HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Tue Feb 24 15:10:23 EST 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
THE GOD FACTORY
ACT - 28
27 November 1993
Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
Chris has repeatedly brought up the subject of good and bad with
regard to elemental theta manifestations. No one yet seems to have
answered his questions directly, and I am not sure I can do so
satisfactorily, but I will try.
There are possibly absolute definitions of good and bad, but they
would always be relative to some being's DESIRES. If there are some
absolute desires, such as to live forever, to have games (which include
penalties and pain, but maybe not permanent loss) then good would be
those things which aligned with these desires.
If theta or thetans are sovereign as some suggest (not me, lord
forbid) then anything created by a thetan, since it must come from his
own desire, must be good, no matter how painful it might seem in the
If thetans are not inherently sovereign, then it is possible that
things exist in the universe or in the basic nature of theta itself
which theta finds itself opposed to, even actually detests, and so these
parts of existence would be considered bad by theta.
As to whether or not they really WERE bad, begs the question of
'bad relative to whose desire?'
Within a game, you can set rules, and it is implied that once you
have done this, following the rules is good, and breaking the rules is
bad. People can enter your game with the intention to cheat, to break
the rules in order to win unfairly, so from within the game it looks
like these people are bad, even though a sovereign thetan would have had
to set the game up so that people COULD enter it with an intention to
cheat, so having such beings in this case would be good.
But within games, good and bad are well defined, they involve
following and breaking the rules. Penalties are set up so that
punishments and rewards are allotted according to whether you follow or
break the rules. These punishments and rewards, being of pain and
pleasure, ugly and beauty, are themselves intrinsically bad and good.
Sometimes really vicious games are set up so that painful penalties
are associated not only with breaking the rules but also with LOSING the
game. This puts constant pressure on the players to choose between
breaking the rules and losing, especially if they think they can escape
being caught for breaking the rules, and that breaking the rules will
help them win.
Thus we have two kinds of good and bad, good and bad behavior, and
good and bad experiences. Good and bad behavior seems more arbitrary as
it is defined by the rules of the game which can be changed by the game
creators. Good and bad experiences are more absolute as they have to do
with beauty and ugly which in my opinion are mathematical absolutes
relating to harmony and disharmony.
However any good musician will tell you that even disharmony can be
good if it is used intelligently within the framework of a greater whole
where the discord is resolved into a harmony at the end. The best
pieces are not all harmony, as anyone who has appreciated Tchaikovski's
violin concerto can attest.
It is therefore one of the philosopher's main jobs to ask if the
pain and disharmony that we see in life is indeed part of a bigger
picture including the past and future and ALL of the present wherein the
present disharmony is somehow resolved into a harmony at the end, which
harmony is better for having been resolved from a disharmony.
It has been suggested that harmony is only of value WHEN it
resolves a disharmony, although I personally have had visions of clear
harmony which belie this position.
Within a game therefore, it is plausible to find that various
behaviors are considered good and bad according to whether they produce
resolve or not, and whether they break the rules of the game.
It is possible that if a being runs away from doing the right
thing, and makes doing the wrong thing right, he will continue in error,
which will lead to a form of decay based on denial of doing wrong.
He will withhold, he will limit himself, he will make others wrong
who are right, he will generally become more unconscious of himself and
his past, future, and the present, and he will be less and less able to
play the game at the level of game piece that he is accustomed to. Thus
he may take on smaller and smaller pieces and roles as they are the only
options left to him as he corners himself in his denial of wrongness.
How many corners can you back yourself into before you become a
So that could be considered a poetic statement of the law of decay
espoused by myself and others including Hubby about what happens to
beings who continue to withhold and do wrong. They refuse to correct an
error, they refuse apology and confession, and they continue on down the
dwindling spiral by holding onto their engrams and memories of pain
harder and harder because they act as justifications and make rights for
the wrong that they did.
"You hurt me second, so I was RIGHT to hurt you first!"
Hubbard says beings do not last long in this universe, but quickly
become entities in other people's lives, eventually to fall to the
bottom of the tone scale as a form of stone cold apathetic MEST, not
physical universe MEST, but a ball of mental mass and entheta, or
What mental mass is, is a higher harmonic of physical mass. The
physical universe is the lowest of seven planes of existence labeled by
the Theosophers as Physical/Etheric, Astral, Mental/Causal, Buddhic,
Nirvanic, Monadic and Divine.
((A monad is an indivisible and impenetrable unit of substance
viewed as the basic constituent element of reality.))
Each plane is it self divided into 7 sub planes. The Mental plane
in particular has 4 lower planes which have to do with normal thought
and which are usually considered the 'mental' plane. The upper 3 planes
of the mental plane have to do with thoughts that can not be put into
words and in particular have to do with personal responsibility and
personal CAUSATION and is therefore referred to as the CAUSAL plane by
the Theosophers and as the Spiritual plane by Adore.
