THOUGHT, itself, occurs into the mind, seemingly produced by the individual and from one memory.

That is not the actual situation. It has been my experience to recognize that 'thought' is produced from more than one memory and that all 'thought' that emerges in my mind is not 'self generated'. It is received in a different memory. That certain thought, not all of it however actually emerges from a depths of mind that is unconnected to the 'now' when it occurs is a very difficult fact to discern and then to prove, even to one's self, but it can be done.

Some thought comes from another 'world', one to which the body is almost certainly connected at birth, or potentially able to become connected to. It's a kind of thought that I know about only through experiences that were utterly without meaning at first (1982-1987). During that time span I experienced and recognized a difference at times  in how I heard and experienced spoken words. At first it was occasional and it happened in only one persons' speech, but after 1984 the change overlaid every aspect of my every day life. . After 1987 I had become aware of a mechanism that produced a kind of inner  replay, a real 'reflection'. The words and experiences that were necessary  to understand, then to describe this, came to me though physical events;  finally I "got the message' that was being implied, it was 'spoken' through a  'second underlying context'.    One of the two 1989 batches of information that I later named  'mindquake' began with these words:  "Think about the whole thing. Think about the implications of the whole thing." David Bohms' book  Wholeness and the Implicate Order was brought to mind as well as his idea that every fact should be lifted out and re-viewed with new eyes. I became aware eventually that this 'doubleness' is an inner 'echo' of certain specific content that is literally 'reproduced' as a bundle and in a certain phase (or state of mind)  it is experienced by many people  who believe it is 'alien to themselves'. This 'not me' material is really 'not me'. The influence is 'picked up' and accurately experienced as a 'manipulative, controlling' agency that almost without doubt is experienced to come from real world people, groups and situations. The husband who believes his wife is a manipulative, controlling, scheming 'other'  may be unable to discern certain subtle mental operations, so that his 'wife' is really within his own  mind however a kind of nonverbal communication almost 'forces' the real woman into the 'mold' of that mental 'wife'!!  This is experience I've had myself, of being invisible as an individual female, not to one man but to all of them, especially in therapy, where I expected to be listened to and where I needed to get help with my real world problems.

An almost impossible to believe kind of  'collective mind' that 'man'  shares, from which the same words come from seemingly different people who did not seem able to recognize their 'single mind'  became distinct over the period almost 22 years in duration since 1984.

That  it is 'alien' is in my opinion a good description of what it is and this has been recognized by Emanuel Swedenborg who wrote in his lifetime that the influences of God, and of Divine Providence are experienced as 'alien' by man in the process of 'regeneration'.

The effect of being 'talked to' by some thought produced by exterior world circumstances can also be produced, by mechanisms of mind. But this alteration is carefully accomplished, and with purpose it seems to me in a distinct form, known to Emanuel Swedenborg as 'double thought'.

 I had not heard of him when I named this experience as 'second underlying under/'lying'context's. (To speak as though one knows what one has merely heard about, that has not personally experienced or even read about is lying/'lying' according to Peter D. Ouspensky whose books came to me before I knew about  Swedenborgs' writings )  I had become aware somewhat vaguely, that  doubleness of meaning must be found in the way second under 'lying' contexts' that arise automatically in the mind on the life path he named the 4th Way. Its a way to create information through the activities of mechanisms of mind that I believe can be named the 'psychological sense' in the way P. D. Ouspensky wrote about it.

I became aware of this myself, hearing so many men talk about ideas they had no real knowledge about.. One example was when I heard a coworker talking on the telephone and he said: "I don't want to be anal retentive but...." and I asked him if he knew what 'anal retentive' means.      He was honest so he told me he'd heard someone else use the term and  it sounded 'neat' so he used it himself. I had become aware that the 'anal retentive mindset' has many attributes, derived  originally from 'misogynistic' Greek Thought, through Martin Luther's Protestantism, passing to Freud's idea of the Oedipal Complex into capitalism, and being 'tight' with everything, being ultra literal, and rational without relation to using and understanding symbolic material.  This is a simplistic way to put it, but I experienced it! 

