
# BUTTERFLIES ARE FREE TO FLY

A New and Radical Approach

To Spiritual Evolution

By Stephen Davis

Smashwords Edition, License Notes

Thank you for downloading this free ebook. You are welcome to share it with your friends. This book may be reproduced, copied and distributed for non-commercial purposes, provided the book remains in its complete original form.

Copyright 2010 by L & G Productions, LLC

# Table of Contents

Chapter 0 – Introduction

PART ONE – The Movie Theater Metaphor

Preface to Part One

Chapter 1 – Plato's Cave

Chapter 2 – Joining Together

Chapter 3 – What's Wrong with This Picture?

Chapter 4 – The Library

Chapter 5 – The Field

Chapter 6 – The Hologram

Chapter 7 – There is No "Out There" Out There

Chapter 8 – The Breakout

PART TWO – Inside the Cocoon

Preface to Part Two

Chapter 9 – The Consciousness Model

Chapter 10 – The Player Model

Chapter 11 – The Human Game Model

Chapter 12 – The Two Halves

Chapter 13 – The Process

Chapter 14 – Spiritual Autolysis

Chapter 15 – Detaching & "Desirelessness"

Chapter 16 – Judgment

Chapter 17 – Beliefs & Opinions

Chapter 18 – Resistance

Chapter 19 – Fear

Chapter 20 – Who Am I?

Chapter 21 – On Becoming a Butterfly

PART THREE – Questions & Answers

Preface to Part Three

Chapter 22 – One Big Hologram?

Chapter 23 – Other People

Chapter 24 – The "Earth Environment" Template

Chapter 25 – Are We All One?

Chapter 26 – One Player per Infinite I?

Chapter 27 – Past Lives?

Chapter 28 – Karma, Cause & Effect

Chapter 29 – Trust

Chapter 30 – Money

Chapter 31 – The Ego

Chapter 32 – Compassion

Chapter 33 – Robert Scheinfeld

Chapter 34 – Jed McKenna

Chapter 35 – U.G. Krishnamurti

Chapter 36 – The Future

You are invited to write a book review, or offer comments, or download the free audio book version of this ebook by visiting:

ButterfliesFree.com

# CHAPTER 0

INTRODUCTION

Back to the Table of Contents

Sweet freedom whispered in my ear  
You're a butterfly  
And butterflies are free to fly  
Fly away, high away, bye bye

~ from _Someone Saved my Life Tonight_ ,

music by Elton John, lyrics by Bernie Taupin

George had a problem.

Although he hid it fairly well, George was basically unhappy. He was feeling unfulfilled; his life had become dull and boring; he hated his job; he was probably going to be fired soon because of the economic recession; his relationship with his wife had gone south; he couldn't communicate any more with his kids; he had no real life except working, eating, watching TV, and sleeping; he could count his real friends on one finger; and he saw no real way of changing anything, of making anything better.

But that wasn't George's biggest problem at the moment. His most pressing concern was that he had begun to walk in his sleep.

One night while George was out sleepwalking, he fell into a very deep hole. When he woke up, he discovered he was lying on the bottom in just his pajamas, and there was nothing in the hole except him. He looked up and saw the morning sky above him, with a few bare branches of trees overhanging the perfect circle of sunlight at the top. It was early spring, and there was a chill in the air. He saw no one, but he could hear the faint sound of voices.

He knew he had to try to get out; but the walls of the hole were straight and slippery and high, and there was nothing to use for climbing. Each time he tried, he fell back to the bottom, frustrated. He started crying out for help.

Suddenly, there was a man's face peering down at him from the top of the hole.

"What's your problem?" the man asked.

"Oh, thank God," George cried. "I'm stuck down here and can't get out!"

"Well, then, let me help," the man said. "What's your name?"

"George."

"Last name?"

"Zimmermann."

"One 'n' or two?"

"Two."

"I'll be right back."

When the face disappeared, George wondered what was so important about the spelling of his name; and then the man was back.

"This is your lucky day, George! I'm a billionaire, and I'm feeling generous this morning."

The man let go of a small piece of paper he was holding in his hand and it floated slowly down into the hole. George caught it and looked up again. The man was gone.

George stared at the piece of paper. It was a check for a thousand dollars, made out in his name.

"What the hell? Where am I going to spend this down here?" he thought to himself. He folded it and put it in his pajama pocket.

Then he heard another voice coming.

"Please help me," George yelled to the empty space at the top.

A second man's face appeared, a kind and compassionate face.

"What can I do for you, my son?"

George could see the man's clerical collar as he leaned over the edge.

"Father, help me get out of this hole... please."

"My son...." The voice was soft and loving. "I must perform mass at the church in five minutes, so I can't stop now. But we will say a special prayer for you today." Then he reached into his pocket. "Here, this will help," and he dropped a book into the hole before leaving.

George picked up the Bible, studied it and tried to imagine any possible way to use it to get out of the hole. Eventually he gave up and tossed it aside.

The next passerby was a woman. When she understood George's predicament, she threw down some organic vegetables, along with vitamins and herbal supplements.

"Eat only these," she said.

George put them in a pile on top of the Bible.

A doctor stopped and donated a few bottles of the sample medications he was being paid to peddle that week.

A lawyer came by and talked for a while about suing the city for not putting a fence around the hole. He left his card.

A politician promised to pass a law to protect sleepwalkers if George would vote for him in the election tomorrow, assuming he could get out of the hole.

By this time George had taken a seat on the bottom of the hole, shivering slightly from the chill, starting to give up hope that anyone would help him get out. He felt lonely, helpless, and a little fearful. He moved the drugs aside, picked up an organic banana off the pile and took a bite.

"I can help you get out."

He heard a strong, convincing, powerful female voice. He wasn't quite sure.... Did he recognize that voice? Had he seen her on TV or something?

"You just need to let go of all your negative thinking, learn to visualize, and then use the 'Law of Attraction'."

"But that's exactly what I'm doing – trying to attract someone to help to get out of this hole!" George protested.

"You must not be doing it right," came the response.

She tossed something thin and square that landed at George's feet.

George yelled up to her, "But... wait!" There was no one there to answer.

He picked up the DVD, still shrink-wrapped, and stared at the cover. _The Teachings of Abraham Master Course DVD Program_.

"At least you could have thrown down a portable DVD player," he said quietly, to no one in particular.

In a little while a Zen Buddhist sat down in a lotus position at the edge of the hole, wanting to teach George to meditate. "If nothing else," the Master said, "if you practice long enough, you'll feel better about being in the hole. Who knows, you might even be able to levitate your way out in a few lifetimes."

George was about to resign himself to being in this hole forever when he heard the voice.

"Can you move over a few feet, out of the way?"

George looked up. "What?"

"Could you please move away from the center of the hole?"

George stood up and took a few steps back toward the side. "Why?" he was about to ask, when the man jumped into the hole, landing at George's feet.

"Are you crazy?" George exclaimed as the man got up and brushed himself off. "Now we're both in this hole together. Couldn't you just throw me a rope or a ladder or something?"

The man looked at him gently. "They don't work."

"How do you know?" George asked incredulously.

"I've been here before, and I know the way out."

* * *

I assume you're asking for help, or you wouldn't be reading this book. Something's not right in your life and you want to change it.

So I'm about to jump into your hole, but not because I feel any desire or obligation to help anyone. Helping someone else is one of the biggest traps anyone can get caught in.

I also have no intention of becoming a teacher – yours or anyone else's – or a guru, or a mentor, or a coach, or someone who pretends to have any or all of the answers.

If you want, you can think of me as a "scout" – like a scout on a wagon train in the Old West, whose job it was to ride ahead looking for a way over the Rocky Mountains to reach the Pacific Ocean, finding a path for others to follow with relative safety and security against the elements and the Indians.

I'm not the only scout out there, and I don't claim to have reached the ocean yet. But I'm the only one who has taken this particular route, which turned out to be a very effective way to go and safe enough for me to return to talk about it.

On my journey, I explored some very radical territory and collected a lot of information about which paths work and don't work that might benefit someone else. That's the main reason I'm writing this book, to pass on that information, knowing there are others – not that many, but some – who want to go where I'm going and where I've been. Maybe you're one of them.

You hired me to be your scout (whether you're conscious of it or not), but you should know that it doesn't matter to me what you think about this information, or what you do with it. You can take it or leave it. My only job – and my total joy – is to report back to you what I've found.

So I'm jumping into your hole because it seems like fun and in alignment with what the universe has in store for me at the moment.

However, maybe you don't want me in your hole. You should really think about this. If you keep reading, there will come a point where there's no turning back. In a way, switching metaphors, it will be like climbing Mt. Everest. The journey can be very difficult, physically and emotionally; and it takes a while.

As I said, I'm not yet at the summit, but it's in sight. I've reached a point high enough along the way that the appreciation, the joy, the peace, the serenity of being are already beyond expectation. What I know with certainty – and confirmed for the most part by eye-witness reports from other scouts – is that arriving at the peak is definitely worth the effort of getting there.

You may or may not want to go all the way. I will let you know when we reach the place where you can only go on and not back.

On the other hand, you may decide you don't want to leave your hole at all. If so, you should stop reading now. There is nothing "wrong" with your staying there. You'll have enough money and good organic food and books to read and DVDs to watch and drugs to take to keep you occupied and entertained.

It's your choice.

# PART ONE:

THE MOVIE THEATER

METAPHOR

Back to the Table of Contents

This is the only radical thinking that you need to do.

But it is so radical, it is so difficult,

because our tendency is that the world is already "out there,"

independent of my experience. It is not.

Quantum physics has been so clear about it.

\- Dr. Amit Goswami

PREFACE TO PART ONE

There are three things you should know before we begin our journey across the Rocky Mountains....