The physical plane is also divided into 7 subplanes. The lower 4
physical subplanes are the material planes that we know of in the
physical universe, solid, liquid, gas and plasma. (Yes I know this is
terrible physics, but most of theosophy was written before anyone knew
anything about sub atomics.)
The upper 3 planes are are called the Etheric plane and are the
physical efforts exercised directly by the thetan in its effort to
control the physical universe. The etheric plane is that elusive bond
that everyone says doesn't exist and which if it were sensed would prove
that something more is affecting the body than mere biochemistry. The
body's RIDER in other words rides the body through the reigns of the
etheric plane. The etheric plane is the operational interface between
the higher planes and the body on the physical plane.
Thus we have the following correlations between Theosophy, Hubbard
Theosophy Hubbard Adore Adore Adore
CAUSAL CHOICE SPIRITUAL RELIGION CREATION
MENTAL THOUGHT MENTAL SCIENCE DISCOVERY
ASTRAL EMOTION EMOTIONAL ART EXPRESSION
ETHERIC EFFORT PHYSICAL BUSINESS TRADE
Thus comes Adore's proclamation that,
'The Purpose of Creation is Trade in Expressions of Discovery'.
To the theosophist, the soul resides in present time on the three
lowest of their seven planes, the mental, astral and physical. (By
mental plane I mean here to include the causal plane, and the physical
includes the etheric).
The Soul, being created in the image of God, is a Triune being,
which means he has three 'bodies' or parts to his overall beingness.
They are the physical, emotional and mental parts.
As a soul goes through his multi lifetime, multi body journey, he
evolves on the causal plane until he is bulging out the top of it. At
the point he breaks through to the Buddhic plane of consciousness he
becomes 'Enlightened'. At that point he moves all three of his bodies
up one plane. Now he resides on the Buddhic, Mental and Astral planes
only. His body continues to exist, but he doesn't think he IS a body
any more and is quite aware of being exterior and controlling it by
The outward implication of this is that he no longer needs to use
EFFORT to get things done, he can merely emote them into existence as
the emotional plane is his lowest plane and the one he uses to interact
with the world. This is a recovery of 'Desire is Sovereign.' He is not
all powerful in the sense of being able to do anything, but he can act
without EFFORT, and he does now recognize that everything which exists
is in accordance with his own desire, so he has recovered his sense of
sovereignty in good working order.
Adore would say his Sovereignty is balanced by his Majesty which is
his Sovereign Desire that his Desire not be Sovereign for a while.
Further since he is no longer tied to the physical plane via his
use of the etheric subplanes to get things done, he is free to wander
around where his body is not. He can also put himself inside of other
people's heads and be them or see what they are being, doing and having
and thinking, feeling and exerting.
He no longer controls his body by effort or mental force, but
communicates with it as anyone would communicate with another animal,
for example a dog. You don't MAKE the dog come, you say 'Come!' and it
comes, ON ITS OWN ACCORD. Just so with the body.
The enlightened soul's journey now consists of mastering the
Buddhic plane of consciousness until he once again breaks through to the
Nirvanic plane which is often called Nirvana, or Christ Consciousness.
The Christ, considered as a post, is the head being of the Nirvanic
Plane of beings. Kind of like the Chairman of the Department.
I believe that a dude named Metteya either is or recently was the
holder of that post. Jesus, Homer, I can't believe you don't know this.
Shame on you.
Anyhow, the Theosophers hold that Jesus was an incarnation of
Metteya or whoever was holding the post during his time on Earth.
I have had many micro second visions from the Nirvanic plane, and
all I can say is that it is Class beyond Imagination. I assure you,
there is no Hell Forever. The kindness, wisdom and INTELLIGENCE of The
Christ plane is unfathomable, unmeasurable, and without bounds, truly a
Sovereign Omnilord of Unanimous Regency and Caliber Excaliper (SOURCE).
As the Soul enters each plane above where he is, he raises up all
of his three bodies with him, shedding the lowest plane he was last on.
Thus he remains a Triune Being to the very top which is called the
Divine plane. The Divine plane relates to the Divine Chakra, at the top
of the head, much as the lower planes each relate to their own Chakra.
The attainment of the top subplane of the Divine plane is the
attainment of total Sovereignty in this universe. One recognizes in
that moment that the soul is God in carnation, one of many, figuratively
At the top of the Divine Plane is the head of all head Triune
Beings, the King of Kings, God himself, again another post for this
universe, held by someone real. This God by the way has the Divine
plane as his BOTTOM plane, so his top two planes are in the next
Above this God is another whole series of planes in a larger
universe of which our God is himself an evolving Spirit among many.
