Session 104

THE TAROT IS THE STORY OF ONE

January 15, 1966
Present: Given, Legion, Gayla, Sweet Timothy.

Gayla: What is the total meaning, or sentence, spelled by the Tarot Books?

WE: This is the story of ONE.

Gayla: Is there a correct sequence? If so, why?

WE: Yes. Like stories, the sequence follows a seeming pattern.

Gayla: What is the pattern?

WE: It depends on who reads the story.

Gayla: Are you saying there is a difference between the ALL and individual entities?

WE: No.

Legion: In the order given, is the sequence correctly understood by me as Sephiroth, chakras and principles?

WE: Yes-if you read it that way.

Gayla: What is the true import of the Books for man at this time?

WE: ONE is realized.

Gayla: Will you be more specific in reference as to how it is to be read?

WE: With the eye open.

Gayla: Why do some books have letters, as given, and others do not?

(No reply).

Legion: You said once you would speak of numbers in relation to Tarot. Is it time now?

(Still no reply.)

Legion: Is there anything you would be willing to say regarding number and Tarot?

WE: The mystery of number is.

Gayla: Are there any key cards?

WE: Yes.

Gayla: What are they?

WE: All.

Gayla: Is this a reverse deck? Has it a connection with the prior deck?

WE: A progression.

Gayla: Is there another new deck?

WE: Not now.

Gayla: Will there be another one soon?

WE: There is only NOW.

Gayla: Is there another deck to be given?

WE: In your sense, no.

Gayla: Would it be possible to expand on the essential meaning of each card?

WE: Yes. You must do it.

Gayla: Is there more explanation?

WE: No. You are it.

Gayla: Please give more elucidation on the whole subject.

WE: Yes, you will do it.

Legion: What does the word Tarot mean? What do the letters spell?

WE: Here and now.

Gayla: Should we do something about putting this out soon?

WE: Are you not?

Legion: Please say something more helpful regarding the Tarot.

WE: Do not strain a whale through a fish-net.

Gayla: Is this something like a re-statement of a reality that has been stated many times in the way of a message? And, if so, is it important at this time?

WE: ‘Tis a statement-not a re-statement.

Gayla: What is the difference in this statement?

WE: The statement in its entirement is this: ONE is in motion. That motion is love. YOU are that ONE in motion.

Gayla: But how are we to bring it all together?

WE: Impossible!

Gayla: How, then, do we bring it into manifestation?

WE: Look at it another way. See what is and not what seems.

Legion: Is the royal mix-up related to 18th dynasty Egypt?

WE: Yes.

Legion: In the progression we are now in, will this be straightened? Is it being straightened?

WE: Yes. It is.

Gayla: Why am I suffering?

WE: Are you really?

Sweet Timothy: Why am I not suffering?

WE: He is.

Sweet Timothy: What is the Egyptian or Royal Maze?

WE: The present.

Legion: Between the 18th dynasty and today, has ever a similar concept been expressed in the world?

WE: Expressed-but not spoken of.

Sweet Timothy: Is “big” Timothy that which is suffering? By all standards, I should be suffering . . . why am I not?

WE: You are suffering and your Feeler is not functioning. When your Feeler functions, you will not suffer.

Sweet Timothy: Can I turn on this Feeler? If I can, what of this loathsome personality?

WE: Yes. It is turned on by that loathsome phrase.

Sweet Timothy: What of Meher Baba? Is he essential to this motion?

(Sweet Timothy had become an ardent Baba follower since moving to Bolinas, and often attended meetings at the Baba center in San Francisco, known as Sufi-ism Re-Oriented).

WE: He is-as are you.

Sweet Timothy: Can we expect to achieve realization by ourselves?

WE: There is no intermediary. There is ONE.

Sweet Timothy: Do you have any practical suggestions concerning the goal?

WE: BE-which necessitates doing.

Gayla: Doing what?

WE: Expressing ONE.

Sweet Timothy: What is the Avatar and what is my function?

WE: There is ONE. If you call ONE Avatar, YOU are that. If you are, you know. If you know, you do. If you do not, you are not. If you can say “I am,” what then is the question?

Gayla: In what way was I involved with Egypt?

WE: In the end. You will be so again in its progression.

Gayla: Could you give me a specific name or event?

WE: Yes. Final acceptance.

Gayla: Of what?

WE: ONE.

Sweet Timothy: I am impaired. I feel nothing whatever. How to break this?

WE: Feel out – stop feeling in. It is that simple. More to the point WE cannot be.

Sweet Timothy: What is the difference between sensation and feeling?

WE: Feeling will give sensation.

Sweet Timothy: I feel there is something to be touched, which….

WE: Correct feeling. Touch another.

Sweet Timothy: I have a strange feeling that you are trying to tell me something. But there is a barrier between here and out there. What does this mean?

WE: Inward flow must out-flow.

Q: What started this inward flow?

WE: Fear that out-flow would lessen you. On the contrary, it would add to you.

Q: But what was the cause?

WE: It is simpler to accept the remedy than search the cause.

Sweet Timothy: Is there a suggested kind of out-flow? I’m at a loss . .

WE: You are not. (Pause). Touch another. To do this, you must feel. If you fear to feel, o’ercome this fear in the only way possible . . . DO IT!

This was the first session in which the link between the Royal Maze of the Tarot and 18th dynasty Egypt had been openly admitted by the communicant of the board, but as usual no details were forthcoming. The details were not the point. ONE was the point. The message, as such, had come to its end-although there would be one more session in Mex:co a month later, and yet another, as aftermath, in 1969. What remained, at this point, was getting the work to the public, which commenced in 1967 with the publication of the 22 progressed Books of the Tarot in poster-size.

Comments are closed.