These are the days of miracle and wonder;
This is the long distance call.
The way the camera follows us in slo-mo;
The way we look to us all.
The way we look to a distant constellation;
That’s dying in a corner of the sky.
These are the days of miracle and wonder;
and don’t cry baby, don’t cry, don’t cry.
– Paul Simon
I thought it was time to write a sort of rambling, confusing post, because I am confused. I don’t confuse easily, and I don’t want you to get more confused. So I will try to apply what all good Scientologists learn to apply to handle confusion: Confusion and the Stable Datum.
Here is a stable datum:
You are real.
And here is another datum of comparable magnitude by which you may evaluate this datum:
I am real.
The question at hand is: Besides you and me, what is real?
Let us entertain a concept of gradient reality. Some things are more real than other things. We have a synonym for reality in Scientology: Agreement. And we all know that there can be variations of agreement. So if reality is based on agreement, then there can be variations of reality, too.
This applies most obviously to future realities. How do future realities come about? By someone deciding, or dreaming, that the future should be such-and-such, and then getting others to agree and help create it.
But it also applies to the present and the past.
The earth revolves and lets the sunlight sweep over it.
But what is the sun?
Scientists say it is a huge ball of material that is involved in a constant fusion reaction. This fusion reaction has been going on for billions of years and will last for billions more.
The ancient Egyptians might have told us that the sun is a being who cares for us by giving us warmth. There are still many people who think that stars and planets have a certain amount of self-determinism.
Is one concept of the sun “more real” than the other? Whatever is said about it, the sun is obviously real. We see it, or its light, every single day. It is at least as real as that light and heat.
And the past: Were ETs involved in bringing humans to earth?
The legends say they were. But science has rejected these stories as “unreal.” They are myths and legends, designed to teach, not to be strictly factual.
Stories and perceptions
If you, personally, perceive something is real, then it is real for you.
If someone else perceives something as real, then comes and tells you about it, they are telling you a story and probably hoping you will agree with them that what they perceived was real. But you didn’t perceive it; you only perceived the story about it.
We all know that someone can totally make up a story and tell it to us and be very convincing. Go watch any modern movie. Their “reality” can be intense! Yet they are merely stories, patterns of light and color on a screen, patterns of noise and sound in your ears. The reality is that you experienced a movie.
The everything-is-a-movie paradigm
There are some who will tell you that everything you experience is really like that movie; just radiation patterns that you then perceive and interpret.
Well, in some esoteric sense, they are right. But I don’t like to be told this. I can tell the difference between watching my environment and watching a movie. There are lots of differences and they are obvious. So, is the intention of this paradigm to convince us that we really can’t tell the difference? Is it trying to take an ability we have away from us? That is the problem I have with this paradigm.
The scientific paradigm
Currently “Science” (if I may use the term as a cultural institution rather than a philosophy and practice) asserts that if a phenomenon cannot be reproduced in the laboratory, then it is unworthy of scientific study.
“Scientists” who are afraid of going out of agreement with the people who fund their comfortable lifestyles will act to defend the “realities” of those funding sources. Of course, that is not good science (hence, “scientists”).
History, technically, is a humanity. But so were psychology and economics. Now those are “sciences.” We would like the findings of history to be reproducible, too. We would like everybody to agree on what “really” happened. But the problem with history is that it is almost entirely composed of stories of what other people perceived or would like us to believe they perceived. Until recently, the actual perception of historic events in present time seemed impossible. Yet, this is nothing but an extension of an ability we call “memory” which we use all the time.
Recent breakthroughs in the use of memory as a research tool
I’m not sure I want to detail these technologies here. But there are at least three of them:
- Hypnosis (regression therapy)
- Auditing (reliving and meter-assisted recall)
- Scientific Remote Viewing
These technologies evolved from each other in the order given. I consider Auditing the most safe and reliable of the three. Hypnosis is dangerous, even in skilled hands, because it pushes the analytical mind (ego?) out of the way, instead of inviting its cooperation, as is done in auditing. Remote Viewing combines elements of solo auditing with elements of Astral Travel or Projection. It is very difficult to learn to do well, and also has its dangers, as the analytical mind is again being pushed aside during the session.
What is similar about all these technologies, along with the use of normal waking memory (mostly in children) is the “realities” that they have validated.
Here is a way for a person to “go back” and inspect mental records of past events (made automatically at the time) without the problem of having to interpret someone else’s story. It gives the researcher an opportunity to personally inspect those records, or to directly communicate with someone who is personally inspecting those records. The findings have been fascinating.