One memory that produces thought, is extremely remote (in the beginning when it is initiated) from 'now', although it's productions are visible. The idea that this is 'hallucination', 'audible hallucination' to some individuals, who disregard it when they are aware of it, came to me as a surprise because this 'irrational' material is what makes the difference between the two 'worlds'! 

How can different memories be detected? This one showed itself to me, it made it's original location very distinct by producing certain thought, early in my life that I experienced in some cases as an instinctual command, in thought words, to do something. I learned something as a result of the instinct that I later read about or heard from teachers or other persons. 

1. "Add the double numbers (in the products of each table) across."  I was 9 years old, I was looking at a tablet on which I'd written  my multiplication tables. Without hesitation I added double numbers across. 

 i.e:     12 = 1 + 2 = 3       27 = 2 + 7 = 9        56 = 5 + 6  = 11 = 2    120 = 1 + 2 + 0 = 3  

Sweenborg named these early in life memories as 'remains' and Ouspensky described them as reoccurrences that  were important .  I had several such seemingly trivial re-occurring memories and eventually I became curious about them.

Once it is accepted that 'emotional' content is different, concerned with 'spiritual insight' (the psychological sense, which creates second underlying contexts or doubleness of thought) it can be accepted this is 'non-self generated thought' although it is generated by 'objects, people, and events' in the exterior world. In fact this was one of the most surprising discoveries I made, and it happened quite slowly but in a purposeful flow of events (in my opinion) that I became aware that a conversational tone emerges in this kind of experience. Thought that is visible, that means the individual can 'see/hear' it, can occur in this process but it cannot be related to, i.e.,  understood, written down, talked about until it meets its exact match in the exterior world. Norman O. Brown writes that emotions become conscious by encountering words in the exterior world.  His book Life Against Death came to me at the perfect point when a new model airplane whose nameber was YA001 approached Final Assembly. It was the first 737 that had a vowel in its name.  

This page is not going to be complete, but I  will give some examples of 'double thought' and try to explain the way it is experienced as a 'second underlying context.' It is necessary to give what may seem like off topic information about what my ordinary natural world life was when the 'strange new flow of circumstances' began to be evident enough to attract my attention. A change in hearing as well as a change in perception occurred, not all at once, but by degrees, like an occasional event, then a steady dribble, and then an increasing flow, then a flood that nearly was overwhelming. The change in hearing and in perception was very subtle, it had to be identified as a repetition, an extremely rapid repetition of content, whatever I was looking at,  hearing, reading and thinking!!!

The first occasion I noticed the change in perception was at night when I noticed lights on cars coming towards me or receding from me, as well as lights across the valley. I could not see what had changed because when I looked very carefully they were  not different at all physically. There was a difference however, a distinct difference: they looked like eyes, they seemed menacing for some reason. Lights across the valley were somehow bright specks that seemed 'paired', yet there was no change in them at all. It became obvious the change was inside my head, in my perception eventually. The sense of 'pairedness' became evident, over a period of years,  after I had become aware of a rapid 'repetition' of an episode of thought about a real world event when it happened. The rapid repetition was somehow batched, no spaces between the words of thought that had occurred to me, a single unit 'reflected back' and this 'reflected content' had an attribute that changed it completely from it's original emergence in my mind. I had suspected this rapid repetition had been happening for many months, perhaps a couple of years but I'd never been able to be certain about it. 

In this episode it was distinctly evident, the 'repetition', with the attribute of 'self reference' as well as a literalness  caused it to seem spoken to me the way another person would speak to me. This almost certainly caused other objects, than my own thought productions to seem 'conversational' also, the same mechanism was at work. 

I can give many examples of 'single events', I thought nothing of the ones that happened before 1984 but I remembered them later. Between 1984 and 1989  there are several  long strings of experience that are more difficult to write about. They are 'snippets'  of experience because overall, every moment of my life between 1984 and 1995 was involved and even now I noticed a distinct continuation of the original 'vein of thought' that began or was initiated with a brief, extremely vivid dream. I had never read about interpreting dreams, nor did I know anything about psychiatric ideas. 

