The word energy, and what it is doing

The corpus has one word problem, and it is one word.

Read the essays in this thread and you will find densities, centres, rays, a veil, a catalyst, a harvest. Put the material’s own account of any of them into a sentence and it keeps reaching for energy. It is the noun the corpus uses most, and the one that makes the whole thing sound like a textbook. I have watched the expensive failure more than once, in readers who take an account of something real, believe it real, and spend a year reconciling it with numbers the corpus never stated.

What the material’s word is doing

The corpus barely defines the word, and that not-defining is information. Across the hundred and six sessions the noun appears about a thousand times. The careful compound, intelligent energy, appears eighty-eight times, in thirty-five sessions. The bare word is the habit; the qualified one is the exception. That already tells you where the care is not.

Using intelligent infinity each portion created an universe and allowing the rhythms of free choice to flow, playing with the infinite spectrum of possibilities, each individualized portion channeled the love/light into what you might call intelligent energy, thus creating the so-called natural laws of any particular universe.

Read the grammar before the cosmology. A portion acts, it channels, and what results is what you might call intelligent energy. The energy is downstream of an act, and the act is a being doing something with love/light. If you came for a noun with properties, this is where you will not find one.

The term Love then may be seen as the focus, the choice of attack, the type of energy of an extremely, shall we say, high order which causes intelligent energy to be formed from the potential of intelligent infinity in just such and such a way.

An energy of an extremely, shall we say, high order. And then, for the mechanism itself, in just such and such a way. The material cannot tell you what love does to the potential of intelligent infinity, and says so in the same breath in which it says it does something. That vagueness is not a defect. It is the passage.

There is a third passage, late in the material, and it settles the question because the questioner asked for exactly the description a physicist would have asked for. The questioner asks for the energy that enters the centres: its origin, its form, its effect. Ra answers that this is partially possible, then gives two sentences. It says that the origin of all energy is free will acting upon love, and that the nature of all energy is light.

Be exact about what a definition like that is. An action has no field: no units, no magnitude, no direction, and no behaviour when the one acting is absent. If the word names an action, the cosmology was never a description of a substance, and every sentence in this library that says energy is saying that a being is doing something.

The direction of dependence

The diagnostic is a single question. In physics, what is the direction of dependence between a person and a field? The field is there, and the person is in it. Now ask the corpus.

In this process you may see the transdimensional aspect of what you call will, for it is the will, the seeking, the desire of the entity which causes the indigo body to use the novel configuration and to reform the body which exists in space/time.

That is not a medium responding to a change in the operator. It is a relationship in which the wanting is the active term. A field would not care what you wanted; this one is described as caring about nothing less.

The material also glosses its own noun, and the gloss is a role rather than a substance: asked who can heal, it says a being whose life does not equal its work may find real difficulty absorbing the energy. Those are the properties of a relation between people, not of a quantity a person has.

And the corpus does not leave the substrate reading alone. It corrects it. A questioner in the early nineties proposes a clean chain: free will taps intelligent infinity, which yields intelligent energy, which then focuses and creates the densities. Ra calls the statement, in its own word, thoughtful but confused, and the confusion is not about mechanics: what the material puts in its place is the Matrix of the Mind and the catalyst. Our reading is that the point is that intelligent energy is not the level at which the densities are made.

Figure 01

The word energy, in two senses, with the gap marked

Where it borrows physics, and where it marks the borrowing

Now the half a sympathetic reading leaves out. The corpus uses the vocabulary of physics constantly: electromagnetic fields, frequencies, vibrations. A line the library itself leans on, about the body, is one.

These streamings are then available to the individual who, like the planet, is a web of electromagnetic energy fields with points or nexi of entrance.

No physicist wrote that. Our own reading is that the energy centres essay is right to take it as the substrate the map stands on; the claim here is narrower. As a physical description the sentence is empty. In the corpus’s own key it says something particular: a body has places where something can get in, and what gets in arrives rather than being produced.

