[Page 0] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Introduction

[Page 1] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Objectives

The operational objective is to develop a staff of enlightened and illuminated beings to act as officers and crew for Spaceship Multiverse.

The logistic objective is to minimise the temporal duration of the implementation phase with harm to none.

The tactical objective is to apply available resources to the attaining of the strategic, operational and logistic objectives, in the moment, each moment.

Becoming a 2 is "attaining knowledge and conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel"

Becoming a 3 is "crossing the abyss" or "dissolution of ego".

A 1 knows a 1 and can guess at 2's and 3's, at least able to see they are at least 1's.

A 2 knows a 2 and can guess who might be a real 3, but in some traditions (such as "layman") may not know themself a 2 and may not distinguish 1's from 2's unprompted.

[Page 2] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Challenges

The challenge presented by the 1 is, how can they even recognise 2, let alone attain it?

The challenge presented by the 2 is, how can anyone be so egotistical as to think that they are a 3 ? Or even a 2 ?

The challenge presented by the 3 is the Multiverse, since there is only one being, and the multiverse IS that being, as are all "other" beings.

[Page 3] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Techniques

In order to establish that a concept possesses a referent, it is invaluable (some might say, "essential") that the referent exist within the sensual and/or perceptual field of the being(s) to whom one wishes to establish the fact of the existence of the referent and/or its nature.

To turn a 0 into a 1, you must demonstrate to that 0 the existence of the referent of 2. This explains why it is said to require a 2 to accomplish the feat.

To turn a 1 into a 2, you must demonstrate to that 1 the existence of the referent of 3. This explains why it is said to require a 3 to accomplish the feat.

To turn a 2 into a 3, you must demonstrate to that 2 that the being who turned them into a 1 was only a 2, not a 3. Otherwise 2's might think themselves 3's and themselves tell 1's that those 1's are themselves 2's. A 2 can make you a 1, but only a 3 can tell you when you have actually attained 2; if your 2 tells you so, you might end up both thinking one of you is a 3. A bunch of 2's can try to figure out who the 3 is that made them 2's, but how can they tell whether or not they are in fact 1's and a 2, the over- eager 1's convincing the 2 it's a 3 so it can convince them they are 2's? They say a REAL 2 would not let that happen, and 1's scarcely grasp how REAL a 2 IS.

[Page 4] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Application

If you are a 0 you are unlikely to read this book, and who-ever influenced you to do so (whether you are conscious of such influences or not) is probably a 1, 2 or 3. If you read and understand the entire book AND ITS IMPLICATIONS, you will probably be a 1, and if that occurs, it implies a 2 must have been in the picture; many say, the 2 must have been in your presence; others might suggest a 3 may be able to turn a 0 into a 1 at longer ranges, such as by "operational literature" capable of carrying some of "the Master's Baraka" at least during the lifetime of the issuing 3.

If you are a 1 that would certainly explain your interest in this book: you are capable of recognising a fellow inititate even through the medium of the written word. Can you tell a 1 from a 2 or 3 though?

If you are a 2 you are enlightened enough to make use of this handbook in the course of your Teaching. A 2 can Teach, if only within or by use of their own tradition. You can, in theory, turn 0's into 1's, but probably all your friends are 1's or even 2's, and find 0's mundane or at best a bit slow or otherwise not managing to experience this world as The Kingdom. You live a charmed life, but even your most 2-ish friends have not convinced one-another that this life IS the Kingdom of Heaven, due to egotistically thinking they know that if it was, it would appear otherwise than it appears to them, and others they know, to appear. Can you figure out who the 3 was who made you a 2 ?

[Page 5] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Application

As the 3, you wrote this book, by causing an object known as "Mark Metson" to write it for you, probably without even having to pay conscious attention while incarnate to the detailed logistics by which you accomplished that feat. "Authors" are literary devices used in writing to rationalise the presence of the written form of a concept, and as such serve as part of the/ "your" "unconscious" processes. If you are unconscious of having created your experiences, such as whatever in your experience once seemed to add verisimilitude to the concept or existence of "other", you are perhaps only thinking or dreaming that you are the 3. Also the imaginary 2 imagining it is writing this might, one imagines, wonder why you had to dream IT up to rationalise YOUR experience of this book. Are we one or are we "not"? Uniqueness is a property of One. Each One, all One, are One Unique One, each Uniquely.

[Page 6] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Application

[Page 7] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Application

The problem posed by assuming a 3 might read this book, is how they could be "another" than it's author. If the reader is the 3, the reader is the writer. Yet on the other hand if the author is the 3, the writer is the reader. In either case, presumably with all the weird wisdom of the 3 that poses no problem, it takes that in its stride: it is all one 3 using multiple I-dolls or psychophysical bodies to play a melody by dancing the dance of stars, its movements generating the music of the spheres, to which it dances...