I can select a few strings but there was a single line of endeavor, not consciously chosen by me, and perhaps not even unconsciously that had to be identified. I remember a few times that I said something to my husband that would indicate I had some 'foreknowledge' of what was coming. I remember saying to him with a sense of anguish  and an awareness off his participation in the 'change' that I consciously didn't understand for nearly 9 years: "Don't do this to me. I am innocent."

I would have to write more than most people will try to understand and I cannot use the style of poetry or symbolism, just plain talk is required from me. The symbolic sense was unknown to me from actual experience or from even having read anything about it even in 1987, which was about the time I read The Symbolic and The Real by Ira Progoff. I had not a clew about what the title meant even after having read the book, but I noticed an effect of having read certain information in books: new thought was emerging in my mind, obviously constructed from what I had recently read. 

The events I will try to describe are examples.  The eruption of Mt. St. Helens was a kind of 'benchmark' of the beginning although I realize that even in 1975 I was being carefully made aware of certain habits I had, and of a few reoccurring memories that had puzzled me for most of my life. They will seem disconnected very likely. That's the way they happened to me, each 'bit' of information was unique, but very mundane every day stuff. They accrued and  were not connected in my mind when they happened, to any thing other than 'natural world causes' and the effects from 'real world' events.  Information was being created using what I and several other individuals and couples were trying to do, really do!  When a 'batch' had assembled, and was displayed into my mind,  then I understood something that I had not known previously. It was a visible process, the assembly process and the display process. I watched this process without realizing what I was seeing for several years prior to 1989. It began with just feeling terrible, nearly inert, everything that had been easy to do was difficult for no reason I could see, except that I'd had a terrible blow on my head in 1981. Prior to that I'd had surgery so it seemed these causes produced the new effects. 

By 1987 I had begun to suspect the apparent causes were not the real causes. I heard other people talk about 'life situation changes' that came when a relative had cancer, a divorce changed everything or an unexpected situation changed everything. They seemed to be experiencing something similar to what I had thought were the effects of my real world causes. 

The 'strangeness' and 'new body conditions'  began in 1979, and until 1989 I had no suspicion that 'other than natural world causes' were producing the nearly overwhelming problems I was struggling with in my body, and in my personal life. A kind of 'convergence' of what was 'within me' as 'thought', or 'sensed   content that was not really words' yet even when the 'idea' began to emerge and events in the real visible world was clearly evident by 1987, after two real events happened that made "convergence" between mental content and material world events   explicitly evident. The dates and the timing of events began to seem impossible although at first I barely noticed the 'coincidences'. The word did not occur to me , and I don't believe it's be best word anyway. The 'convergence zone' happened, event by event and each was perfectly timed to a point to point connection between 'thought' and physical world 'event'. It was the real world background  from which the major eruption of mental material into my mind  in 1984 emerged, only the timing was 'magical', truly impossible I thought.  I  hope that the element of 'coincidence' may be identified, but a different way of looking at them, a new definition of this 'kind of experience can be made.

I believe that is why it happened. So that a new definition of an old idea can be made;  one that has been interpreted and misunderstood for 'centuries and thousands of years'.

Mt. St. Helens was visible from where I lived on May 18, 1980 when she 'blew her top' on at 8:32 a.m on May 18. The dark cloud of her 'dusty inner parts' was overhead before a friend called me with the news. In the spring of 1980 everyone I knew was focused on the mountain, wondering if it would really erupt but it seemed so remotely possible to me that I was more concerned with the increasingly uncomfortable symptoms I was noticing in my body.

In the fall of 1979 I had a complete hysterectomy although  this had not been talked about between me and the surgeon prior to surgery. I had tumors in one ovary and after a long period of  loss of blood that left me exhausted he told me the ovary had to be removed.  Within six months I went back to the surgeon because I had so many new symptoms in my body, and it was then that I found out he'd removed all the sex organs. His reasoning, he told me was that I would very likely return with cancer of the cervix within six years so he was saving me that problem. He then told me that I had 'severe menopausal syndrome', which about 12% of women will experience if they have a complete hysterectomy. He said there wasn't any way to determine who would develop this syndrome.

