Text Highlight – The Intimate Dialogue between Innermost and Outermost: Sexuality Beyond the Psyche and the Human

By September 13, 2018Information

These excerpts are from a Jewel Café table conversation with John that lead to a meeting hall dialogue, both talks were in Edmonton on Sunday, September 2, 2018.

Excerpt from Jewel Café conversation

Q: You’ve shared in different settings that you’ve recently come into so much … and then so much again. Is it continuing?

John: It continues. It’s not just that it continues, but with a similar curve in it.

Q: What’s the relationship between the meaning of that curve and the meaning of where you come from?

John: They’re together. Each manifests the other.

Q: Does that mean that there’s an increase in your bringing?

John: Yes.

Q: Can you say a little bit about how to relate to the bringing in a multi-dimensional way? Bringing what you are to here sounds quite linear, but I know it’s not like that. I know it has other qualities that make it what bringing is.

John: What’s not able to be brought here is being brought here.

Q: I’ve heard others say that’s because of a force field or veil having been punctured, so that now what’s deeply unseen has access to here. Is that what you’re saying?

John: It’s a lot more than that.

Q: So there’s something that’s actually happening that never happened before. Is that what you’re saying?

John: Very much of that, without it having to be categorical.

Q: Is that because ‘categorical’ would have it lose intimacy, lose movement or power?

John: And it’s too narrow. It’s more complex than that.

Q: What makes it complex? Is it realms and dimensions, or is it things that you haven’t spoken of yet. Or is it timing? Or is it a combination of those things?

John: I haven’t spoken of it yet. It’s more than realms and dimensions, and it’s also more than timing.

Q: What is it that makes what you haven’t spoken of yet, complex?

John: It’s made of what is more than the mind of a self can apprehend. The very nature of the self mind isn’t inclusive of all that’s involved, which means, then, that it can’t conceive of it.

Q: Is that because complexity is related to a lack of development of the mind? Because once the mind develops to the right level, what would look complex wouldn’t anymore?

John: It’s still complex. It all fulfills a logic, so it’s coherent.

Q: I’m drawn into an intimacy with the nature of complexity, like touches of relationship with that form in the unseen. It has a different quality to a resonance. You’re not yet speaking of what’s actually complex: you’re just letting out some vapour around it so it’s a growth movement for us.

I’d like to go in a different direction, now. I recently heard you respond to a question about power and you said something about the psyche. What I realized was that I broadly thought my problems were in my self. I haven’t even begun to fathom my psyche! I don’t really know what the psyche is – just that it’s beyond the threshold of my self where so much unconscious power is. It might explain why I can feel I’m knowing and moving, then suddenly it’s gone. Is it worth giving energy to this threshold, or is bringing everything of me into the alignment of loving and knowing you enough?

John: That enables you to, very safely and nurturingly, drift out of the zone of your psyche, where you can see without the filters of your psyche.

Q: I really would love to hear you say some more about that.

John: To take on your own psyche is endless, and taking it on also confines you to it. It’s the magicalness of responding to something that is fundamentally deeper than your psyche, so then you, awareness, are being given and thereby taken by what’s more, enabling you to drift out of your psyche, enabling you to see without your psyche. That includes seeing your own psyche.

Q: It was new for me to hear you talk about the need to comprehend our selves. I thought you’d only be doing that if we’re actually starting to see the depth and breadth of our selves, and now you’re saying the same about the psyche.

John: You can’t comprehend it from inside of it.

Q: Can you say more about drifting outside of it?

John: It’s like being on a space station and drifting away from it, being very relaxed … so you’re drifting out into space and you don’t have the tether. If you’re drifting out and you’re tethered, you’re not actually drifting away. You just haven’t used your real connection that makes it impossible for you to drift away: get to the end of the tether and you can’t drift any more. All there is, is coming back. If you’re removed from the tether then every little bit of movement away from the station is you are drifting away from it.

Q: And within that metaphor you can’t go back, right? In space, if you’re not tethered and you’re drifting away, you can’t go back.