Asked to explain density, the central structural term of the cosmology, the material calls it mathematical, hedges, and goes to music rather than to mechanics.

The term density is a, what you would call, mathematical one. The closest analogy is that of music, whereby after seven notes on your western type of scale, if you will, the eighth note begins a new octave. Within your great octave of existence which we share with you, there are seven octaves or densities. Within each density there are seven sub-densities. Within each sub-density, seven sub-sub-densities, and so on infinitely.

Seven notes, and the eighth begins an octave. That is the corpus’s own best explanation of its own central term, and a reader told the densities are a frequency scale should notice it did not say so.

And at the top of the system the corpus makes a claim stronger than any field reading would license. The centre it calls the total expression of a being is described in the same answer.

The remaining center of energy influx is simply the total expression of the entity’s vibratory complex of mind, body, and spirit. It is as it will be, “balanced” or “imbalanced” has no meaning at this energy level, for it gives and takes in its own balance.

Read that twice. At that level, balanced and imbalanced has no meaning, because the energy gives and takes in its own balance. It is a claim that where the system tops out, the distinction between a state and its opposite has stopped applying, made with the word energy sitting in the sentence. No field does that, because a field is defined by the states it is able to be in.

The material also knows when it is stretching. When it likens focused light to a laser beam, it adds that the beam is a laser beam in the metaphysical sense. About technology that might use what it calls gravitic effects, it says the term is inaccurate and that nothing closer is available.

Where it is genuinely careless

The corpus is not consistently careful. Ask it, mid-session, whether anything can be done to make the instrument comfortable, and it reports that the energies are balanced, apart from a slight distortion in the instrument’s mental energy, which is only slightly lowering its vital energies. The question is about a woman’s back. The stiffness is muscular, the fix a massage, and the word has slid all the way down the ladder until it means something close to how she is doing.

That is not a field, and it is not free will acting upon love either. It is a corpus being loose with a word it has made carry more weight than any other it has. If a reader has been told, as sympathetic readers often have been, that the corpus is careful with its terminology at every point, that reader is misled in the other direction just as surely. The care is uneven, and the unevenness is the information.

What this is not

The material’s account of what energy is for is not a claim that energy is a field. This essay is not claiming it is not a field either. Nothing in the transcripts is a physics claim and the argument above refutes none. What it has tried to establish is narrower: the word is not a name for a stuff, the dependence runs from the choosing to the energy rather than the other way round, and the physics vocabulary is a set of handles rather than measurements.

What the material does claim, and claims hard, is what an unsympathetic reading would also be happy to flatten. Whatever this is, it is intelligent. It is the medium in which a relationship with the Creator becomes possible. Every account the corpus gives of the densities’ ascent, of the centres, of the veil and of the catalyst is written in its vocabulary, and it offers that vocabulary not as a metaphor or a convenience but as what is going on. A reader who takes the physics reading out has not corrected it. A reader who takes the claim out has emptied it.

A caution about a word of my own. Describing this energy as closer to information than to force is our word. The material never uses it, and never once says anything about information. If you take our word for the corpus’s, you have made the same mistake pointing the other way, inside a library, which is a worse place to make it.

What we make of it

Here is the community’s own reading, and I label it because it is ours. We read energy as the name for intelligent action: what a being does, expressed as a thing. That is why the word keeps arriving with a verb. Channeled, formed, given, balanced, offered, tapped. The corpus is not describing a medium. It is describing a life, and it reached for the nearest noun.

The consequence is not a prohibition. You do not have to unlearn physics to read this. You have to change the key. A density here is not a band on a spectrum. A centre is not a battery. Raising something is not accumulating a quantity, because the word that names the raising also names the one raising it. Change the key and the cosmology becomes legible: the densities’ asymmetry, the catalyst and the veil hold together instead of hovering.

The discipline is the material’s own. Use the word every day. Keep it undefined. Do not make it smaller than the corpus makes it and do not make it larger. The material will not hand you a definition, and that refusal is why this essay had to be written.