I remember that he said I would have symptoms for about 6 or 7 years and then I would feel better. I don't remember feeling startled or surprised but I noticed an incongruous 'snigger', a slight sound and facial distortion. I noticed it and felt slightly puzzled, but only slightly. I noticed this same grimace in one of the psychiatrists  I went to.

The 'secret about the 'it'  not  the insane, just out of sight, around the corner' is connected to the experience of learning to get meaning from the "Second underlying contexts". Other names are  'meaningful coincidence', or synchronicity', or 'ideas of reference', and I have good reasons to believe  the sense of deja vu, perhaps even the idea of reincarnation and karma can be accounted for also by this 'inner reflection' of content.  The inner content precedes the outer content.

It's  an experience of what seems to be 'coincidence' but it is really a 'regenerated' thought' or in the exterior world it's a 'second sight' of content that occurs very rapidly in the mind. Literally it causes a 'double take', a 'review'ing of some already seen 'packet' or scene. Jokes almost always occur as a result of this 'second sight' operation, but there is almost always a sense of self reference as well as personal experience that makes jokes 'funny'.  I remember that jokes about old people never seemed funny to me until I had to lay the newspaper on the floor in order to be able to read without my glasses! I feel  hilarity only when something personalizes the 'material', whatever form it takes. 

 Thought content that is generated by 'objects, circumstance, events' in the exterior world is 'bundled' so to speak, as a unit, no space between words and 'reflected back' or 'echoed' with a literal sense added to it, as well as 'self reference'. This is nothing unusual or difficult to understand basically because it creates 'second under lying contexts', or a 'new context' for everything.  The sense of 'self observation' that is implied in the myths of Narcissus and the lonely female counterpart are stories about a real 'split' in memories that was evident in the Greek era. This is a simple way to put it at this point, it's just the beginning of how mental processes become evident in 'stories'. 

"Second underlying/under 'lying' contexts  is my own term, one that  I coined after I had become aware of a mechanism of mind that 'regenerates' thought packets, as a unit with the spaces removed. I had not read anything at that point about 'meaningful coincidence', or about synchronicity, or other ideas in psychiatry such as psychosis or neuroses. I knew nothing when I coined the term, or rather the term presented itself when I understood P. D. Ouspensky's way of writing about 'lying' and of being unconsciously identified with information one has not really read about or experienced personally.  Individuals who used terms like "anal retentive" for instance, merely because it became a popular term, rather than knowing it's origin and real definition. 

The effect of this 'replay' of thought is that it is 'reheard' in a flash of time that is so brief it is nearly impossible to notice the 'recurrence' as a separate 'event'.  There are several attributes of this 'new production' from it's original occurrence, but the 'doubleness' of thought itself is the most important attribute to become aware of in the process behind  experiencing  apparently disjoined and unconnected 'meaningful coincidences'. They occur chaotically but after an accumulation there is a sense of something purposeful being constructed using them somewhat as 'bits of information'.

 Emanuel Swedenborg used the appropriate term, double thought to describe it, but I had not read anything authored by Emanuel Swedenborg when a 'double thread of context' began to emerge, quite gradually in my mind, for every word I heard, without regard to where it occurred.

Just try to picture the plot of a movie that unfolds over a long period of time, 70 years for instance. The movie takes place in a couple of hours because only the relevant points to the plot make up the movie. Everyone has 'scenes' in front of them at any given moment, except when your eyes are closed. The particular 'scenes' from my past that formed the plot of the story that has emerged into my mind after 1984, were taken from my actual life. There's nothing more mystical than why it is impossible to validate personal experiences., those 'meaningful coincidences' as some authors have named them. I formed my own name for them, although the first time I used it aloud, the term came out spontaneously. I was in a therapy session with a psychiatrist that I'd recently begun to see. I believed he knew already what I was trying to talk about. However  it became evident later this was due to my lack of knowledge about psychiatry itself, it's foundations and how Freud, then Jung had written about their experiences. The 'symptoms' they observed  in me, were very familiar to them, but of course I didn't know THAT either!!

