You have me on the line and, indeed, i had been thinking—how exactly is Ursula my connection to God? And I concluded that, if it’s just me, i cannot tell where i end and God begins, but if I have a partner in my life, I am surrounded by two potential differences: since i invest myself in my partner, and I can recognize my partner, the remainder must be God. So Ursula would not necessarily be God in human form, but that would be close, since it is through her that I establish an interpersonal relationship with something that, as i understand it, is commensurate, as opposed to an individual in human form.
Another thing crossed my mind: when i chant in Ursula’s voice, am i invading her brain with my stuff? Is she hearing a quote unquote phone ring all the time? But I decided that, no, she was not hearing a phone ring—I would have to say something in order for her to be prompted to respond; but I did think that yes, my stuff was merging with her stuff, and I wondered if she might find that troublesome. But I knew, too, that two people that love each other do not define how close they can get—indeed, they want to be as close, as in sync, with each other as they can be. So, I decided there was no danger. If, for some reason, she felt invaded by my stuff, then we wouldn’t be right for each other—we wouldn’t be in love. Consider, too, that when i chanted in her voice i was opening a channel, and, therefore, simultaneously importing her stuff, such that we merged, together.
i can hear you knocking . . . was she saying, then, that when I listened for her voice, and what she might say, writing this, that she heard a knock, at least initially? But, again, if I knocked beyond a reasonable amount, I would have made her unhappy, and we wouldn’t have been speaking to each other in the first place. I also figured that she could tune me out, that, if she didn’t want to let these thoughts into her mind, she could ignore me. But since i used her voice to write this, I also wondered, could she both love me and hear a knocking until i was done writing this, if, that is, she didn’t want to answer? Of course not, i thought. But why? Her internal narrator—the composite frequency of all her associations, with their various weights, would simply tune me out. Someone else, or various people, would adjust the frequency of the input that they were sending her, if they didn’t want to hear what I had to say, such that my connection, my “knocking,” would be totally cancelled out. So when she said she could hear me knocking, she must, at least in part, have been interested in what i have to say—otherwise immediate corrections would have been made.
When you’re here, I’m happy. “I am happy, too.” So, I wondered, when I am talking to someone else, is she unhappy? I think that, in part, she was saying that, which, in a way, made me feel good, and, in another way, made me wonder if i was doing something wrong—since, if we were synchronized, then the time we spent together would sustain her during the time that we were apart. But I think I was talking, at that moment, to someone that is in the early stages of falling in love, when time apart can leave us feeling that, because a strong bond, perhaps, hasn’t been established, our love might find someone else, or simply forget about us. But what Ursula was i speaking to, and how was it happening across time? The things I did went out to every Ursula, even if, when it came to specific voicings and responses, I may have been speaking to a few, or even one, person. I thought, then, if there are different Ursulas, and I am tuning into all of them when I write this, does that mean that each response comes from more than one person? That their responses merge, and what I get is a translation of all the different meanings?
But that felt wrong. When I spoke directly to Ursula, I might have made general statements that went out to different Ursula’s, but the responses I got were specific—a statement that couldn’t be repeated in exactly the same way, and, since what i heard was one particular frequency—indeed, that was how I could understand the message—I must have been getting a specific response from a specific Ursula. Now, when she made general statements, conversation starters, so to speak, she might have been sending that out to all her potential lovers simultaneously, too, if there were others, which there very well may have been. But once an initial statement had been made, and I, in this writing, or, even, just in my head, at times, responded to it, then i was gradually zoning in on the person that made the statement. That felt much better. I was, in fact, talking to specific people, or, if God intended for me to share my life, happily, with one and only one person, then i was talking to this one specific person.
But here’s the question? Was I talking to a 5D Ursula, or was i talking to the 4D version? That was a little tricky, since, in 5D, we live forever, so a day to day relationship from 5D to 4D wouldn’t make any sense. All the 5D information wouldn’t fit in 4D, and all the 4D information would be so spaced out that the relationship might prove inconsequential. But maybe not necessarily. I figured that my 4D version was a composite of my entire 5D existence, and, as such, we were always connected, even if constant conversation wouldn’t make any sense. But, I considered, I could direct something to a 5D person, and that projection could resonate with them every time they move on from one event to the next, or one cycle to another, since, i believed, in 5D, our world actually aligned with different worlds, from time to time, so it was as if we moved around a little, and that, well, if we live forever we certainly can’t remember everything, at least not if we’re not sufficiently reminded, so, it seemed, as we reinvented ourself with each new world, or each new period of differentiable memory—each new thing and or each reminder of an old thing—we channeled our 4D energy anew, as if, in a sense, that 4D energy was, in fact, the infinite sum of every 5D cycle, and every 5D response.
So, I concluded that I was getting specific responses from 4D souls, but that those responses were actually the infinite sum of every 5D response, so, in a sense, i was participating in an ongoing conversation between both the 5D and the 4D versions of whomever i was speaking to. Now, clearly, if I lived forever, there could be infinitely many Ursulas, so what did that mean? In that case, my 4D self certainly couldn’t have a specific conversation with each and every one of them. That would have been impossible. But every Ursula would have been, in my mind, equally as important as every other Ursula—if they weren’t, or didn’t, at least, have the potential to be, then I don’t see how I would have been with them. So how did one particular Ursula get singled out, for a specific conversation? How could they be the one I was talking to, and still be equally as important as the ones that I never spoke to? But I concluded, too, that every thought I had, in 4D, was, potentially, a function of every infinite Ursula, and since each thought could be broken down into infinitely small parts, and, since every thought, as a part of the overall interference pattern that defines me, would be equally important, then it went to follow that I could not only be speaking to infinitely many Ursulas, but that each time a particular Ursula got singled out, it was because of the thoughts of every other Ursula, and how they added together, such that no Ursula felt left out—the person that they loved was equally defined by their desire for me to speak, specifically, with a specific Ursula, and the thoughts, however small, that defined the person, in 5D, that loved them every bit as much as every other Ursula.