[Page 8] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Application

Adepts of the Layman School for example have a saying, "those who know don't speak; those who speak, don't know"; so Layman Adepts are notoriously difficult to wring admissions of Adepthood from. Wiccan Adepts on the other hand, tend either to think they are merely Initiates, or unilaterally decide they are 3's (mistakenly) and by so doing, slip back from 2 to 1. Luckily, Wiccan Adepts work in groups, else you would find most Wiccan 2's either denying they are 2's or posing as 3's to their own downfall. By forming a community of Adepts, it becomes possible that enough Adepts, working together, might discover the 3 who enlightened them. A 1 should leave such problems to 2's and concentrate on learning to detect 2's. If you cannot trust a 2 to detect a 3 for you, you probably wouldn't trust a 3 even if you did stumble upon one. But it is said the 2's and 3's ALL, UNANIMOUSLY recognise ALL 3's as at being AT LEAST 2's so when looking for a 2, look for someone who recognises many or most famous historical "great teachers" as at least 2's (the others being the historical "great charlatans", 2's who fell to 1).

[Page 9] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Application

All the foregoing hopefully clarifies why one finds Adepts operating consensual, perhaps communistic communities in which heirarchical concepts do not fare well, yet in which the real students are able to identify the real teachers and the real teachers know the students are over-estimating them, because they have seen a REAL teacher. If a 3 does exist incarnate, the 2's are probably hiding it somewhere so it doesnt get crucified again.

Real 3's ALL have ALWAYS INSISTED that being dead would in no way prevent certain specific lives from continuing to function effectively in the world; JESUS and SAI BABA are examples of lifestories/personalities asserted by the one 3 (while incarnate as them) to be designed as personalities which would continue their function even beyond the historical period said to represent their living incarnation. This myth permits today's 3's to assert that there is no proving they exist merely due to the existence of 2's: the 2's could in theory all be attributable to discarnate 3's. This myth is often used by the 3 to go incognito and by 2's to deny the 3 who taught them so that they can fall back to being 1's and maybe claim to be 3's.

[Page 10] "Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Results

"By their fruits shall ye know them." Wicca is a PRACTICAL craft. It is by RESULTS this book should be judged. Is it true? Is it necessary? Is it kind? Is it done out of love, or for power? These four questions are the checklist all words and acts should pass, the Rules of Right Action of a Spiritual Warrior. The Warrior is on the Path: hopefully a 2. The Witch is using the Craft: hopefully a 3. The Path is for Seeking; the Craft is for Crafting. Witches have a fifth Rule of Right Action: Does it Work?! To Craft a Path, it has to Work.

A person who takes Wisdom as Hyperbole passes like a point in hyperbolic orbit. Take it as Parable and you are parabolic: there is a focus. Realise it as merely elliptical and we can communicate: an orbit exists. But two foci: you and me. The Circle is the special case of ellipse in which the foci are one: we are one. Results of reading depend upon how you approach the point of the book, which is my focus. This is symbolism in plain english and plane geometry. I could hardly speak more planely and plainly save perhaps by utilising an actual 3-dimensional mobile wherein the plane of that which eclipses the point from your point of view can change its plane to minimise eclipses.

Let us hope you get more out of it than you put into it; for if so, we all benefit.

"Dancing to the Melody" A Spiritual Teacher's Handbook: Journal

Dec.21st 1992: Have begun tabulating recognition among magickal community with respect to a scale of 0 = Mundane, 1 = Initiate, 2 = Adept, 3 = Illuminated, where a 2 can initiate a 0 making a 1, but only a 3 can determine when a 1 has become a 2, and only a 3 can initiate a 2 making a 3. The mark of a 1 is they know there are 2's and maybe even higher, and are willing to learn to be a proper 1 so as to hope to attain 2. The marks of a 2 are that they can create 1's out of 0's, and are "enlightened folks". 1's are learning to recognise 2's; 2's recognise one another regardless of from what tradition they are. They are learning to recognise 3's. This state of affairs implies that if we survey the magickal community, we should find consensus among 2's as to who is a 2, who a 1; and some consensus among 1's as to who is a 2; but a 1 should be able to recognise another 1, so basically all 1's should agree as to who is a 1+, all 2's as to who is a 1+ and who a 2+; and even if we assume some 2's might not recognise one-another, we should find TOTAL, NO EXCEPTIONS consensus among 3+'s as to who is a 3+, since at 3rd degree, being ONE, it should agree with itself. It is possible we may find all 3's list themselves as 2, except those 3's who partake of "the one" consensus as to which of their bodies to list as a 3. Luckily there is another criteria we can use to try to detect a 3: all 2's must presumably have met a 3 in order to be initiated as a 2 (since a 2 cannot initiate a 2, just a 1). Thus even if it should emerge that 3's are too modest to admit they are, 2's can consider who was the teacher who made them a 2 for real. ...( stopped to write the book)... And now I have just written sections 1,2,3,4 and 5. Sections . and 0 and the cover were all I wrote on Nov.13th 1992, and the Nov.15th 1992 journal entry was all I wrote of this book on Nov.15th 1992.