This page is a 'detail' page, I hope I can  set a context from which my mental experiences can be understood in case you have some of your own; I believe everyone is supposed to have them.  I named them 'mindquakes' eventually after I could relate to them, which was several years after they occurred. 

The first small one, but the most important one happened 1982. It was the most important one because it initiated a new kind of event into my life and the people involved were not in my family. The 'new kind of event' involved what I later realized was 'meaningful coincidence' although I never thought of that myself.

I was desperately trying to handle a wretched home life situation as well as cope with   a very much changed body and mind condition when I experienced the first of this 'new kind of event'.  The first 'events' were of a certain kind marked by perfect  timing, just impeccable timing as well as hearing myself say something spontaneously, that I'd not thought about. I was not surprised immediately at what I heard myself say, in fact I didn't wonder about it until much later!  I'd not experienced anything similar before in my life, at least I believed so when they began to happen.  I will describe the first three: 

1. Driving along I5 I suddenly heard myself blurt out that I was going to change my name because I didn't feel like myself any more. "I am JuAnna." I said, not conscious then of how odd it was that I'd not thought about changing my name before, the words just seemed to come out of my mouth automatically. A white van came alongside on the passenger side, pulled very closely in front of me and then veered over to the left lane and sped away. But while it was in front of me I noticed the first vanity license plate I had ever seen: DJWANNA. Immediately the words translated in my mind as "Do You Want To?" The second meaning emerged also immediately and I realized the sound of the letters duplicated exactly what I had just said aloud. I did not think of it as an 'echo' or a 'repetition' or a 'reflection' of what I'd just said. Indeed this didn't register as a coincidence. I screamed: "DID YOU SEE THAT?"  and sped up to try to verify what I'd seen. "Yes, I saw that. Slow down. Do you want to get me killed?" my passenger   curtly said.  This incident made no special impression on me at the time, I didn't think of it later until after several somewhat similar incidents happened. When a 'flow' became somewhat evident, only then I was interested in trying to figure out how these 'incidents' happened, so precisely timed as they were. It was obvious the timing was impeccable and that I could not have possibly 'decided' to say what I'd said, the words and the situation outside of me were part of some other will, than mine or the driver of the white van.

 Did we have an appointment to slip by each other that had been scheduled long before that few seconds?

2. In the spring of 1982 I found a roll of film under the seat in our van under and dropped it off to be developed. I couldn't remember where the pictures had been taken. The film had  been in our van for some time, I'd not an idea how long.   A week later I went to visit a woman I knew, she was the wife of my favorite challenge level square dance caller. It was her birthday she told me. She was thrilled at the surprise her husband had given her before he left for work:  not one birthday card but two.  I made the appropriate remarks about what a nice husband he was,  thinking wishfully that I had no such surprises in my life. We talked about the two cards and the sentiment conveyed by them then after coffee I left.  Within a few minutes I'd picked up the roll of film. When I saw them I  realized they were pictures taken in the fall of 1981 on  the vacation to the Olympic Peninsula with my husband.  

I felt very odd when I saw that one of the pictures of me was virtually identical to one of the birthday cards my friend had gotten from her husband. I glanced at it, then did a 'double take' and really saw a near duplicate of one of the cards I'd just looked at, a birthday card, one of two, given to my friend by her husband.   I was running through the evening surf, with a pink sweater over my bathing suit, waving my hand to someone on the beach. The colors were nearly identical, the scene was virtually identical and what I was doing was nearly identical to one of the cards. These details were point to point similarities to the card. This man was not a man I believed was attracted to me, nor I to him, but there had begun to be an uncomfortable situation between us, which I could not find a word to describe. 