_ONE:_ Although this book carries a copyright, you are hereby granted permission to print it, copy it, share it, give it away to anyone else, quote it, do anything you want with it – except you cannot sell any part or the whole book, or make money from it in any way, or assist anyone else in making money from it in any way. I feel very strongly that the information in this book should always be available for free to anyone who wants to read it.

_TWO:_ It seems many scouts encounter things that are hard to explain when they return to the group. It's not easy trying to get people to understand something they have never directly experienced.

So from time to time I will use quotations from other sources. These quotes are not there to prove I am "right" just because someone else whose name you might recognize said the same thing. They are included mainly to try to further explain a concept which can be difficult to grasp and offer another viewpoint using words different than mine which you may relate to more easily.

With very few exceptions, all the quotes and many other references have footnotes to give you the opportunity to check out my sources for yourself. Simply click on the purple footnote number and that will take you to the footnote which will contain an active Internet link. If you want, you can then click on the Internet link to go directly to the source material in your Internet browser. Then click on the word "reading" in the footnote to return to the point you were reading in the text and continue. Try it here by clicking on the number

There are also links embedded in the text to various videos to watch as you read. As usual, click on the purple hyperlink. I have also included some Hollywood movie suggestions at the end of a few chapters from time to time. These movies are not supposed to be viewed as perfect examples of the information you just read, but close enough to the subject matter to be interesting and pertinent as well as entertaining.

_THREE:_ People apparently learn most easily when they can compare something new to something they already understand, called by some a "datum of comparable magnitude."

For example, if I were to try to tell you about a new game I saw while I was out scouting called "Blat-Blop," and suggest you might enjoy playing it, you'd most likely have many questions before being willing to engage and ask for further explanation.

But Blat-Blop cannot be explained directly. It's different than anything other game known to man. So what do I do?

I tell you that Blat-Blop is like American football, except there's no ball and no goal posts.

Now, at least, you have some idea of what I'm talking about, as crazy and incomprehensible as it sounds. Your mind probably pictures a bunch of men running around a field all dressed up in heavy pads and helmets, which is true in Blat-Blop; but you still have no idea what they're doing or why.

When I said "Blat-Blop is like American football," I was using a _simile_ , comparing two different things to create a new meaning.

There's something else called a _metaphor_. A metaphor is a figure of speech using one thing to mean another and makes a comparison between the two. For example, Shakespeare's line, "All the world's a stage," is a metaphor comparing the whole world to a theater stage. A metaphor is a lot like a simile, but without the direct comparative wording. We could turn Shakespeare's metaphor into a simile by adding the word "like": All the world is _like_ a stage.

On the other hand, an _analogy_ shows similarity between things that might seem different – much like an extended metaphor or simile. But analogy isn't just a form of speech. It can also be a logical argument: if two things are alike in some ways, they are alike in some other ways as well. Analogy is often used to help provide insight by comparing an unknown subject to one that is more familiar.

Then there is something called an _allegory_ , which is a one-to-one comparison or substitution of something figurative for something literal. While this is very similar to a metaphor, allegories are usually more subtle and a lot more involved, taking up entire books and pieces of art.

I say all of this for two reasons.

First, I'm forced to use a lot of similes, metaphors, and analogies in this book – and begin the book with an allegory – to try to explain what I've seen as a scout that is difficult at times to describe, and very new in many cases. I wish there were words and ways to say exactly what I've found without having to make these comparisons, but there aren't. It's that simple.

Secondly, I apparently have a small brain malfunction. (Maybe it's the mad cow.) Despite all previous efforts and diligent study, and the definitions and differentiation I wrote above between _metaphor_ and _analogy_ , I still can't tell the difference. So I warn you right now – and any English teachers who may be reading – that I might confuse those two words. If you wish, any such error can simply be chalked up to my personal weakness in this area.

Just be prepared for a lot of metaphors and analogies, whichever they may be.

Like...

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Now click on the word "reading" in – Back to reading

2. Datum of Comparable Magnitude, or Datum of Comparable Magnitude – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 1

PLATO'S CAVE

Back to the Table of Contents

Imagine that for your entire life you have been sitting in a chair in a movie theater. The place is dark, like all movie theaters; but you can feel...

No... wait! Before we go there...

There's a famous allegory called "Plato's Cave," written of course by Plato. It's a fictional conversation between Plato's teacher, Socrates, and Plato's brother, Glaucon; and, essentially, the first part of the allegory goes like this...

Socrates asks Glaucon to imagine a cave inhabited by prisoners who have been chained and held immobile since childhood. Not only are their arms and legs held in place, but their heads are also fixed so all they can see is a wall directly in front of them. Behind the prisoners is a large fire, and between the fire and the backs of the prisoners is a raised walkway.

As people and animals travel over the walkway between the fire and the backs of the prisoners, the light from the fire casts their shadows on the wall in front of the prisoners. The prisoners can only see the shadows, but they don't know they are shadows.

There are also echoes off the wall from the noises produced on the walkway. The prisoners can only hear the echoes, but they don't know they are echoes.

Socrates asks Glaucon if it is not reasonable that the prisoners would think the shadows were real things, and the echoes were real sounds, not just reflections of reality, since they are all the prisoners had ever seen or heard.

Socrates next introduces something new into this scenario. Suppose, Socrates surmises, a prisoner is freed and permitted to stand up and move around. If someone were to show him the actual things that had cast the shadows and caused the echoes – the fire, and the people and animals on the walkway – he would not know what they were and not recognize them as the cause of the shadows and sound; he would still believe the shadows on the wall to be more real than what he sees.

The allegory goes on, but I want to stop here. (If you are interested, you can watch a three-minute animated video at PlatosAllegory.com).

Now...

Imagine that for your entire life you have been sitting in a chair in a movie theater. The place is dark, like all movie theaters; but you can feel there are restraints – shackles – over your wrists and ankles, making it difficult to move your arms or legs. The back of your chair is high, rising above your head so it is impossible to look behind you. All you can see is the movie screen in front of you and the people sitting next to you in the same condition.

In front of you, sweeping around on all sides of the theater as far as you can see, is a gigantic IMAX 3D screen. You sit there watching movie after movie, and it seems as if you're part of the movie itself, fully immersed in it. (Click here for Woody Allen's example of a _total immersion movie_ , from The Purple Rose of Cairo.)

Like the shadows and echoes in Plato's Cave, these movies are all you have ever known. They are, in fact, your only reality, your life.

The actors are good and the scripts well-written, and you get emotionally involved in these movies, feeling anger, pain, sadness, regret, joy, enthusiasm, antagonism, fear, and a wide range of other emotions depending on the storyline. You have your favorite characters – family members and friends, for example – who show up often, and others you despise and wish would not appear at all.

Some movies are pleasurable to watch, even beautiful at times – happy, poignant, satisfying, enjoyable. Others are dark and ominous, disturbing, painful, producing reactions inside you which aren't very comfortable. You resist watching those and wish you didn't feel what you were feeling. You close your eyes at times, wanting the script to change.

But you're content to stay there and watch, because you've been told – and have come to believe from experience – this is the only reality there is, and you have to accept it.

The vast majority of people – 95% of the Earth's population, if I had to guess, maybe more – will die sitting in that movie chair.

For the others, something interesting will happen one day.

In a particularly uncomfortable movie, you might scream "No!" and forcefully twist your body in the chair. Suddenly you're aware that you no longer feel the shackles on your wrists and ankles, and you realize you can now move your arms and legs. You use your hands to feel around and discover the shackles had no locks on them – ever – and your panicked movements simply pried them open. All along you had just assumed – believed – you were a prisoner, like a dog who stays clear of an invisible fence.

You wonder what to do next. You realize you no longer have to sit there and watch the movies if you don't want to. You could get up; but you don't, not right away. You might lean over to the person next to you and start telling them there are no locks on the shackles, but all you get is a "Sshhhh" in response.

The fear of standing up is enormous; the thought of walking away goes against everything you have been taught. Finally – maybe it's curiosity, maybe it's anger, maybe it's just that you can no longer stand to feel what you're feeling – you decide "to hell with the fear." You get up. Nothing happens. No sirens go off, no one comes to make you sit down again, and you begin to think maybe there was nothing to be afraid of.

So you decide to walk. As you move down the row toward the aisle, saying "Excuse me, excuse me," people look at you in astonishment and wonder and dismay. Some even tell you to sit back down, get out of the way, behave. It's clear they all think you're crazy. But there's something inside of you that feels excited despite the fear and urges you on.

Finally you make it to the aisle, turn and see that it leads up between the seats; but you can't yet see the rear of the theater. What is clearer now is that the movie screen continues all the way around the building, 360 degrees; and hanging down from the ceiling in the middle of the theater is a large black ball. Out of the ball very bright light is streaming toward the screen on all sides. You have no idea what it is, or what it means.

As you walk up the aisle, you bump into a couple other people going in your direction, and some others returning to their seats. The ones heading back to their seats give you a dirty look, almost hateful, mainly terrified, and someone warns you not to go any further. But you've gone this far, you think, and decide you want to find out what's at the end of the aisle.

When you finally make it to the back, you can see the entire design of the circular theater. In one half are the seats from where you came, all facing in one direction, filled with people staring straight ahead at the movie screens; and behind the seats is a large space where people like you are walking around. You also see a door in the middle of the far wall with a sign saying, "Do Not Enter – Extremely dangerous."

Since the IMAX 3D screen continues all the way around the structure, there's no way to escape the movies that are playing. In other words, your reality, your life follows you everywhere. But something's different, even if you can't say what at the moment. The movies haven't changed, but you have, in some way you can feel but don't yet understand.

