While out of body during sleep, I was met by an escort whom I had not met before. His radiant identity suggested he was legitimate. He informed me that a class was being held tonight and part of the subject matter is suitable for me.
I connected with the escort and we flew high over Melbourne suburbs to the city centre and settled on the top of a skyscraper. The class was already taking place on the roof of the building, in the open air with the darkness above and the city lights all around below.
About a dozen attendees were seated in chairs attentively facing a female lecturer standing beside a projection screen.
An invisible sound proof shield was in place around the class so that I could not hear what the lecturer was saying.
The escort informed me that the lecturer would cover several subjects and when the subject to which I was suitable was about to commence he would prompt me to step forward into the class and be seated. He would also signal me when to depart the class.
Around the outside of the class were several others standing with their escorts, awaiting their time to step into the class. The lecturer occasionally paused between subjects at which times attendees were ushered by their escorts into or out of the class.
I noticed there were attendees who remained continually seated in the class while others would step in for only a minute or so after which they were signaled out and taken back to their bodies by their escorts.
I saw some official types standing in the background overseeing the event.
All persons present were obscured by shadows and by a uniform disguise projected onto them to preserve their anonymity. The disguise projected onto everyone was of a plain chess piece pawn. All pawn suits were grey with a white band near the head. The disguise only became apparent when I looked directly at someone and tried to perceive their identity. When I did not try to identify them, then they remained in human form, partly dulled by shadow and without their identity visible.
Although I could not identify any individuals, I could quite easily identify their gender and their relationship to society, including their social and occupational groups.
I noticed that most present were social workers, counselors and psychologists, and that every attendee was involved in some sort of welfare employment or activity, not necessarily through recognised organizations but all in some sort of role of social service and influence.
I understood that most attendees were deeply asleep, in a state of low awareness and no initiative, and would not consciously remember the experience, but to varying degrees they would remember the essence of the messages they had heard in the lesson.
Not being asleep and in dream state like the others, but more conscious than they, I could observe details and exchange quiet communications with my escort about what was going on. He informed me that being a sleeper’s class for people in dream state and in keeping with the design of the lessons, that I had no interaction rights when in the class, only permission to attend and observe.
The Lecturer paused and the escort prompted me to enter the class and be seated.
The Lecturer was an incredibly proficient communicator. She spoke clearly and precisely, and with space between her words, pausing frequently. Her pauses were as deliberate and well crafted as her words. She projected her words both audibly and visually, and projected accompanying pictures and symbols along with her words and pauses. The projections were both on the screen beside her and within my mind. She inserted brackets, dashes and an array of tone and inflections into her speech.
The following is a transcript of my notes and contains what she said. The bracketed sections represent the brackets and dashes that the Lecturer would insert into her speech. Except for the blue bracketed text which is of my own insertion and marked cb. The symbols depicted were the lecturer’s projections.
Immediately after I was signalled to depart the class I returned to the body and recorded the content of the lecture.
Date: Night of Thursday 4th October 2007
Subject: Human Relations – Promiscuity
Location: Melbourne, on roof of a city skyscraper.
Attendees: A focus group of between one & two dozen selected persons, social work/counselor/psychologist types and others of similar influence.
Attending Conditions: I understand all attendees were asleep and unconsciously out of their body. All persons, including the lecturer, had their personal identity obscured by a uniform similar to plain chess piece pawns, not black or white but grey, and each had a white band near the head; this to protect anonymity, hide attendee’s personal identity and personality condition from each other, and the white band to symbolise the indwelling soul. This uniform “activated” upon any individual whom I tried to get a personal identity on beyond their gender and relation to society.
State: Exited via solar plexus with sharp observant awareness & recall.
Content of lecture as delivered:
“The guidelines for wellbeing – that is, the rules for living and for safety – for mental, emotional, and physical wellbeing – are different
for Married and Single people.
The rules and guidelines for each category of lifestyle (married and single) are incompatible with the other.
For the Promiscuous (and promiscuity is defined as sex without commitment), the rules and guidelines for both these categories of lifestyles (married and single) apply.
Therefore, life becomes complicated and troublesome for this group (the Promiscuous).
(Forward progress is hampered; energy is scattered (focus is lost); life is slowed; vision obstructed; purpose lost. Haphazard becomes the life.)
Of course, this is a Base Level View – (ever) the starting point for understanding.
(And it is well, and right – and best, that the rules and guidelines for wellbeing favour, or best serve, the married and the wholesomely single – for this is the way humanity has (pregnant pause cb) “developed” (the word evolved was demonstrably avoided cb) – and is the course that humanity is on.)
Presently we are utilising Humour as the avenue / the conduit for this message, (projection of comedy, tv, sitcoms, films cb) for there is much opposition to this message – particularly when it is presented through the traditional avenues of Religion and Common Sense.
The message though, is yet to be obstructed through the avenue of humour.”