesture obviously compatible with the seemingly—sacrificial character of the process — but whatever could motivate a higher—density negative being to take such an indeterminately risky leap into the treacherous backwaters of ‘lower manifestation’? Surely the negatively—polarized soul has no affinity whatsoever with anything so formally 'sacrificial' — perhaps the negative—style of consciousness could presume to profit from a pseudo-incarnation, as with the hokey 'walk—in' phenomenon where no real consciousness is lost at all, no Veil of the lower densities is assumed but the 'inhabiting' consciousness of the required body is simply displaced, by persuasive or — if possible — forcible expropriation. But what could possibly be the percentage for the negative being in actually submitting to the full-scale, uncompromised process of amnesic incarnation necessarily engaged by one—and—all when coming through the portals of physical-womb birth?" "Yes; that is the question. It apparently happens; but why? What does the negative—polarized soul have to gain that is so important and otherwise unobtainable that it would take the greatest of all risks? It seems that the negative—being is above all canny, it seems he'd play the safest odds, and never take a bet that wasn't totally stacked in his favor." "And so it is. You're right, Colonel. The negative being won't do anything in that sense that isn't guaranteed beforehand, and that certainly includes the 'riskiest' of all ventures: that of 'taking birth’. Again, he will do it, very rarely — but at climactic moments of optimum potential polarization of consciousness positive or negative as we have now with our world-situation, there is more incentive for direct wholesale Gain than at 214 T-Bird_Vs_The_Flying_saucers.htm the best of intentions, and then there's no way to know when that irreplaceably precious Consciousness can be