There seem to be little groups of people gathering here and there – others like you who had gotten out of their chairs and made it to the back – discussing something that sounds important. It's all so new, so strange, so difficult to understand, so frightening, so... "unreal." You think for a minute about going back to your seat, back to the reality you know so well. Then you decide not to, to stay a little longer, at least for now.

You stop for a moment at the back of one group and ask, "What's going on?"

"We're trying to change things," is the answer.

"What do you mean?" you ask.

"We don't like the movies that are playing. We want different ones," the voice clarifies.

While seated in the movie theater, you never considered the idea of changing the movies. You didn't know it was possible. But now it's an interesting thought, and you admit there were movies you wish you hadn't had to be part of, aspects of your life you would have preferred not to watch and experience.

You eavesdrop on another group in time to hear a man say, "Yes, this is reality. But there's a better place we will all go to when we die, if you just have faith and follow a few simple rules...."

There's a Guru in the next group admonishing his followers, "Yes, we can leave this reality, but we must all go together. Have compassion for those left watching the movies...."

As you continue your trek around the back of the movie theater, you catch bits and pieces of other comments, like "This doesn't have to be your reality. You have the power to change it, and I can show you how;" and "Love is all there is;" and "Quiet your mind."

In all the confusion, it finally occurs to you for the first time that you have the choice of what to do next, and it feels exciting as well as scary, because you've just taken the first step toward self-responsibility and self-realization.

* * *

Once again, let's stop here for a minute.

In Books Two and Three of his _Enlightenment Trilogy_ , Jed McKenna makes the distinction between a "Human Child" and a "Human Adult." This idea is worth playing with, especially in light of our Movie Theater Metaphor.

First of all, being a Human Child or a Human Adult has virtually no relationship to physical age. The vast majority of the world's population are Human Children, most of them older than twenty.

_"Most human beings cease to develop at around the age of ten or twelve. The average seventy year-old is often a ten year-old with sixty years time-in-grade.... We must learn to see the difference between a Human Adult and a Human Child as easily and unmistakably as we see the difference between a sixty year-old and a six year-old.... Our societies are of, by, and for Human Children, which explains the self-perpetuating nature of this ghoulish malady, as well as most of the silliness we see in the world."_

Human Children are the ones sitting in their chairs in the movie theater. They might complain a lot about the movies they're watching, but they continue to watch without doing anything about it. They're convinced they are kept in their seats by some powerful, external force, and that they are helpless to change anything. In fact, they believe the thing that needs to change is "out there" – someone or something they have no control over. Even voting is an act of a Human Child, a statement that change is only possible by changing "them." They're convinced the movies they're watching are "reality," life as it has to be; and they take no responsibility for their condition.

Some Human Children might actually have discovered their shackles were not locked and they were free to stand up and walk whenever they wanted. Perhaps a few might have stood, even fewer took a few steps toward the aisle. But the fear soon becomes overwhelming, and back they go to their seats to put their shackles on again, comforted by the fact they are in such good and plentiful company.

_"Human Childhood is the ego-bound state. It is, in [actual] human children, a healthy and natural state. In human adults, however, it's a hideous affliction. The only way such an affliction could go undetected and unremedied is if everyone were equally afflicted, which is exactly the case. No problem is recognized and no alternative is known, so no solution is sought and no hope for change exists."_

Many people are happy to spend their entire lives as Human Children, settled into their chairs, immersed in their movies; and I'm not trying to suggest there is anything "wrong" with that. There isn't. It's exactly how it should be for them, and there is no reason at all to try to change their minds or make them into Human Adults, as we will discuss later.

But I assume you're not one of them, or you wouldn't be reading this book. You've stood up, made your way to the back of the movie theater, and started to behave like a Human Adult. This book is for you – about you – not them.

* * *

In Plato's Cave, the Human Adult is the freed prisoner who now stands behind the rest, sees the fire and the men walking, casting shadows on the wall. But, as Socrates points out, the shadows still represent "reality," and the fire and men and animals on the walkway remain some kind of unexplained mystery.

At a minimum, a Human Adult has become aware there is something "wrong" with the life it has been experiencing through the total immersion movies and is not willing to accept that "reality" at face value any more. In the classic 1976 movie _Network_ , news-anchor Howard Beale expresses what a number of new Human Adults feel when he rants, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!"

A Human Child lives in ignorance, thinking they are awake with their eyes open when in fact they are sound asleep with their eyes closed. A new Human Adult has taken the first step of opening their eyes, even though they are still asleep and do not understand what they are now seeing.

Just so no one gets confused, Human Adulthood is not the state of so-called "spiritual enlightenment," although it's what most "seekers" are actually looking for and most "gurus" are actually selling. (We'll talk more about this later as well.)

_"The difference between Adulthood and Enlightenment is that the former is awakening_ within _the dreamstate and the latter is awakening_ from _it.... Shallow, early-stage Adulthood is often mistaken for, and sold as, Spiritual Enlightenment, but it's not. It's just the first real glimpse of life."_

Have you ever had a dream in which you wake up and realize it's just a dream, but you're actually still dreaming and never really woke up, that waking up in the dream was part of the dream itself? That's what Jed is talking about. A Human Child is asleep and dreaming, but thinks it's awake and thinks the dreams are real. A Human Adult is asleep and dreaming and wakes up as part of the dream, but doesn't wake up from the dream itself. Like a Human Child, it thinks it's awake, but it's really not.

The next step – actually waking up from the dream – is what this book is about.

Being a Human Adult is not a "bad" way to spend your life, especially if you compare it to Human Childhood. But it does have its limits.

As a Human Adult, you might be able to figure out how to better cope with the movies coming at you that define your life. There are all kinds of groups in the back of the theater claiming to be able to teach you various methods of filtering or improving or avoiding or denying or processing or dealing with the emotions that arise as a result of your immersion in your reality. We're going to look closely at some of these groups in the next chapter.

But becoming a Human Adult is not the end; it's really just the beginning.

* * *

I don't know whether it's helpful to remember when you transitioned from a Human Child to a Human Adult, getting up from your chair in the movie theater. Stories abound about life-changing car accidents, sudden and unexpected divorces, the loss of a loved one, a near-death experience, drug-induced glimpses of another world, and the like.

For me, it was very clear.

I was in my second semester at a small southern college, saying I wanted to become a doctor, but actually more interested in philosophy and religion. Two years prior a friend of mine in high school had recommended a book called _There is a River: The Story of Edgar Cayce_ , by Thomas Sugrue. One day during the semester break at college, I suddenly remembered it while browsing through a bookstore in New York City.

Back at school I cut classes for a week and read and re-read that book. It blew my mind. Until then, I had been asleep – sound asleep. My childhood and teenage years were spent being "normal," like everyone else. Well, maybe my family was slightly more dysfunctional than most; but still, I was seated in my chair, watching the movies, experiencing all the discomfort, wishing things "out there" would change, and trying to find as much pleasure as I could to compensate for the pain.

_There is a River_ ended with about 30 pages of philosophy from what are called Cayce's "Life Readings." It talked about the origin and destiny of humanity _("All souls were created in the beginning, and are finding their way back to whence they came."_ ); about reincarnation and astrology; about universal laws (" _As ye judge others, so shall ye be judged."_ ); about meditation and extrasensory perception; about body, mind and spirit ( _"Spirit is the life. Mind is the builder. Physical is the result."_ ); about Atlantis and Earth changes; and about the unknown life of Jesus, whom Cayce called our " _elder brother_."

My life changed overnight, in the same way Cayce predicted one day northern Europe would change " _as in the twinkling of an eye_." My fraternity brothers didn't know what to do with me. For one thing, I stopped eating pork, which had been my favorite meal and I would literally live for Wednesdays when pork chops were served for lunch at the frat house. I also spent the next summer working for Cayce's son, Hugh Lynn, at the Association for Research and Enlightenment in Virginia Beach.

I stayed in school another year after reading the book, although I stopped going to classes. As one cleaning woman once told me, "Don't worry about it none! What they're teaching you here ain't right anyway." I was now a Human Adult, although I would need time to adjust to my new surroundings.

The consequences of getting up and walking to the back of the movie theater seemed overwhelming for me. My mother, of course, was against it. So was my girlfriend. I would be wasting a lot of money already spent on an education and maybe never get a diploma. I would most certainly never become a doctor. I had no idea of what I would do next, no prospects on the horizon. I would be leaving all my friends and a life that contained some moments of joy and pleasure for... what?

And perhaps most critically at the time, I would lose my college deferment and be subject to the draft, most likely ending up as a soldier in Vietnam, a war I opposed from the beginning.

In the end, however, my discontent and discomfort with sitting in my chair in the movie theater won out over the fear of leaving it.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Wikipedia – Allegory of the Cave – Back to reading

2. McKenna, Jed. __The Enlightenment Trilogy \- Back to reading

3 _._ Ibid. \- Back to reading

4 _._ Ibid. \- Back to reading

5. Sugrue, Thomas. There is a River: The Story of Edgar Cayce \- Back to reading

# CHAPTER 2

JOINING TOGETHER

Back to the Table of Contents

New Human Adults who have just made it to the back of the movie theater will usually display some common personality traits.

First, they begin to understand there are possibilities that were inconceivable to them as a Human Child. Even their freedom to walk around is a new sensation that takes some getting used to. Being up and out of their seats has given them new hope and new energy. They don't necessarily understand what's happening, but it excites them to find out, to exercise this freedom and explore these possibilities.

Secondly, anger might come to the surface for all the time they spent sitting in their chairs as a Human Child – anger and resentment toward those who had put and kept them there. It doesn't matter that the shackles were never locked; there can still be the feeling of having been a victim of external forces, for it's way too soon for a new Human Adult to take full responsibility for their condition as a Human Child.

