To All,

As I mentioned in a recent response to Berserk here are copies of some recent contacts with Bob Monroe.  These accounts were posted by Frank to an online TMI Explorer Group he is a member of.  These contacts are conversations about the formulas Monroe often wrote as part of autographing one of his books for someone.

Are they real?  Did they actually happen?  As I've said many times it is my opinion that real proof can't come from anyone else, it has to be your own direct experience.  Other than that,  I suggest you ask Frank.

****************************
Sunday April 2, 2006

9:10 a.m. Bob – if you are available – why did you sign people’s books with formulas, and what do they mean, and how were people supposed to figure them out? Were they embedded rotes? Or what?

Hello, Frank. Took you long enough to figure out how to contact me, didn’t it?

[Big smile on my face.] Well, you were queued behind Mr. Lincoln and Carl Jung, after all.

Yes, I understand. [Gravely, as if taking me seriously.] You should begin by understanding my position. People were giving me their power – you should certainly know what I’m talking about! [referring to my own attitude toward Bob while he was alive] – and thereby they were absolutely negating my achievement, you see. In fact you will see, and already are seeing. When you tell people “you can do this yourself” and they insist on asking you because you can do it better – you see?

Yes indeed. It become a crutch that weakens them instead of a help that strengthens them.

Exactly. So they present me with a book to sign. What shall I do? For some with whom I have a close personal relationship, I can write a personal message. But if it is someone who has just bought a book after doing a program, what should I do? If I sign “Best wishes, Bob Monroe,” they go away glad for my signature but perhaps a little disappointed not to have something to show others, something to make them feel special. But if I say “I’ll never forget the deep impact you have made on my life,” it’s ridiculous, you see. So how do I give an impersonal inscription that does not hurt their feelings or leave them feeling a little bit empty?

If I say “See you in 12,” or “see you in 21,” or “turn left at 15,” I accomplish two things. I give them something personal – it really is personal, for I follow guidance in choosing what to suggest – yet I do not inflate my importance or theirs. And, you see, the most important part, I encourage them to keep using what they just learned. “see you in 12” – well, they can’t do that if they don’t practice going to 12 every so often. Plus, it has mysterious overtones, as if something special is going on behind the scenes, and this is exactly true. It implies that they can be part of these goings on – and that is true too. So a simple inscription sometimes may help them along the way.

But for others, “see you in 12” or whatever has lost value, and it is “best wishes, Bob Monroe” all over again. So for them, formulas. Stockton said to the best of his knowledge no one ever figured out one of the formulas. He didn’t think to ask – how many people ever put any effort into it, for it was the effort I intended to foster.

If I copy one down from Catapult [the biography Bob is referring to, by journalist and author Bayard Stockton] can you tell me what it means?

Well, if we don’t try we’ll never know, will we?

Okay – picking at random, let’s try #4 (Page 305 in Catapult)

6N + L (R2 + 5) = STC

T + 2 p

Now, you were such a trickster, it wouldn’t surprise me a bit to learn that you made it up at random just to keep people moving.


Not quite right. More like I was talking to myself right in front of them knowing it would be years if ever before they heard me.

In the first place, he wrote the formula wrong. “STC” is the other side of the equation, the result, of course, not part of the numerator. So it is

6N + L (R2 + 5)  = STC

T + 2 p

Well I guess that’s pretty obvious – once you point it out! So –

Standard Temporal Consciousness is the product. STC

It is the results of dividing the numerator by the denominator as in standard math.

6N – six levels of nature, plus

L = the level of consciousness represented by (R2 + 5) – or, your receptivity (ego times total self) plus five senses,

divided by

Time plus two times possibility.

In other words, your normal TSI consciousness is created by the interaction of your inner consciousness integration level plus your senses and sense data, as expressed in a given time, on two sides of the veil.

As mathematics it is meaningless, but I never meant it as math.

Six levels of nature?

Count ‘em. Mineral, vegetable, animal, human, elemental, energetic (like lightning, not the forces that created the lightning). By human I mean the TSI components of human, of course.

Well, that’s fascinating! Another?

Go ahead.

#3, p. 305

4L + N2 (S+3) = MVC

T + 6p

You went looking for equivalents from the other formula. Wrong way to look at it. It isn’t mathematics, and it isn’t meant to be consistent.   Each message is a self-contained shorthand expressing what I was feeling at the moment. You might say “what I was receiving from the other side at the moment” but you’re seeing how inadequate and misleading that formulation is.

All right, MVC. Not Most Valuable Consciousness, though that isn’t a bad thought.

Multi-Valued Consciousness (MVC)

4L (4th-chakra love) plus

N2 (nature on both sides of the veil, working together), times

(S+3) or sensory data plus three extra inputs – intuition, other-life feed, and guidance,

divided by

T (the time you are living in), plus

6p or six times personality, or, the limiting factors on your psychic life: attention, emotion, responsibilities, dispersals, capacity, and interaction.

Again, I did not intend for these formulas to communicate on a conscious level to the person I wrote them to – I was talking to myself, as much as anything.

Thanks for all this. It gave me a workout. (If I don’t get anything, maybe I’m making this all up!) Very interesting. Good thing it can’t be verified, or I never would have gotten it!

You’ll find that this is just one more limiting belief. No reason you can’t get through that one any more than all the others.

No, I guess not. I’ll come bother you again when I get my energy gathered again. Meanwhile I’ll show this and we’ll see if we get feedback. Thanks – and good talking to you again after al this time.

Time? What is time? I don’t know that I understand that concept.

[Big smile] 10 a.m.

********************

Another one from Frank . . .

11:50 a.m.

Now have another formula for you if you’re up to it – though Carol did seem to indicate that she would work on it herself.

SCC= T + T2 - 5

          P (V+3)

I reversed it, putting product first, to match your method.

All right. Remember, no necessary consistency between formulas. So T2 here doesn’t have to have any relationship at all to T2 in another formula – though it might. It is strictly my own method of shorthand code.

Super-Conscious Consciousness = Time in TSI plus time in “the other side” minus the influence of the five senses, within the context of (divided by) your perspective, which is formed of your values plus the three parts of your human being, your ego self – which are, depending on how you want to see it, reptile, mammal, human brains, or, body-spirit, ego-spirit, trans-personal-spirit.

I’m not sure that makes sense, which means I’m not sure how good the transmission-belt at the moment.

Well, try it out on her, and if there are parts that are wrong, she will feel the difference; they won’t feel right – for she was part of that minute, that event.

[interruption, but maybe this was all anyway]

Look at Hampton Roads, http://www.hrpub.com
He also wrote 2 books "Messenger" and "Muddy Tracks". The latter was about his experiences at TMI, etc. and published by his company.

Love, Mairlyn