As the soul from this universe passes through the top level Divine
plane he enters the bottom plane of the next universe out and becomes
himself a pre-God among peers, other souls who have embarked on this
same journey, all of whom are preparing to have their own personal
universe of beings.
We call this the God Factory.
Now THIS boggles the mind.
By the way, you can't go around the God of this universe, or try to
petition HIS God in a dispute. The God of this universe has absolute
Sovereignty over this universe. As long as you are in this universe,
which you are by your own choice, you are under Him and only Him.
So you ask for proof of all this.
Well first of all it's a THEORY. But it's a theory based on direct
personal reports of beings who claim to have been there and returned to
tell the tale.
Someone claimed they went, they saw, they returned and they
It is going to be hard to prove without taking you there for your
They all belong in a mental institution, you say?
You see the problem is that when a meatball asks for proof, he is
really asking for evidence. But when he asks for evidence he is really
asking for a THEORY BACKED BY EVIDENCE.
You see he considers that he can't consider some thing TRUE unless
he has a theory which SAYS that thing is true and evidence to back it
up, EVEN THOUGH HE WILL ADMIT THAT EVIDENCE BACKING UP A THEORY DOES NOT
PROVE TRUTH WITH CERTAINTY!
Thus even if he sees something with his own conscious experience,
unless he has a theory about it, and some evidence to back it up, he
won't be able to accept what he saw.
If I go to the Nirvanic plane and I see all this stuff there, and I
come back and report what I saw, someone can always say, well maybe you
were hallucinating. Maybe it isn't real.
But what does he mean by REAL?
Perhaps he means, well something that HE can go see too.
So you take HIM to the Nirvanic plane and he sees just what you saw
and he comes back and he says,
'Well maybe I was hallucinating, maybe it is not real.'
So you take 50,000 people there, all separately, and they all come
back and report the same thing, and of course they will all say, 'Well
maybe we are all hallucinating, maybe it is not real.'
Well if seeing is not believing, then how do you know you exist?
How do you know you are awake? Do you have a theory that you exist, and
some evidence to back it up, so it becomes a good guess that you exist?
No of course not, that's nonsense. You LOOK and you KNOW.
But some people don't believe what they see. They must have a
theory and evidence to back it up, to verify with high probability that
what they can observe directly and with perfect certainty, does indeed
What is objective reality?
It is what everyone can see and agree to and manages to be
consistent from day to day.
If you need a theory and evidence to back it up in order to know
that you exist, then you are surely too far gone to know anything with
certainty merely by LOOKING, and so of course you will have little to no
experience of the higher planes of consciousness.
And even if you still manage to get a glimpse, you will say, 'Maybe
I was hallucinating, maybe it was not real, how do I support my theory
that what I saw was real without just looking at it again.'
You see they play their scientific games with themselves, a game of
vias. They already have a theory which says nothing can be known for
certain, because all knowledge consists of theories backed up by
evidence which they readily admit proves nothing with perfect certainty.
So they don't know that they exist, but they do have a well
supported theory that they exist. But what evidence do they have that
they exist? What evidence do they have that THAT EVIDENCE exists? Do
they have another theory that says that the evidence exists too? Backed
up by what evidence?
Eventually someone has to LOOK and see what they see, and take it
as a given self evident truth that if they see something it must exist
and be true.
Its hard to argue with bliss, "Maybe I just thought I was
happy but really it was only a hallucination that I was happy!"
Say you see a car. Now maybe there is no actual car
there made of metal and glass, but YOU DO SEE A CAR, the *SEEING*
of the car can not be doubted. That's a perfect certainty.
Just so with a happiness, if you feel happy you feel happy, it
can't be questioned.
That is how you know you exist, you look, you see, and you see yourself
seeing, and it is OBVIOUSLY true.
Nirvana is the same way. It is not some mechanical theoretical out
thereness which you can never see and so can only hypothesize and get
peer review about.
Nirvana is inside you, it is part of your own consciousness. It,
like all conscious experiences, IS ITSELF the evidence at the end of the
chain of looking for evidence to prove there is evidence.
It IS what you finally look at and say, yes I see it, therefore it
All nirvana is, is something to see and experience.
Consciousness is self luminous, you don't need something ELSE, some
other evidence, to support to yourself that you see. It is not a theory
that you see. Those to whom seeing is just a theory, AREN'T SEEING!
They can't be seeing because all they have is an uncertain theory that
they see, backed by some uncertain evidence which they saw using their
theoretical ability to see!
Not only does Nirvana exist, but it also has a wonderful sense of
But really, it takes an ability to SEE and to see one's self seeing,
until there is nothing but perfect certainty of seeing left.
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Feb 24 15:10:22 EST 2015
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L at mailman.lightlink.com
More information about the Clear-L