Next might come defiance, a determination never to go back to their seat. They could if they wanted; it's not too late. But like the freed prisoner in Plato's Cave, it's seems unimaginable for a new Human Adult to consider voluntarily returning to their shackles, chained to their seats, seeing nothing again except the movies playing out in front of them. "I'll be damned if I'm going back there," although some eventually do.

And fourthly, they make a decision to change things. What they decide to change – themselves, or what's "out there" – can depend on a lot of factors; but their defeatist attitude of " _can't_ change things" as a Human Child becomes an overwhelming obsession of " _must_ change things" as a Human Adult. The movies that make up their life are still playing all around them, the 3D pictures enveloping them, immersing them, coming at them from all angles; and they still view these movies as the only "reality" there is, like the shadows on the cave wall. They also have virtually the same emotional reactions they've always had to the movies, which reinforces their need to re-write the scripts.

As a new Human Adult, you most likely experienced at least one or two of these feelings, if not all of them.

A fairly good example of this was the Hippie Movement. The Vietnam War playing out on the movie screen was the catalyst that led a lot of Human Children to stand up and shout "No!" As they walked to the back of the theater (they called it "dropping out"), they soon discovered there were other possibilities of how to live and began experimenting with their new-found freedom. There was anger about the war and the people in charge who were making the movies. There was a defiance to no longer be part of that movie; and there was a decision to make things change. _"We Can Make It Better, We Can Change the World Now, We Can Save the Children, We Can Make It Happen,"_ sang Chicago in 1972.

As far as I can tell, the Vietnam War/Hippie Movement of the late 1960's and early '70's provided the incentive for more new Human Adults than any other event in recent history. Young people by the thousands stood up in their chairs and started walking out. The Movement died fairly quickly; but a lot of people woke up swearing never again to return to their seats, and it left a huge legacy in the back of the movie theater.

The Hippie Movement is also a good example of another common trait of a new Human Adult – the longing to be part of a group. In many cases, it's more than a longing; it's a necessity. After all, you've spent your entire life surrounded by other Human Children and took comfort in being part of the group. In all the strangeness and newness of the back of the theater, you now seek solace and support as a Human Adult; you search for others wanting to change the same things you do; you start looking around for a new group to join.

Fortunately the back of the movie theater is full of groups consisting of Human Adults who have found others of like mind and banded together for a common cause. Perhaps you might wander around for a little while first, standing on the edge of various gatherings, listening, seeing if you agree with what's being said by the leader, looking for just the right one. But very soon, you join one of them. You must. You feel too alone and you need camaraderie, other people around you who will let you know you're not crazy to have left your seat, new friends who will help you change things.

* * *

The year I stayed in college after reading _There is a River_ , I passed the time playing golf, playing bridge, and going to frat parties. In other words, I spent a year roaming around the back of the theater, just trying to escape the movies somehow.

Shortly after my twentieth birthday I joined my first group and participated in the creation of a musical extravaganza to become known as _Up With People_. The idea was to change the world through music and an ideology called Moral Re-Armament.

Moral Re-Armament was based on a certain level of self-responsibility, believing the movies – the world, life, reality – could change if everyone would adhere to a strict moral code of absolute love, absolute purity, absolute honesty, and absolute unselfishness. It was our duty to live that way ourselves, and then go out and get everyone else to live that way as well. We decided to present our cause through a highly entertaining and professional musical, couching our morality in clever and catchy song lyrics such as "Freedom Isn't Free" and "What Color Is God's Skin?"

For almost two years I gave it all I had, 24/7/365; and I had a hell of a lot of fun and did things and saw places and had experiences that were way over the top. I still have many friends from those days, and some of the lyrics and music _Up With People_ created were very powerful. "Coming Home," "Where the Roads Come Together," and "Moon Rider" will probably always move me to tears of joy and appreciation for this time of my life and this group.

It was so much fun that I was able to overlook the glaring inconsistencies and errors in groupthink. For example, in 1966 I was the only one who was against the war out of hundreds directly involved in the program, even in the light of "absolute love."

But as was inevitable in those days, I was drafted and offered an all-expenses-paid, one-year-long tour of beautiful downtown Vietnam as an Army medic in 1969 – which means I missed Woodstock. I also missed out on the drug scene. In fact, I was in uniform for the major part of the Hippie Movement, which would have been a very interesting group to join had I been able.

Basically, I had three choices when I was drafted, considering my opposition to the war. One, I could flee the country and go to Canada or Sweden, remaining as a Human Adult and joining the group of other young men doing the same. But I was afraid I might never be able to return to the U.S.A., a country I loved and did not want to leave forever.

My second choice was to go to jail as a war resister, again remaining as a Human Adult and joining a group of other young men also choosing incarceration to being a soldier. But I was afraid in this case I would lose the support of my girlfriend and my mother and other friends who simply could not or would not understand. This choice also generated many very big questions about how this jail time could affect my future.

So in the end, and based on my fears, I voluntarily gave up being a Human Adult, left _Up With People_ , went back to my seat in the theater, became a Human Child once more, and spent the next three years immersed in a war movie. The minute I was honorably discharged, I bolted out of my seat again and ran to the back of the movie theater.

Lying on my bunk in Vietnam I had made a decision not to return to _Up With People_ when I got out of the Army, but to get elected President of the United States instead. As President, I figured I could really make some changes; so I joined a political group, starting my career by getting elected to the Arizona state senate at the age of twenty-eight. However, one term as a senator was all I needed to realize that not only did this group have no chance of changing anything, but that government the way it is practiced today is actually the cause of most of the problems in the first place and the thing that requires changing the most.

I ran for re-election anyway, not knowing what else to do; but I made sure I lost with some conscious decisions that could have no other outcome, like dropping my affiliation with any major party and running as an Independent, not campaigning, and taking a woman who was not my wife to the Grand Canyon in full public view.

I nearly won despite it all; but late on election night, as it became clear I would lose, my friends started to file out of the hotel room where we were watching the returns, expressing their condolences and even crying for my loss. I tried hard to look disappointed, but inside I was relieved and happy as I could be.

That's when I realized there was something wrong with _me_ I should probably address before continuing to try to change the world. I had just thrown away a brilliant political career as the new "darling" of the Arizona Republican Party, and yet I was utterly thrilled with the outcome. That, to me, was completely illogical and inexplicable.

So I started looking for an explanation, searching the back of the theater for a group who could help me understand, and ended up joining one of the most controversial and radical groups I could find: the Church of Scientology. It didn't take long to make my way to the top, as an OT6 and a Commodore's Staff Aide to L. Ron Hubbard. I will talk more about this experience in a different context a little later. For now, all I want to say is that my stint with the Church lasted less than two years.

* * *

This can be quite common among Human Adults, to go from one group to another, staying only a limited time. In the last forty years, since the Hippie Movement and the resulting large influx of new Human Adults, more and more groups have sprung up with a wide variety of different approaches and techniques for changing things; so when one group turns out to be unsatisfactory for some reason, another one is always there waiting for you. Today the back of the theater is overflowing with them, and I want to take a closer look at some of these groups and their characteristics.

In general we can say the basic difference between a Human Child and a Human Adult is the demand for change, coupled with a self-determined action on the part of the Human Adult. Human Children might complain about the movies and their predicament, but they will never do anything about it, paralyzed instead by fear.

Therefore, for a group to last any length of time in the back of the theater, they must cater to and satisfy the Human Adult's need to be part of a group and their obsession to change things. So they all promise certain very specific things to their followers...

1. They claim they can teach a Human Adult how to change the content of the movies they are watching – how to change their life, their reality – OR

2. They claim they can teach a Human Adult how to change their emotional reactions to the movies they are watching, even if they can't change the movies themselves – AND

3. They claim their followers will be happier, more prosperous, more loving, more peaceful, more wise, more powerful, more of everything "good" if they follow the group's instructions.

It's not possible to talk about all of the individual groups – there are far too many of them – but there is some value in looking at a few of the general categories you have to choose from.

First, there are the "Activists." These are the groups whose intent is to change the movies themselves by actually doing something: animal activists, environmental activists, political activists, social activists, black activists, human rights activists, consumer activists, women's activists, peace activists, intentional communities, Save the Whales, Save the Children, Save the Planet, and so on. For example, over the last fifty years there have been more than eighty anti-nuclear groups operating in the United States alone.

Then there is a category I will call "altered states of consciousness." In this group you can find meditation, hypnotherapy, breathing techniques, yoga, prayer, the 12-Step programs, all kinds of prescription and illegal drugs, biofeedback, stress management, laughter therapy, tantric sex, and more. The goal of all these groups is to change the way you view your movies – your life, your reality – by changing your awareness, or in some cases, by escaping the movies entirely through greater unconsciousness.

The third major category is the New Age, which includes a whole slew of yogis, shamans, swamis, and gurus, along with meditation, Abraham, _The Secret_ , the "Law of Attraction," _A Course in Miracles_ , HeartMath, dolphin-assisted therapy, light and color therapy, Reiki, Emotional Freedom Technique, Electromagnetic Field Balancing (EMF), magnetic field therapy, Thought Field Therapy, Psych-K, channeling, Native American teachings, and the list goes on seemingly forever. These groups attempt to give you some sort of control over your life by offering techniques, ceremonies, and rituals designed to produce an alternative reality, if used correctly – to change your perception about your reality.

And then there are the "Eternal Bliss Seekers," which can also be called the "Heart-Centered Approach," touting meditation, positive thinking, compassion, salvation, love, happiness, abundance, prosperity, goodness, beauty, mindfulness, inner tranquility, peace on earth and good will toward men. The basic idea of these groups is that "negativity is bad computer programming" that can be removed through "a powerful journey of the heart in which we come to understand the role each of us plays in creating the life – and the world – we long to live in, the one perfectly designed to help us live in happiness, fulfillment, and bliss."

