*Focus and Infinite Probabilities*



Q:  How are you doing?

B:  Perfect, and you?

Q:  Fine, great. I wanted to share something: I meditate quite a bit, at
least once in the morning and at night - and as much during the day as I
can. And they are becoming very rich, and I really love them. I started to
extend my hands up, and I could feel energy coming from across the room in
the dark.

And last night something very wonderful happened. It just started and I
felt the other spirits, other entities, in the room. And it was as if I
began a slow aerobic, sitting down. I was being led the way my hands were
moving, and the way my arms were extending. And when I came back - when I
relaxed and I came back - I tried to do it, and I felt that I had to really
put a lot of energy into it, there was not that lead anymore. I guess I
just tested it; I didn't really accept it.

B:  All right.

Q:  I do now. But the other night when I was meditating, it was wonderful
once again. I got up after I was finished, and I went towards the back door
- because the back porch light was on. And I shut the light and then I
opened the gauze drapes there. In between the garage and the house was a
large brownish-red spot, with sort of an aura behind it. And then it just
went away. And it wasn't from the lights; it was just there - a suspended
large spot. And I was wondering about that. I really didn't know what that
was.

B:  Thank you. At this time, what we are able to share with you about this
idea, within our perception and, of course, it is only our perception: you
were seeking... terminology, terminology, terminology... you are now, at
this moment - or at that moment specifically - the particular future self
that a particular past self was aiming to become. So when you became,
finally, that future self, the future self had recognition of the energy of
the past self. It appeared dulled because of the definition of what the
past self used to be: muddied up. You follow me?

Q:  Uh huh.

B:  So you had the completion of a cycle within the overall cycle that you
are. A conversation and a communication from the other point of view of the
future self, which speaks back to the past self and lures it forward.

Q:  The past self being what I was before that happened.

B:  Yes. And therefore, you made your cognitions; you had your dialogue;
you wished it on its merry way and waved good-bye.

Q:  I love it.

B:  Thank you.

Q:  Thank you!

Q2:  Is the future self - I'm perceiving it as something that the present
self, or the upper self or past self throws out there as a model, as a hook
to reach for. Is that an idea?

B:  It can be looked at in that way. We are, once again, talking about the
specific future self within your linear time frame, the one that does
simultaneously exist with you right now. The one you will, quote/unquote,
be in ten years, so to speak.

Q:  Well, what's another... how do you prefer to view it?

B:  We are speaking of it in the terms we have just described it, for this
particular interaction. That is how we are using your term, "future self,"
right now.

Q:  I still didn't get it.

B:  The one you will become tomorrow; that is your future self.

Q:  All right. Where is that being generated from?

B:  From the same place you are now - right here.

Q:  Okay. It's a combination of the totality of oneself would be producing
that future option.

B:  Yes, simultaneous manifestation of all the different, multifaceted,
multitudinous, different aspects that you ever will be, or have ever been.

Q:  And that is changeable; the future self is, of course, changeable at
any one moment?

B:  Yes. There are an infinite number of probable future selves.

Q:  In the past, could one actually...

B:  Yes. One is creating the past from the present.

Q:  Can one actually change one's childhood?

B:  Yes.

Q:  And what would it take to change it in the memory of other people?

B:  Being in the now completely; and there being a need for that reflection
to occur. Then you will attract individuals who will remember it in the way
you now know it to be.

Q:  I'll be darned.

B:  Now this idea, or this tool, is something that can manifest in your
fourth density reality as you accelerate into it, not that you will
necessarily find that the majority of you will have a need to do that. But
some of you may desire a reflection, in that way, simply because that is
the reflection you /need/ to let you know that certain things are changing,
and that you do not have to connect into that past in such a way that lets
you feel as if the past controls your present - which it doesn't.

Q:  But the idea of actually erasing something so that it never happened...

B:  It is not erasing anything.

Q:  But I'm asking you...

B:  It is refocusing.

Q:  Fine, but I'm saying, the idea - this is a separate question: the idea
of erasing something, so that it is totally... no one would have an inkling
of it happening like that. Is that something within your framework that's
possible?

B:  Yes. Now, it may not have, as we have just said, a high degree of
probability of occurring a lot in your particular system. But we are aware
of systems wherein that is a typical thing.

Q:  Beautiful.

B:  It can happen, to some degree, within your system, when it is necessary
- if it is necessary. It may not be for the majority of individuals.

Q:  What density do you liken such an action - the total annihilation or
erasure of something like that?

B:  First of all, once again, we understand that you are using terminology
that you are familiar with. But nothing is annihilated or erased. It is
simply refocused into another probability; all of the other probabilities
still exist. It is a refocusing, not an annihilation.

Q:  Okay. I understand that degree and that level. I just was wondering if
there's something beyond the focusing terminology, where something is - I
said, "erased," but it doesn't - there's no recognition that it ever
existed?

B:  On any level? No.

Q:  Okay; that answers it.

B:  Existence always exists. What you are now expressing is a belief that
your society has taught you. You think, in general, that that which exists
could possibly become non-existent. But by definition, it cannot.

Q:  Yes, because the potential is always there for it to be thrown in any
curve. In other words, it could be perceived in the past or in the
present...

B:  There is always transformation. But creation /is/... and therefore,
always will be.

Q:  Right.

B:  It goes this way: the reason you believe that what exists can become
non-existent is because you do not think that non-existence is real, in its
own right, concurrently with existence. But it is. It is the polarity of
existence, and therefore, just as real, just as, quote/unquote, solid - but
by definition of what it is, you therefore, obviously cannot have any
perception of it. Because non-existence cannot create perception, you
cannot create perception in non-existence.

But that which exists, therefore, will always be on the existence side of
the polarity. That which doesn't exist will always be on the non-existence
side of polarity. And that which exists will never have a perception of
that which does not. And that which does not, will never have a perception
of that which does.

Q:  Thank you. The Arcturean in Hawaii, Avenash - he was saying that the
All is the stillness. What does that mean to you? I'd like to understand
that better.

B:  The way we have described this idea to you a few times is that when you
are cognizant that you are infinitely accelerated, when you recognize that
you are, in fact, connected to the entirety of creation, then it means that
you are - to use your colloquial language - everywhere and every /when/ at
the same time. Being everywhere and everywhen at the same time is the exact
same feeling as standing perfectly still. So that is the "standness;" being
the All is being the stillness. But it means being infinitely active, as
well.

Q:  Beautiful. Thanks a lot.

B:  Thank you.