Stalking Vol 2: The Bridge of Reason
Ignoring the comment, because it required no response, he said, "Politics is one of the two
basic translations of man’s inner awareness of his origins," he began formally. "The other is
religion, both of which manifest in your cellular programming."
"They would be politics and religion," I chuckled at the irony of harboring a deep distaste
"Does it make sense that you have studied them?"
"A bit of politics, but I haven’t studied religion."
"You have been immersed in their failures, as well. We will revisit that knowledge; for this
session we are opening your mind to the scope of your journey."
"Ready when you are."
"From various platforms of existence, the We that is Us assemble our choices to be
endeavored in an order that is subsequently perceived as continuous. In fact, we choose these
experiences from any number of probabilities, then force upon them a personal continuity drawn
from the well of mans’ root assumptions—your current assumptions," he said, meaning not his,
although he understood them to perfection.
"In practical terms, root assumptions replace the inner awareness of one’s spiritual source
from where anything is possible, though in physical life, too, anything is possible. But as your
perceptive mechanisms are not tuned toward this realization, and your ideas do not allow for it,
you do not see how this can be."
"Do Stalkers see it? I mean, haven’t they tuned their perceptive mechanisms toward
accepting any possibility?"
"They have, and this takes them beyond the leading edge of the mass consciousness," he
replied. "To be touching it is considered genius, to build on it is to be ahead of your time, but to
leave it behind is considered lunacy. Now, as a mass consciousness man agrees to these
assumptions at the most basic level of understanding. This is to say that up is not sideways even
when it is viewed with a turned head; there is always an agreement beforehand on which
direction is the base. Man also agrees to various translations of vocal sounds, calls them
language, and immediately agrees that it’s only a symbolic tool that represents, most accurately,
the current expressions of the inner self who is uttering them. But these words are not the
experience. They are the basis of assumptions about experiences in a two dimensional reality."
"You create a two dimensional reality of length and height, and are then forced by t he
nature of survival itself to experience, thereby creating the third dimension of depth."
As I gave this statement some thought, Phillip explained, "In physical life, an object sits in a
tree. It is black and it caws. The object, by its own movement, demonstrates to the observer that
there is life. The observer, compiling the input of his or her perceptual mechanisms into
coherency and continuity—or logic—can still choose to think it is an inanimate object with
electronic couplings, or he can move to a different point to view and examine the object to
determine if it is what it seems. This movement is experience. By way of the experience providing
a different point of view, the observer has provided depth to the object they could not have
perceived in any other way. Having done this once as a child, one needs only to hear the caw to
assume the rest—though now there is no contact—no animation attributed to the source. It is
assumed. As all children learn to assume the same thing, it becomes a root assumption of their
existence. This is the basis of not having to fall from great heights to see if they are as painful as
falling from lower heights. One fall usually does it."
"Got it—I mean, I understand."