(You'll notice that "meditation" appears in each of the last three groups. It's the technique of choice for many Human Adults – ancient, but very popular these days – and offered as part of the agenda of a number of different groups with different goals – like a cure-all.)

* * *

To be clear and complete, I also need to mention some groups you _won't_ find in the back of the theater. For example, you won't find groups representing the world's major religions – Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism (which comprise about three-quarters of the world's population). Instead, they are part of the movies playing out on the screen. While these religions might pay lip service to greater happiness in the "here and now," their underlying and ultimate message is that their followers should not expect any real improvement in their lives – any real change in their reality – while alive, but focus on adhering to various rules and regulations of beliefs and behaviors with the hope of being rewarded later – most typically after they die. This kind of message is perfect for the Human Children sitting glued to their chairs, but not at all acceptable to a Human Adult who wants change NOW!

That doesn't mean there are no Human Adults involved in these major religions. There are, some. Often they are kind and loving and compassionate and well-intentioned, and have chosen to go back into the seated portion of the theater to minister to the Human Children.

What you more commonly find in the back of the theater are splinter groups of these religions – much smaller clusters of Human Adults who claim to have found new ways to lessen the pain and suffering of life in the moment while clinging to the basic tenets of their faith, such as Zen Buddhists, Baha'i, Advaita Vedanta, Christian Scientists, to name just a few. There is also a very long list of other splinter groups, commonly called "cults" (depending on who's doing the calling), that attract those Human Adults who have given up on conventional religion but still need some kind of organized system of morality. Scientology and Moral Re-Armament, my personal choices in the past, fall into this category.

The same thing holds true for politics. In the United States, major parties such as the Republicans and Democrats are in the movies you watch. But in the back of the theater you'll find the Libertarians, the Green Party, the Constitution Party, the Tea Party, America's Independent Party, and so on, that afford a Human Adult the opportunity to join a political group as their method of trying to change things, despite the odds, and knowing full well they are up against a well-entrenched two-party system whose real goal is _not_ to change anything (which is why they are preferred and maintained by the votes of the Human Children).

Conventional medicine is also part of the 3D movies, since its main focus is on suppressing symptoms pharmacologically rather than changing the cause of any disease. However, in the back of the theater you'll find over one-hundred alternative therapy groups such as acupuncture, Alexander technique, AK, aroma therapy, ayurveda, Bach flower remedies, body work, chelation therapy, Chinese medicine, chiropractic, craniosacral therapy, crystal healing, and that's just through the "C's" in the alphabet.

Heterosexuality, marriage, and the nuclear family are part of the movies as well, and these haven't changed at all in human history. But in the back are groups practicing homosexuality, swinging, polygamy, polyamory, free love, BDSM, voyeurism, exhibitionism, and celibacy, for example.

Basically, if you turn on the TV any day of the week and watch the soap operas, you'll see what's in the movies keeping the Human Children entertained and pacified: conventional religions, conventional politics, conventional medicine, and conventional sexuality. What you _won't_ see in the soaps are the groups available to Human Adults in the back of the theater – with the exception of some mocking and fleeting reference in a movie or two to make sure the Human Children don't believe any of the promising rumors that might find their way around the theater.

I don't mean to imply you can't be a Human Adult if you are a monogamous Republican who still goes to church and sees a doctor. Conventional religion, conventional politics, conventional medicine, and conventional sexuality are the four cornerstones of the movies – the life, the reality – all Human Children and Adults are immersed in every moment of every day, no matter where they are standing or sitting in the movie theater. The "conventional" is all they have ever known, never really questioned, and therefore find them hard to leave. This is especially true of new Human Adults who need to belong to a group and have not yet found sufficient replacements in the back of the theater.

What I _am_ saying is that this will change over time. As a Human Adult becomes more comfortable in its new surroundings and finds new groups to join, conventional religion, conventional politics, and conventional medicine will be replaced by groups in the back of the theater, while conventional sexuality hangs on for dear life.

* * *

Obviously, there are many, many more groups for Human Adults to join than I have mentioned – literally hundreds, probably over a thousand of them now, some of which do not fall into one of my main categories, either. For example, there are more than two dozen "UFO religions" listed in the Wikipedia that can be found in the back of the theater. So this was not meant to be a complete list of groups or categories, but intended to give a cursory idea of the kinds of opportunities available to a new Human Adult; and I don't know any new Human Adult who has not joined at least one of these groups within a short time of leaving their chair.

After Scientology, I joined the Chiropractic group, who quite clearly state their goal is to change the world by correcting vertebral subluxation, one person at a time; and I stayed connected with this group for more than twenty years.

The fun part is that you can join more than one group at a time if both groups will permit it. While part of the Chiropractic group, I also later belonged to Loving More, Applied Metapsychology, the Royal-Priest channeling group, Al-Anon, and the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis.

While not actually joining officially, I also "audited" groups connected with the "Seth" books, with Walsch's _Conversations with God_ and Sitchin's _Earth Chronicles_ , with _A Course in Miracles_ , _Urantia_ , meditation, numerology, astrology, Tai Chi, Focusing, and Rosicrucianism. I attended numerous self-help seminars and workshops, tried _The Secret_ , listened to Abraham, watched _What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole_ , and read everything I could from Peter Marshall, John Bradshaw, Sai Baba, Ayn Rand, J. Krishnamurti, U.G. Krishnamurti, Deepak Chopra, Eckart Tolle, Mahatma Gandhi, and others.

Then in 1993 I joined one of the most radical and promising groups I ever encountered in the back of the movie theater. It was an intentional community called ZEGG that had a ten-year history before I joined, now located about an hour outside of Berlin, Germany. I was attracted to this group by their _Twelve Theses for a Non-Violent Society_, written by Dieter Duhm, and their practice of free love. ZEGG no longer promotes the writings of Dr. Duhm, nor do they practice free love any more. The majority of people I knew there during the 1990's have since moved on to create another intentional community called Tamera in southern Portugal, which I'll talk about at a later time. But for more than a decade I thought this group was really going to change things and I was excited to be part of it.

Which group(s) did _you_ join?

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Chicago V. Dialogue, Part Two (1972), re-mastered and re-released in 2002 by Rhino Records – Back to reading

2. Wikipedia – Up With People – Back to reading

3. Wikipedia – Moral Re-Armament – Back to reading

4. Up With People song lyrics – Back to reading

5. Ibid. – Back to reading

6. Wikipedia – Groupthink – Back to reading

7. Wikipedia \- List of anti-nuclear groups in the United States – Back to reading

8. Publisher's Weekly review of Terry Cole-Whittaker's book, Live Your Bliss – Back to reading

9. Welshons, John E., author of One Soul, One Love, One Heart in his review of Terry Cole-Whittaker's book, Live Your Bliss – Back to reading

10. List of cults – Back to reading

11. List of alternative therapy groups – Back to reading

12. Wikipedia \- List of UFO religions – Back to reading

13. Twelve Theses for a Non-Violent Society – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 3

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

Back to the Table of Contents

Virtually all Human Adults have gathered together in various groups in the back of the theater, each group trying to discover how to change their reality, usually with a leader providing guidance to the followers, often with some written text or rules or guidelines. Each Human Adult has achieved at least a modicum of self-responsibility at this point; and some of the groups even give lip service to "individual change," although the main focus is still on "them," "out there," who continue to involve people like us in movies full of pain and suffering.

But as I said earlier, being a Human Adult is not a "bad" way to spend your life; and there are some amazing results that can be achieved by belonging to one or more of these groups.

It's possible, for example, the content of the 3D movies in which you are still immersed might appear to change slightly after applying something you learned in a group. Some Human Adults might see more changes than others.

It's also possible the movie content doesn't change, but you find certain techniques of how to better deal with the pain and suffering inflicted by the movies. Some Human Adults might learn to deal with it better than others.

You can even have all kinds of mystical or extrasensory or paranormal or psychic experiences, moments of "union with God" or "oneness with All That Is" or "cosmic consciousness" or so-called "enlightenment." You could learn to control your heart rate, lie on a bed of nails, move objects and bend spoons, make parking spaces appear where you want them, do psychic surgery, have out-of-body experiences, become telepathic or clairvoyant, even levitate.

If these are your goals, you can accomplish them all as a Human Adult in the back of the movie theater, assuming you find the right group and apply yourself diligently to the task.

But there's a problem. A big one. Several big ones, as a matter of fact.

When they arrive at the back of the movie theater, most Human Adults believe, ultimately, life should not include _any_ pain and suffering at all, that your reality could actually be one of constant and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love – Heaven on Earth, if you will. But you're not there yet, despite all the work you've done and all the techniques you've learned and all the meditating you've "satsang" through.

Why not?

For two reasons. One is the belief in life without pain and suffering is just that – a _belief_ ; and there's no evidence this belief is true. Have you ever met – I'm not talking about hearing or reading second-hand stories from the past – have you ever _met_ anyone in present time living in constant and true and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love? ("Constant and true and abiding" eliminates those few who spend their lives trying to fake eternal bliss.) If it were possible, don't you think it would have happened just once to some Human Adult in the back of the theater whom you know, or your friend knows, or your friend's friend knows? After all, many of these groups claim it's possible for _everyone_ to achieve.

The second reason is that life inside the movie theater is not designed to include constant and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love, as we'll see in a later chapter. It will never happen there.

True, you might be able to have more financial success, for example, as a result of joining some group; but your love life then goes to hell. Or you might find your "soulmate" and have years of marital bliss, but for some reason you can't make enough money for the things you want. Or many circumstances around you can seem to be going well, but then you or a family member or a loved one suffer an unexpected accident or illness and everything changes again. You might even develop a mystical power or two and have moments of "oneness," only to have the high wear off eventually and discover you're still not happy with your life most of the time.