 I had a sense of tragedy, terrible painful grief about him for no reason I could see or understand.

( It did not occur to me for some time that on that trip I'd blurted out  I was going to change my name, to Ju-anna, until later after several more incidents happened .) 

Be careful to understand there was no connection between he and I so  there could have been no foreknowledge of the picture I was going to pick up. It struck me as very odd that two similar pictures would come into my life in a few hours one morning, knowing one of them had been on a roll of film laying in our car for several months.  The word 'coincidence' did not occur to me. I thought about returning to show the picture to my friend but decided not to mention it. The woman and I had rather a friendly relationship in private but in public she seemed only as cordial as necessary for reasons I had begun to suspect: she thought I had a crush on her husband and I did feel something strongly about him, but it was not love. Basically it was curiosity, but I felt a deep anguish, a body wrenching grief  once it began to become obvious that what I felt was misinterpreted.  I didn't think I could say I felt a terrible, agonizing  grief about him.

3. Within the same basic time span this third event happened, concerning the same woman and her husband. I was sewing with her once a week, she came to my house for a sewing lesson. My husband and I belonged to their square dance club so we saw them nearly every night at that point. As I sewed something she had said to me one morning came into my mind. "He loves me so much he cannot bear to be away from me even one night. It would be impossible for him to become a famous caller because he would have to travel and he can't leave me even for one night." What she'd said had become evident to me, her husband could not leave her even for one night, they obviously had a very unusual relationship as I had noticed his very great attentiveness and obvious devotion to her many times. Yet I could not talk to him myself, I could not approach him to ask about certain square dance problems I wanted to talk about with him. I could not understand why I couldn't talk to him, I felt some kind of barrier that prevented it. 

"It's like there's a six foot high fence around him." The thought came into my mind effortlessly. That night when we went to their house for our lesson I was surprised to see a six foot high chain link fence around their yard. It was the only one in the neighbor hood. Someone asked about why they'd put a six foot high fence around their front yard and she said: "We don't want people throwing rocks at our windows." When asked if anyone had ever done that she said: "They could at any moment." It was obvious that a six foot high fence would not prevent someone from throwing a rock if they chose to do so.  She was a bit  less  than six feet high herself, and what I had begun to sense about  her relationship to her husband was that they were extremely 'close' in a way that somehow was not good for him. She had been married twice before, she told me, to men who were very harsh to live with. But the idea began to emerge from things she said to me that she did not intend to be a 'three time loser', with this husband. This woman was a very unusual person to just 'happen' to come  into my life when she did, but the same is true of her husband. The timing of meeting them, having heard about them before we met, was almost as critical and important as what actually happened as a result of my being a silent, nearly comatose observer of their life, at just that point in time. 

It was several years of confusion later that I understood why this couple had become important that I did some very unusual things and watched myself do them!

The mindquake in 1984 made it somewhat evident that I was living the same life they lived, virtually identically even speaking the same words in my home (without realizing it) that they spoke in their home. The beginning of the first mindquake concerned some statements the man had made, to a group of people but at different times!. 

When that happened I remembered the other two incidents, having not thought about either of them after they happened. Then I felt that these events were quite odd, but the word coincidence did not occur to me. 

The  mindquake that  happened July 31, 1984 opened up the life I had been living, as it has been defined by 'historians', and they were all male, the one in 1989 was surprising because it brought up a 'thread of experience' that had begun when I was a very young girl. There were  smaller 'validating events' after 1989, that caused me to keep trusting in this most personalized kind of 'event', and refuse to accept the common interpretations, even those of Carl G. Jung's school of authors. The 'cause' of this event is not a small part of my 'self', it is a completely separate Other than me.

 Without explicit details very little  can be understood about another persons' every day experience.

My ex-husband had often mentioned an event that happened to him when he was in his late teens, "sitting under the apple tree with his maker'. He was told everything he would ever need to know, but as time passed his attitude to the event changed until he said it was not worth mentioning. My relationship with him was a deep bond, and that word was not as meaningful 35 years ago, as it is in 2018.