New Stable Data
From the viewpoint of Western culture, the following list is premature. From the viewpoint of many non-Western teachings, it is long overdue. These are the core “realities” or “truths” that get validated over and over whenever research using one of these memory technologies is conducted:
- People have past lives.
This must mean that people are immortal spiritual beings that travel from body to body with their personal “memory cloud” intact. Isn’t that what this means?
- ETs exist.
Point 1. makes this seem more plausible. If this game of a being picking up a body, living a life, then dropping the body and going on to another is so prevalent, then it must be happening on most inhabitable planets, not just ours. Of course we also have direct evidence of ET existence.
- ETs are interacting with earth humans.
This fact is validated over and over and over again. It is a fact. Scientology concentrates on past interactions, and on those that take place in the Between Lives Area, because they can be problematic. Scientology is not trying to directly solve our current problems on planet earth. It is trying to create beings willing and able to solve those problems. And it is.
I’m still confused
Now, you’d think that knowing all this would result in a big reduction of confusion for a person. After all, these are three new enormous stable datums! And I guess it does, some.
But it doesn’t completely because we are still missing this stable datum:
I am an immortal being who can know with certainty all that I have ever done and all that is going on around me in present time.
It’s a great ideal, but we just aren’t there yet. And I am certainly nowhere near there yet. Are any of you?
And so, “current events” other than those I personally experience, are all just stories. Those stories could be total fabrications, delusions, partial fabrications, or total truth. They are all necessarily limited in their scope and viewpoint because no being yet has the ability to know with certainty all that is occurring in present time. There is just too much of it; too many distractions; too many other things to do.
Some important stories/paradigms
1. Life as a power struggle:
If a spider wants to survive by eating a fly, that spider has to find a way to overpower that fly, which is also struggling to survive.
Same goes for a shark eating a fish, a robin eating a worm, or a man eating a pig. Have you ever seen how much effort it takes to actually kill a pig by bleeding it to death? I have. It’s a power struggle.
When humanoids go at each other, you know that something wrong has happened. We weren’t meant to eat each other; we were meant to eat the lower animals, plants, etc. Of course, most humans don’t kill each other to eat. They kill each other in order to take over control of a physical space because it contains something needed for body survival, like food, water, minerals, etc.
Some humanoids are really into this power struggle paradigm and think it’s just the greatest game in the world. They don’t even think of killing other humanoids as a problem. But, of course, it is.
Other humanoids don’t want to confront this power struggle paradigm in any way shape or form. They want “peaceful” lives eating berries and dancing in the fields or something. Well, humanoid life doesn’t work that way. Spiritual life can maybe work that way. So, until you are ready for a totally spiritual life with no meat body, no light body, no aura or any other energetic attachment to speak of, then you will have to face this power struggle game sooner or later.
2. There is a power struggle on earth.
As far as I can tell, all the big players are more or less agreed that it would be better for “the people” to not know about this. It is their game. We are pawns in that game, but that is not their concern. This planet is full of resources, and those who can control them can profit from that control. That is the way it has always been.
The people of the planet want those resources for their own use. But the controllers see this whole planet as a mere colony of some greater empire. It should be a factory planet, supplying the empire with products it needs, and they, the controllers, should profit from this. This works as long as “we” stay ignorant. We are all enemies to those plans.
That is why, I suppose, they are so upset about the population of the planet being so high. It’s not OUR survival they are concerned with; it’s THEIR power game!
I have no way of knowing if the controllers are totally deluded or for real. What I am sure of is that they are being secretive and they want to keep it that way.
The Galactic Federation is siding with “us” against that secrecy, but they are saying that the veil cannot be lifted until the controllers on earth are removed from power. Doesn’t that strike you as kind of backwards? Wouldn’t it be easier to remove the controllers from power if their existence were fully exposed? And if the group that exposes them is off-planet, what could the controllers do to retaliate? How much worse could it get on earth? (You don’t have to answer that!)
For these reasons I suspect the Galactic Federation, the Resistance Movement (Pleadieans), the Silver Legion, and the Positive Military. I do not suspect their earth supporters. But I suspect their off-world sources. They have not proven their integrity to me yet. They have not demonstrated to me that they aren’t really just one of the sides to this “secret” power struggle.
This does not mean that it is pointless to act against the secret controllers. It means that I don’t see the promises offered by our off-planet “friends” as reliable.
3. Is the galactic power struggle over?
The Galactic Federation insists that the galactic wars have ceased, except on earth. This, they want us to believe, is the last unresolved battle in this whole confounded galaxy.
This is difficult for me to believe, given the above paradigm, and the gaps in their data.
Are they telling us the truth? Or are they telling us a story they hope we will believe because it contains some truth?
This is what I am confused about. You?