The truth is, as a member of a group in the back of the movie theater, you will never change the basic storyline of the movies, at least not in any significant and lasting way, or in the way you think you want to. Many have tried, but virtually none has succeeded; so you're not alone in your desire or in your frustration.

Put very simply, a Human Adult in the back of the movie theater can never get all its ducks in a row at one time, no matter what it does or believes or pretends. It's just not possible.

Why?

The first huge problem is that none of these groups actually work – _none_ of them produce the results they claim they can.

Before you slam this book closed and try to defend your personal choice of a particular group or two, please take an honest and objective moment to consider...

~ when you look at the world today, do you really think the human race as a whole is more peaceful, more loving, more tolerant, more fulfilled, happier, safer, better fed and better housed than it was ten years ago? Or fifty or a hundred years ago? When you watch the evening news, doesn't the opposite appear to be true? Doesn't it seem like the world – as portrayed in the 3D movies surrounding you – is heading in the "wrong" direction, away from constant and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love and into greater depths of pain and suffering despite all the efforts of all the different groups that have grown exponentially over the same period of time?

~ after hundreds upon hundreds of years, of hours upon hours of meditation by millions upon millions of people, not much has been achieved, other than maybe a few very isolated cases. After that much meditation, where are all the so-called "enlightened ones," and why don't they comprise a bigger percentage of our population?

~ if _The Secret_ or the "Law of Attraction" actually worked, we should see a large number of their followers manifesting wonderful things in their lives on a regular basis. I wouldn't even require a 100% success rate to consider these kinds of techniques effective. If _The Secret_ or the "Law of Attraction" worked 50% of the time for 50% of the people who tried it, I might deem it worthy of attention and praise. But when only a very few people get results only a very few times out of many when they use these techniques....

~ after all the positive thinking and compassion and pilgrimages and prayers and altars and sweat lodges and stone circles and ceremonies and rituals and sit-ins and demonstrations and protests and endless _Course in Miracles'_ meetings, we're still no closer to peace on this planet than we've ever been. Even the Hippie Movement had little or nothing to do with ending the Vietnam War, and at the moment we're involved in two more wars just like it.

~ all the profound changes in human history have come from a single individual, not a group – both "good" (Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, Moses, Confucius, Martin Luther, Copernicus, Einstein, Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, and Cai Lun – who invented paper in China in 105 AD) and "bad" (Ghengis Khan, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.).

I repeat, none of the groups in the back of the movie theater produces anything close to what they claim for the overwhelming number of their followers. I do not say any of this judgmentally; I am not blaming them, or criticizing them, or saying they are "wrong" for their lack of success. (In fact, I know their lack of success is perfect for the way the movie theater is designed.) I am merely stating fact, pointing to the elephant in the room, explaining that the emperor is naked.

Nor am I saying none of these groups work because they didn't work for me. As you read, I was involved with a lot of so-called spiritual and self-help groups for more than forty years, involving hundreds if not thousands of people. I have never met _one_ person out of those thousands whom I would say has achieved what the group promised. Have you?

I also want to remind you that I decline to be a guru, teacher, coach, mentor, or leader of any group, so I have no vested interest in making them all "wrong" and myself "right" in order to get you to follow me instead. I am not interested in "followers," so I am completely free to tell you the truth as I see it, and as anyone else can see it if they look closely and carefully and honestly.

* * *

Some of the groups conveniently explain why they are so ineffective, offering reasons like, "No pain, no gain," or "It takes years and years, and even lifetimes, for our technique to work," or "You must be doing something wrong," or "Your desire is not pure and sincere enough," or "You're not spiritual enough to make it work," or "Remember, there are sixty-four levels to go through to be enlightened."

The most common excuse a group makes for its ineffectiveness is, "we don't have enough people in our group to make it work." So every once in a while, one or more of these groups will go back into the main theater and try to get some of the Human Children up out of their seats to join them, with some success some of the time, on the theory more members in the group will make it more effective. Occasionally a few new Human Adult recruits make their way to the back of the theater as a result, but not enough to make any difference.

My biggest objection to things like _The Secret_ and the "Law of Attraction," for example, is that when they don't work, we feel like it's _our_ fault, that there's something wrong with us. After all, there are supposedly all these other people who use them successfully, so it must be me. I'm not good enough to make it work. I'm doing something wrong. I'm worthless. I'm a failure. The problem is "all these other people who use them successfully" don't exist either. Sure, there are isolated cases where someone used _The Secret_ and "manifested" a new car – we'll find out later whether that was actually true – and, of course, Rhonda Byrne probably "manifested" a lot of money for herself when she made up _The Secret_.

The Truth is there is nothing wrong with _you_ , and there never has been; the error is with the group and its philosophy, technique, ceremony or ritual. They simply don't work consistently for even a small fraction of their followers.

If any group in the back of the theater were really successful in producing constant and true and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love, don't you think word would get around quickly and everyone else would leave their group and join that one? If any one of them were even moderately successful in changing the movies or a person's reaction to them, thereby providing real relief from the pain and suffering – rather than being just a temporary and well-marketed fad – don't you think most Human Adults would be beating down their door to join? Instead what we see are new groups popping up like popcorn in our movie theater. What more proof does anyone need that the existing groups don't work?

When Human Adults can step back from the groupthink and be honest with themselves, they know their group doesn't work. The problem is we don't want to admit it, because one of these groups _has_ to work. We _want_ them to work, very badly. We _need_ them to work. We _have_ to believe the group we've joined offers us the relief we seek from the pain and suffering. If _none_ of the groups work, we'll feel hopeless – no better off than the Human Children still sitting in their seats – and that's the worst feeling in the world, to be avoided at all costs.

There comes a time for many Human Adults when they cannot escape or deny the obvious forever and decide the particular group they belong to at the time is not working – is not successful in creating the change they want. At that point they will simply move on to a different group, still convinced _some_ group must work and all they need to do is keep looking for the "right" one. Over the lifetime of a Human Adult, they might belong to a few, if not dozens, of these groups, trying desperately – and futilely – to find one that works, that does what it says it can do, that offers constant and true and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love.

* * *

Jed McKenna doesn't have very nice things to say about the yogis and swamis and shamans and gurus and leaders of all these ineffective groups, calling them "snake oil salesmen," as if they were doing something "wrong."

_"Gurus and meditation and spiritual teachings are all gentle deceptions meant to soothe the inner coward, not forge the inner hero.... Gurus are the worst egotists the world has ever seen. All gurus are welfare organizations providing petty experiences to their followers. The guru game is a profitable industry: try and make two million dollars a year any other way."_

While all this might be factually accurate, I don't share Jed's judgment that goes along with it. Yes, maybe there are a few leaders of these groups who are out to make a name and fame and fortune for themselves, and realize leading a group of Human Adults in the back of the theater can produce exactly that for _them_ , even if the group doesn't produce any results for its followers. But even that isn't "wrong."

On the whole, I like to think many of these leaders are sincerely trying to find some answers. After all, someone has to be able to figure this out, don't they? Please?

But all leaders of all groups end up hitting an impasse, mainly because their philosophy or technique or practice contains major and irreparable inconsistencies.

There is a theory in social psychology called "cognitive dissonance," which is "an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing them."

As a Human Adult, for example, you may be opposed to cruelty to animals, but you still want to eat meat. This causes you a problem you must resolve in your mind somehow.

_"An early version of cognitive dissonance theory appeared in Leon Festinger's 1956 book, 'When Prophecy Fails.' This book gave an inside account of belief persistence in members of a UFO doomsday cult, and documented the increased proselytization they exhibited after the leader's 'end of the world' prophecy failed to come true. The prediction of the Earth's destruction, supposedly sent by aliens to the leader of the group, became a 'disconfirmed expectancy' that caused dissonance between the cognitions, 'the world is going to end' and 'the world did not end.' Although some members abandoned the group when the prophecy failed, most of the members lessened their dissonance by accepting a new belief, that the planet was spared because of the faith of the group."_

Jed McKenna suggests a Human Adult will experience something similar which he calls "Spiritual Dissonance"....

_"A common example of Spiritual Dissonance would be: If God loves us, why does He allow so much suffering? The certainty of God's love is the internal belief. The obviousness of human suffering is the external reality. Is God unable to end suffering? No, we must answer, because He can do whatever He wants. Therefore, He must allow or even cause suffering. But how can that be if He loves us? Something somewhere has to give or, preferably, we avoid asking the question in the first place."_

Different groups offer different solutions for this Spiritual Dissonance. One common technique is to create a new belief that builds a bridge between the two conflicting ones:

_Internal belief:_ "God loves us."

_External reality:_ "There is suffering in the world."

_Bridge belief:_ "We only suffer because we are not worthy of God's love."

Or...

_Internal belief:_ "We were made in the image of God, who is perfect in every way."

_External reality:_ "We do bad things as human beings."

_Bridge belief:_ "Life is a school, a training center, where we are supposed to learn and mature into perfect souls."

My favorite example comes from my recent experience in the intentional community of Tamera in southern Portugal. One of the spiritual leaders there knows, deep in her heart, "judgment is wrong" – her first contradiction, for to say "judgment is wrong" is a judgment itself. But because of her compassion for others, she wants to change the world and make it a better place to live. She's smart enough to realize wanting to change the world is a judgment things are wrong and need to be changed, so she comes up with a solution: "We must accept things just as they are, without judgment, and then we can change them."

What ?! Simple logic says if you don't judge something as "good" or "bad," or "right" or "wrong," you will see that "something" as perfect exactly the way it is. Any action you then take will not be motivated by the need or wish to change it at all. (We'll talk a lot more about this concept in later parts of the book.)