Today is Yule at ----'s, where I shall unveil this book to its first readers. Unless I first xerox it at K-PC Ltee in which case K.P. or John may be its first readers as I would certainly give them a copy if I xerox it there. I still want to add some form of bibliographic section in which to mention The Spiritual Warrior's Handbook by Phill and Diane Dunn, Learning How to Learn by Idries Shah along with other Shah works, and the Llewelyn Practical Guide to Psychic Self-Defense and Well-Being with mention of the question of why Dion Fortune's classic Psychic Self-Defense was allowed to pass out of print.

If you paid for this book it was obtained from a charlatan, possibly a deliberate, conscious, intentional devotee of evil in its most insidious and destructive form. Charging for this book is a violation of Wiccan Law. No true Initiate (1) and absolutely NO Adept (2) would charge for this book, and the one 3 so ordained it, or so all 2's agree. Only someone who had not read this or who espouses essential evil would be so foul and unscrupulous as to charge for it or to pass it on to another without warning not to charge for it.

There is no excuse possible for charging for this book: if a person cannot afford to duplicate it and give it away, then they can loan it and the person to whom it is loaned can duplicate it themself. Any attempt to loophole the Wiccan Law against charging for magick is very highly suspect, including charging for teaching, healing, or Teaching or Healing. Physicians, Therapists, Healers, and Teachers should never ever ever ever charge for their Work, at risk of their Immortal Soul. If they do the Work, Divinity/Spirit will provide; if they charge for it, they are officially, karmically, physically, ritually, factually, akashically, for real and for true, as God lives in whose presence my soul stands, record affirm prove and declare that they stand apart from Divinity/Spirit, forfeiting any claim upon or to Divinity/Spirit: that they choose to deny or ignore divinity/spirit and try to wrest a living from the earth by the sweat of their brow rather than accept the Kingdom on Earth and live freely of the bounty of the Goddess/Divinity/Spirit/God. A TRUE healer, physician, teacher, therapist etc. is known by fruitive karma: as they sow, so shall they reap. If they cannot afford to give their Work freely, it is no true Work, merely going through the motions: if they truly Worked, they would find, like the lillies of the field, that they are provided for. As soon as you accept pay for, for example, teaching, those paying start trying to dictate who, where, when or how you teach, or even what you teach. The hippocratic oath, not pay, determines who, where, when and how a healer or physician Works. A Teacher's own Genius or Holy Guardian Angel or Divinity dictates Teaching similarly.

True teachers, healers etc. thus must either be real, doing real Work, in which case Divinity/Spirit (karma) will provide for their needs; or must have some mundane profession, craft or labour they do for a living and to provide for the expenses they incurr in the course of their Work. The question of whether Wicca should have a paid clergy is simply answered: it does, and the Goddess pays them so well that they never ever ever ever charge anyone else for doing the work of the Goddess. They make their living at mundane labour, craft or trade, or simply live among friends who do so: they tend to have many friends. If anyone wishes to donate to their cause they could try anonymous untraceable donations such as "losing" money in a Temple or other means of putting money in such people's hands without in any way even thinking or feeling about expecting that money to be used in any anticipatable way and with no slightest unconscious wish to somehow influence who, where, when, how or what is Taught, if anything. And the Witch would STILL feel you are somehow, however subtly or craftily, paying for The Work and will try to seek to Work without accepting money for it. Only people suffering from attachment to material things would dream of attempting to subvert this essential occult principle. Thus a 2 who did so would in so doing revert to 1, and the 3 never has, never does, and never shall, for he/she is god/ess and provider of all. The ancient rule to provide was that all should give one tenth of all to the One, so that if ever the One 3 does incarnate, a stockpile of a tenth of all produced since last the one 3 drew upon it will be there ready to finance its Work.

In practice stockpiles of that sort, such as the possessions of the Roman Catholic Church, have in fact been maintained to some extent. In order to access them however, the 3 would have to convince the 2's (presumably the College of Cardinals) that it is, in fact, the 3 (presumably the Pope). Because all bodily incarnations of the 3 are One, any 3 is all 3's is any 3. If the Pope is truly 3rd Degree, (s)he will inevitably, naturally, and unarguably grant all 3rd Degree incarnations equal access to and authority over those funds. If the pope is not the 3, then the pope is just another of the college of 2's, and hopefully is fully aware of being only a 2, not a 3. For to fail to be aware of such would be to slip to 1, which is far too unenlightened for holding the position of pope; the college/consensus of 2's would spot that in an instant. It is partly by learning the difference between 2 and 3 that a 1 becomes a 2, so a 2 who cannot tell a 2 from a 3 WHEN PRESENTED WITH A BONA-FIDE 3 (THE bona fide 3: the one all bona fide 3's recognise as such: the one who recognises all who recognise her or him for who and what they are) is not in sooth a 2 but may be a 1 who is too blind to receive Enlightenment from the Source of Illumination. It is hoped that the one 3 will know how to heal such blindness. Indeed it is obvious it would not be the one 3 in full power and revelation were it not possessed of such knowledge. Some say however that sin can blind one even to the revelations of The One God. Sin being a word meaning basically to miss the mark, as in archery. In colloquial language, "to miss the point".