John: Within the metaphor, everything that you really are can only be comprehended from within space, and not on the space station. The space station is part of space, but the space station, when you’re tethered to it, separates you from space. If you drift out into space the space station is still in space.

Q: So the space station, the space man and space are all levels of me? And then, because of the oneness that we’re in, it is all levels of you. And the movement in that which is possible for us comes by levels of love. Some of that is sexuality. Some of it is deeper sexuality. Some of it is higher sexuality. Some of it is the purity of love that runs through: it’s all love.

John: Some of it is celestial sexuality.

Q: Could you say something about that word ‘celestial’, because it’s new for us? I would love you to open it more.

John: In the way that all of the bodies in our solar system are the context, the greater context for this planet, and this planet can’t really grasp that. It can hold it abstractly but it’s not really comprehending it. As soon as it’s really comprehended you’re not of this planet anymore; you’re of what this solar system is. So celestial, the meaning of celestial takes you off the planet, into a context, the context of the planet that doesn’t come from the planet. That takes place in physical form within planet earth, the solar system we’re in, and the universe that that’s in. And all of that is form of the unseen. So there, the celestial within the unseen has the quality of the heavenly.

Q: So in this, heavenly is the context for this universe because it’s beyond this universe.

John: Yes.

Q: And celestial is what comes from heavenly.

John: The heavenly and a counterpart form, which are like all of the seen bodies in our solar system, in the universe.

Q: So there’s a mirroring?

John: Yes, because it’s form of. It’s like if you are being from the innermost outward, your self, your person, your life, will form in a way that mirrors what you’re coming from, from the innermost outward, and really what that means. So it’s all being mirrored in your forms. If you separate from that, what’s mirrored in your forms is the sophisticated separation which has some – or even a lot – of what’s deeper than your self.

Q: It seems that in the mirroring between the levels there’s an interplay between each level; it doesn’t come through just like a pure beam.

John: It makes the relationship between everything coherent.

Q: It touches me. It’s so beautiful. It ends so well. It just becomes more whole, more of what it is, and it just keeps happening. That’s what you are. You’re coherence from the inner out, and you just keep getting more. Where’s the veil in all that coherence?

John: It’s not actually like a puncture – that something poked a hole in it. It’s more like a diffusing, a weakening and a diffusing of the ozone layer. So something of the radiation of the sun gets through that diffusion where it doesn’t get through elsewhere.

Q: Where’s the separation? There’s no separation in what you were describing.

John: There isn’t.

Q: Perhaps it’s in the way that distortion can condense on the mirror – the reflection – and in some places you can wipe the condensation away – the ozone getting thinner – and in other places there’s some build-up on the mirror and the reflection is distorted.

John: And when you wipe the mirror you still don’t see properly because you only see clearly through the part of the mirror that’s been wiped. You can’t wipe the whole mirror because as you wipe it’s catching up.

Q: Is the veil punctured for everybody: for every child, for every adult? It’s not just for this group?

John: In some way, to some degree: yes. In some way, to some degree, it’s for all of reality – everyone. But it doesn’t register that way in everyone. It may register in that way, perhaps, in very few.

Q: And it’s punctured because of you? Or because of the timing? Or …

John: That’s complex.

The café conversation ended here and was continued in the evening meeting, excerpted below:

Q: I just was with energy of talking with you at the café table and there’s something about that setting that brings up such a directness and a persistence, and such an enjoyable quality of engagement with you. I started the conversation speaking of the change in you that you had talked about before the summer in various settings, and asking whether you could say anything about how that was now in us coming back together. You had said that the curve was pretty much the same. I’d asked you if the curve had meaning and you said that it did. I asked you if there was a connection between where you come from and the meaning of that, and the meaning of the curve, and I think you said that they were the same.

John: The two are in conversation. The part that’s the same is the language.

Q: When you say that there’s a conversation between them, then to me there must be some kind of space between where you come from and this curve in order for the conversation to have room, for the communication to go backwards and forwards.