But none of the groups in the back of the theater is completely logical. Glaring contradictions show up very quickly in all the groups when an honest and objective mind shines the light of reason and discernment on them.

Some groups simply pass off their inconsistencies to a higher authority: "The Lord works in mysterious ways," or "It's the job of the clergy to grapple with such imponderable issues." Or they tell their followers to ignore the tough questions altogether, or deny them, or simply stay occupied and distracted so these kinds of questions and countless others like them can never gain a foothold in our awareness.

The main objective, however, is to stop the discomfort....

_"The most sincere seekers are... not seeking truth or answers; they're seeking relief from Spiritual Dissonance. Providing this relief is the lifeblood of the religious and spiritual marketplace. It has nothing to do with truth or awakening. In fact, just the opposite. In the final analysis, stripped of all its holy pretensions, the entire spiritual marketplace is really nothing more than an existential quick-lube shop, and while there may be an endless variety in packaging, there is really only one product. Spiritual Consonance is what all seekers seek; an end to discomfort.... But the consonance they seek can only be found in deeper unconsciousness..._. _To the best of my knowledge, spiritually-inclined people, from all walks and disciplines, at all stages, are really doing nothing more than maintaining or deepening their entrenchment, and maybe piddling around with mildly altered states."_

I still have many, many people I call my friends in all of the groups I've belonged to – intelligent, well-meaning, well-intentioned Human Adults who care a lot about this world, probably a lot like you; and somehow it becomes easy to overlook these contradictions in order not to rock the boat the group is sailing in. The truth is we don't _want_ our group to have inconsistencies and contradictions; so they don't, as far as we are concerned, even though they are written all over the elephant in the middle of the living room.

Recently one of the leaders of a group I belonged to declared its Jewish members should no longer observe Shabbat, supposedly to help them break old patterns of religious tradition on the way to creating a new culture. However, the main group itself – basically Christian – continued to hold their Sunday morning services, complete with _Amazing Grace_ as a hymn, and even called one of their daily meetings the "Gospel Hour." No one spoke up or asked questions or issued a yellow card for hypocrisy.

When you're outside one of these groups looking objectively at their beliefs, it's relatively easy to spot many of the inconsistencies and contradictions. When you're inside the group, however, it's very difficult not to succumb to groupthink. After all, there has to be _some_ group that can produce what they claim, doesn't there? You've looked everywhere and decided the group you're in is the best you're going to find, so who are you to question the wisdom and authority of the group leader, even in the face of obvious illogic? And you still have an overwhelming need to be part of a group and not be "out there" all alone, so you will swallow almost anything that sounds half-way plausible in order to justify and explain away the fallacies in their thinking.

One of the best techniques any group can use to cover up their inconsistencies and contradictions is called "Crimestop," as defined by George Orwell in his novel _1984_....

_"Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity."_

* * *

Can all these groups be "wrong" about everything all of the time? On the surface, that sounds quite ridiculous and impossible. But think about it for a minute.

Imagine you're trying to solve a long and involved math problem, and the first equation is "2+2=?". If you get that answer wrong, every other calculation you make after that is going to be wrong, too.

Well, technically I guess that isn't exactly true. There may be other equations within the problem that don't depend on your first answer, and you could get them right. You could also make other mathematical mistakes in the process and just happen – by chance – to arrive at a right answer along the way.

But your final answer is always going to be wrong. There's no way around that. In other words, if your basic premise is faulty, all subsequent results that depend on that basic premise will be faulty as well.

_"In life, contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong."_

_"It means there aren't millions of things wrong, just one, right at the source, and everything else that appears wrong stems from that single core error."_

This is not just true of math problems; it's also true of every religion, philosophy, spiritual practice, self-improvement technique, belief system, ceremony and ritual.

Every group in the back of the theater is "wrong" and cannot and will not produce the results they claim they can; and the simple reason is that they all begin with the same incorrect premise. In the next few chapters, we're going to find out what that incorrect premise is.

* * *

Everyone is looking for solutions to lessen the pain and suffering of life, to change the reality they feel subjected to in the 3D movies surrounding them. The problem is those answers cannot be found in the movie theater. Some have come close at times, but no one has put it all together, because it cannot be put all together. No Human Adult is going to find constant and true and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love as long as they are in the back of the movie theater. It doesn't work that way.

I'm sure by now you have figured out the most important reason why: All the Human Adults and all the groups they belong to are still _inside the movie theater_. Not one freed prisoner has ever left Plato's Cave at this point in the metaphor; and with very few exceptions, everyone still considers the shadows on the wall – the 3D movies they are watching – to be "real."

Once in a while, someone will look up at the black ball hanging from the center of the movie theater and see those bright lights shooting toward the wrap-around screens, wondering what the hell that's all about. But almost no one seems to know.

And the sign on the door in the back wall says, "Do Not Enter – Extremely dangerous."

#

FOOTNOTES

1. McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

2. Wikipedia – Cognitive dissonance – Back to reading

3. Festinger, L. Theory of cognitive dissonance – Back to reading

4. Festinger, L., Riecken, H.W., & Schachter, S. When prophecy fails – Back to reading

5. McKenna, Jed. Id. – Back to reading

6. Ibid. – Back to reading

7. Orwell, George.  – Back to reading

8. Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged – Back to reading

9. McKenna, Jed. Id. – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 4

THE LIBRARY

Back to the Table of Contents

There are three other doors in the back of the movie theater I haven't mentioned. One has a sign saying, "Men's Room;" another says "Ladies Room;" and above the third door is a sign saying, "Library," and that door is never closed.

In between groups, or as I began to realize the particular group I belonged to at the time wasn't going to produce what they were offering and my membership was coming to an end, I would go into this Library and read, looking for new inspiration and hope. I've mentioned in passing some of the titles and authors I spent time with, and I had the chance to study many of the texts written by the founders and leaders of various groups, saving me the trouble of actually joining that group in order to discover its inconsistencies and contradictions.

Most of the books in the Library aren't worth mentioning, at least in this discussion. But there is some very important information I discovered while reading you should know about, if you don't already – information absolutely critical to anyone wishing to change their reality.

So I'm going to make a big jump right now from philosophy and religion to science, from metaphors and analogies to cold, hard scientific experiments. The subject is quantum physics and what has become known (and widely misunderstood) as the "Holographic Universe" – monumental discoveries made in the last few decades which literally change everything we have believed about our physical universe.

Don't worry. I'm not going to get scientifically technical or say something any Human Adult couldn't understand. But if you are still not satisfied with any of the groups you've joined – if you're looking around trying to find out why none of the groups have produced anything close to what you want to experience and what you think is possible to experience – then you should spend the next few chapters in the Library with me; and bring your computer.

I want to say at the outset I am not an expert in quantum physics, so I have invited the real experts – Ph.D.'s in physics, professors of quantum physics at major universities worldwide, authors of many books – to speak to you directly by using a lot of their written quotes and video interviews. Basically, I want to assure you that what you will be reading will not be my opinions, but those of the people who really know what they're talking about.

I've included a number of links to videos to watch, and I strongly suggest you visit those links and watch those videos as you read.

Okay. Here we go...

* * *

We've known for a long time – at least, I was taught in school more than fifty years ago – the physical world around us is not as "solid" as it looks and feels. In fact, the universe is made up of mostly empty space.

This becomes very clear when we take a ride on a rocket into outer space and see so much "nothing" between a few particles of matter called stars and galaxies. As the technology has improved and we have gone deeper and deeper into "inner space" as well, we find the same thing in the atomic and sub-atomic worlds – mostly "nothing."

The very best and most fun way to experience this for yourself is to watch a nine-minute video called _Powers of Ten_ , from the office of Charles and Ray Eames, which they produced for IBM in 1977. You can watch it here.

There have been other videos made along the same lines: Cosmic Voyage (1996, produced for IMAX and narrated by Morgan Freeman), and Cosmic Zoom (1968, produced by the National Film Board of Canada.)

The most important thing to see in these videos is that "outer space" and "inner space" look very much alike; there's hardly anything there except empty space.

For example, if you took the nucleus of a hydrogen atom and blew it up to the size of a basketball, the electron that defines the outermost "edge" of that atom would be twenty miles away from the nucleus. And in between? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Just empty space.

" _Within all the atoms and molecules – all the space within them – the particles take up an insignificant amount of the volume of an atom_."

" _In fact, the universe is mostly empty_."

So... the first thing we have to understand is that matter is not "solid," even though it looks and feels that way to us.

" _Matter is not what we have long thought it to be_."

Matter is, in fact, full of empty space.

* * *

The _Powers of Ten_ video ends at the limit of our understanding at that time (1977), looking at a single proton in the nucleus of a carbon atom.

But as the technology improved over the years, and scientists were able to dive deeper and deeper into "inner space," they discovered the very small particles they found did not behave as they were supposed to, at least not according to all the laws of physics we had believed for the last hundreds of years.

The most famous experiment that caused a real commotion is called the Double Slit. It was actually first done with light in 1801 by an English scientist, Thomas Young. Young demonstrated that light was not actually a particle, as had been believed forever, but acted like a wave instead.

Then in 1961, this same experiment was performed with electrons rather than light, and finally in 1974 with just one electron at a time. Since then it has been repeated and refined and repeated again, over and over, with the same result every time.

In September 2002, this Double Slit experiment was voted "the most beautiful experiment" by readers of _Physics World,_ and noted quantum physicist Richard Feynman has said " _all of quantum mechanics can be gleaned from carefully thinking through the implications of this single experiment_."

That's how important this experiment is, and how much it has changed everyone's thinking of how the world works.

So let's take a look at how this experiment is done and why its results are so startling....

