Continuance (and probably some conclusion) on densities

[hogey11]

A few interesting pieces:

43.16 Questioner: The physical vehicle that is used in fourth-density space/time is, I am assuming, quite similar to the one that is now used in third density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. The chemical elements used are not the same. However, the appearance is similar.

This also supports the "electrical" body being that of the energy centers rather than of the chemical reactions of the body.

Maybe it was I who said Ra said it instead of Q'uo.... i get mixed up sometimes. Sorry!

I'm surprised that one could interpret Ra's response in that manner. It would clearly seem that the 4D body is also a chemical body (i.e. atomic structures), but of a different 'core vibration'.

Obviously we can see an 'astral' entity's body, but what we call astral is only a 'shadow' from a 3D-mind perspective. We can not see it as it is, unless 1) 'ectoplasm' is furnished, 2) we are perceiving it from a 4d-mind (i.e. 4D time/space or metaphysical), 3) it's an dual-activated or an early 4D body, or 4) the 4D entity is advanced enough in 4D understanding to make part of itself visible - which could mean discomfort for the 4D entity.

I see this possibly being a control thing. If we gain dexterity with our brain similar to what we have in our fingers in 4D, this would make sense. Our brain would no longer work as a soup of chemicals, but instead as a tool of which we have complete control.

I agree that there would be more control of the 4D body from a 4D mind-complex, but apparently such control only exists in potential, initially. The control, like any use of 4D 'intelligent energy' abilities, is a learned skill. It may take many years to discover.

It's interesting that Ra goes so far to matter-of-factly relate the natural consequences of early 4D abilities with respect to this control - as if this learning was a common thing and had particular importance or relevance.

I agree with you on both points.

I think my quote mentioned was not very thought out at that point in time. What you are saying make a lot of sense. I think the thing I left out in my first idea is that it seems that we will still use chemicals in the 4D physical vehicle, but different ones and maybe less in total... So i'm down with what you are getting at here.

I will think on all this, you make some great observations. thank you.