John: It’s like the innermost and the outermost coherently speaking to each other and speaking each other: each known and consciously moved into by the other, each being the same as the other.

Q: What kind of sameness is it? What’s the higher and the deeper of that sameness?

John: A sexuality that communicates it – one that is beyond the psyche and the human.

Q: What that sounds like to me is that, as the innermost and the outermost of what you are fulfill their own intimacy, out of that comes a higher power which you are saying is a form of sexuality – and so it’s like another level up from the intimacy that’s been fulfilled by the innermost and the outermost. It’s the synergy of those two creates a more, and that more is both an absolute free flow and embodied in you. That sounds like a higher frequency than celestial. It sounds higher.

John: (nods)

Q: When you speak of sexuality that’s beyond the human and the psyche, did that mean that the human and the psyche are the same size and weight?

John: They’re not. The human, how much of it is permeating the psyche, is real. That of the psyche not permeated by the human is actual, but not real.

Q: What was coming to me was that the love in that sexuality opens the conversation between my innermost and my outermost. And the more that I’m in that conversation and allowing that conversation, then I’m moving towards the fulfillment of that intimacy here.

John: Yes.

Q: Is that what makes us celestial beings?

John: Eventually.

Q: With the innermost and the outermost being in a conversation like that, that’s already so much.

John: If you could see the conversation, you wouldn’t call it sexual any more than you would The Black Stallion movie.

Q: For me, in that movie, I don’t know what other word to use than ‘sexuality’, but I can say I found these qualities in the movie. I found rawness in the nature and purity, and I found magic and tenderness and surprise in the music, and I found innocence and passion and love in the boy. And I found breathtaking power and mystery and things I don’t even have words for in the horse. It feels that I might have an inkling of the movement of that innermost to outermost conversation, like the movement of blood or the movement of cells? The kind of tumbling, fervent free-fall.

John: Not in the body but in the impregnated womb.

Q: You mean that the egg in the womb is a metaphor for the conversation?

John: The being-fetus and the being-mother, comprehended neither by the psyche nor the human. It’s like a promise of what the whole body could be in – anyone’s.

Q: When you say that this is what we’re made of, made for, is that what you mean?

John: Yes.

Q: And coming into that is by opening and softening.

John: Beyond the psyche and the human.

Q: Could you say something about what you mean when you say ‘the psyche’?

John: The entire developing genetic program and its mind that doesn’t receive the truth directly, doesn’t receive the truth on its own. It receives it indirectly and only when awareness in it is listening. It’s like the difference in getting the meaning of the sun from being on the earth and the directness of its rays or getting it from the moon, and what all that opens when you know it and you’re listening. The moon, in this way, is your humanness. Much smaller than your psyche.

Q: Can you say something about where I, as awareness, am when I’m listening?

John: Relaxed and opened.

Q: Because then the sun’s rays reach me directly, receiving truth in that way is what allows me to comprehend my psyche. What value is there in sensing some of that, in being close enough to my psyche to feel that a little bit? Or is that just incidental and part of what happens by really hearing truth?

John: It gives the truth within, mind.

Q: The kind of body sensation picture I have for mind is of the top of a baby’s head, when they’re newly born and they have that soft spot on the top of their head. It feels like pressure on that soft spot in me, something about truth having my mind.

John: The brain’s availability to physical touch.

Q: I feel the shielding in my brain and reflected in my mind, like dark places in my mind. It feels different than my conceptual mind. It feels like my brain. Is it like places in the grey matter of my brain and the light form of my mind, and spaces in my psyche that fuse together? I feel the intersection or the connectivity between those three. It feels physical. It feels real; it feels like form. Is there some other way that I could be with this right now?

John: Your psyche reflected in your awareness doesn’t reveal to you the realness of your mind. The magicalness of your sex does, uncapturable by thought. In comparison, thought within the psyche is such a rogue use of mind.

If that magicalness isn’t there, that means that you’ve lost your mind.

Join the discussion 2 Comments

Leave a Reply