#

We're going to start by taking small pieces of matter, like little BB's, and shooting a stream of them out of a gun against a barrier that has a single slit in it.

#

Behind the barrier is a sensitive screen, so when a BB hits it, it makes a mark, like this....

#

Most of the BB's hit the barrier, but the ones that go through the slit hit the screen and make a pattern just like the shape of the slit.

#

All that makes perfect sense. So now we'll add a second slit in the barrier...

#

...and shoot the BB's at it again; and we get what we'd expect to get: a pattern of two slits on the screen.

#

Okay, so far so good. Now, what would happen if we sent waves of water toward the screen instead of firing BB's at it?

#

With just one slit in the barrier, part of the wave goes through the slit and forms a pattern on the screen that looks a lot like the BB pattern with only one slit. The most intensity on the screen is where the top of the wave hits, directly in line with the slit.

#

But if we put a barrier with **two** slits in it between the waves and the screen, a completely different thing happens.

#

When the water goes through both slits, the new waves created by the slits on the other side of the barrier hit each other on the way to the screen.

#

When the top of one wave hits the bottom of another wave, they cancel each other out. This is called "destructive interference." You can easily see this when you drop two pebbles in a pond some distance apart and watch what happens when the ripples meet. So when we send waves through a barrier with two slits, we get what is called an "interference pattern" on the screen, like this....

#

The bright lines on the screen are where the tops of the waves joined each other ( _constructive_ interference) and then made it to the screen. The dark spaces in between are where the top of one wave hit the bottom of another wave ( _destructive_ interference), canceling them both out and never making it to the screen.

So, when we send "particles of matter," like the BB's, through two slits, we get two definite patterns on the screen that look like the slits they came through. When we send "waves" through two slits, we get an _interference pattern_ on the screen.

Simple enough. Now let's try this experiment with electrons instead of BB's....

#

We have always thought about an electron as a really, really small BB whirling around the nucleus of an atom – a very small "particle of matter," and solid, like a BB. So we would expect to see the same pattern on the screen we got when we shot BB's; and we do when there is one slit in the barrier....

#

...and when we shoot a beam of electrons through two slits in the barrier, we would expect to get a pattern of two slits on the screen just like the BB's.

BUT WE DON'T!

Instead, we get the same interference pattern we got when we sent "waves" through two slits.

#

WAVES

ELECTRONS

#

Originally, scientists thought this might be because they were firing a lot of electrons toward the screen at one time, and maybe some of the electrons were crashing into each other on the other side of the barrier, canceling each other out and not making it to the screen. By 1974 they were finally able to develop a way to fire one electron at a time at the screen, so there was no way possible for them to interfere with each other. But they still got an _interference pattern_.

(To watch a short and well-done animated video of this Double Slit experiment from What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole, click here.)

How is that possible? How is it possible to send one tiny particle of "matter" at a time through two slits and have it form a wave interference pattern?

There was only one explanation that made any sense: An electron is a wave rather than a particle; it is not a solid piece of matter as we have always thought!

More recent experiments have discovered the same thing holds true for the nucleus of an atom, not just the electrons.

" _Matter is not what we have long thought it to be. To the scientist, matter has always been thought of as sort of the ultimate in that which is static and predictable.... We like to think of space as empty and matter as solid. But in fact, there is essentially nothing to matter whatsoever; it's completely insubstantial. Take a look at an atom. We think of it as a kind of hard ball. Then we say, 'Oh, well no, not really...it's this little tiny point of really dense matter right at the center....' But then it turns out that that's not even right. Even the nucleus, which we think of as so dense, pops in and out of existence just as readily as the electrons do_."

So the very building blocks of what we call our "physical universe" – the nucleus and electrons of atoms – are not just particles of matter, but in fact exist as waves. In quantum physics this is called "wave-particle duality."

That blew everybody's mind; but it's not the end of the story....

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Tiller, William, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Stanford University _._What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

2. Hameroff, Stuart, M.D., Associate Director of the Center for Consciousness, University of Arizona. Id _._ – Back to reading

3. Satinover, Jeffrey, M.D., Ph.D., Teaching Fellow in Physics, Yale University. Id _._ – Back to reading

4. Jönsson C., Electron diffraction at multiple slits, American Journal of Physics (1974) Volume 42, Issue 1, pp. 4-115 – Back to reading

5. The Merli-Missiroli-Pozzi Two-Slit Electron Interference Experiment – Back to reading

6. Physics World – Back to reading

7. Greene, Brian. The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory __ – Back to reading

8. Satinover, Jeffrey. Id. __ – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 5

THE FIELD

Back to the Table of Contents

Electrons are both waves and particles? One minute they act like a particle, and the next minute they act like a wave?

At the time, no one could really believe any of this was actually true. Something must be wrong, they thought....

#

So the scientists modified the experiment to "watch" (with a measuring device) a single electron as it went through the double slits to see if it really acted like a wave instead of a particle.

#

However, the moment they observed the electron, an even stranger thing happened. They got a standard "particle" pattern on the screen that looked exactly as if they had fired BB's through the two slits.

The simple act of "watching" the electron meant it went back to behaving like a particle instead of a wave, and therefore only went through one slit, not both, and formed a pattern like the BB's.

So... the final conclusion is this: In its natural state, an electron is a wave rather than a particle, _until it is observed_. Then it becomes a particle with a fixed position in space and time.

" _The electron is very peculiar in the sense that when you're not looking, the electron can be here, can be there, or can be over there.... It can be all over this room, so to speak. But whenever we look – this is the strange thing about this electron – we always find them to be in one particular Geiger counter, although we have a room full of Geiger counters. This is the fundamentally important stuff about the electrons_."

" _There is compelling evidence that the only time quanta* ever manifest as particles is when we are looking at them. When an electron isn't being looked at, it is always a wave_."

(*In the early 1900s, scientists had started using the term "quanta" referring to the energy associated with an electron bound to an atom (at rest) which results in the stability of atoms, and of matter in general. So the term "quantum mechanics," and now more commonly "quantum physics," has to do with the study of electrons and their energy. " _The word "quantum" is also synonymous with "wave/particle," a term that is used to refer to something that possesses both particle and wave qualities_.")

Now this was truly radical – an electron is a wave until it is observed, and then it becomes a particle!

The ramifications are enormous. It means reality – the physical universe which we have always thought of to be "solid and predictable" – is not "real," not "solid and predictable" at all, because the basic building blocks of that universe are not particles of matter, but waves of possibilities – waves of potential locations where an electron might appear as a particle when it is observed.

But who is this "observer?" And how does an observer change the electron from a wave into a particle?

The first question is not easy to answer completely at the moment. The "observer" can be a human being looking at something; it can be a machine or a device set up to watch, record, or measure something; it can literally be anything that attempts to "see" something "out there" in the physical universe. But there is another level to the answer which needs more information before it can make sense; so we'll just have to wait.

Right now it's worth repeating the inescapable conclusions of the Double Slit experiment: According to quantum physics, the atoms (nucleus and electrons) that make up the physical universe we consider to be so solid and so real only appear to be solid and real when they are being observed. When they are not being observed, they return to a wave state of infinite possible locations.

(To watch a short and well-done animated video of how an "observer" affects the Double Slit experiment, from What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole, click here.)

So now let's talk about how an observer changes an electron from a wave into a particle....

Wait a minute! No one really knows the answer to the question of how – or why – the observer changes an electron from a wave into a particle. The experts can only speculate....

" _Particles aren't really what they seem to be. They're momentary manifestations, momentary 'poppings' of this quantum wave function in which there is no particle – there's just this waviness which can spontaneously pop out as particles_."

In other words, when an electron is viewed by an observer, these waves of possibilities "pop" and assume a specific location in space and time, which is what we see as "reality." This is called "collapsing the wave function."

"Collapsing the wave function" can be very successfully explained and predicted mathematically, using complex quantum mathematics; but it's very hard to describe in simple English. Basically, it means an electron normally lives in a wave state (a wave function) that includes many possibilities of where it could end up as a particle; and when the electron is observed, those multiple wave states are "collapsed" to one state, the state of being a particle in a specific location.

Physicist Nick Herbert says this sometimes causes him to imagine that, behind our back, the world (where we are not looking and cannot observe) is always " _a radically ambiguous and ceaselessly flowing quantum soup_." But whenever we turn around and try to see the soup, our glance instantly freezes it and turns it back into "reality." Herbert believes this makes us all a little like Midas, the legendary king who never knew the feel of silk or the caress of a human hand because everything he touched turned to gold. " _Likewise humans can never experience the true texture of quantum reality because everything we touch turns to matter_."

So where are these electrons living as waves of possibilities when no one is observing them and collapsing their wave function into a particle?

The answer to that question has gone through a lot of revision over the years, and has been called a lot of things as the research has progressed, including:

~ the "Planck Scale" (by the physicist Max Planck)

~ the "implicate order" (by the physicist David Bohm)

~ the "vacuum state"

~ the "quantum wave function"

~ the "zero point field"

~ the "superstring field"

~ the "M" field

~ the "unified field"

Today it is mainly just called "The Field." In her book, _The Field_ , Lynn McTaggert defines it simply as " _a field of all possibility_."

Everything you can think of, and everything you can't think of, and everything no one can think of already exists in this Field as waves of possibilities.

Dr. John Hagelin explains...

" _Progress in our understanding of the universe through physics over the past quarter century has been exploring deeper levels of natural law, from the macroscopic to the microscopic, from the molecular to the atomic to the nuclear to the subnuclear levels of nature's functioning.... and what we've discovered at the core basis of the universe, the foundation of the universe, is a single universal field of intelligence.... So all the forces of nature, and all the so-called 'particles' of nature... are now understood to be... just different ripples on a single ocean of existence.... It's called the "unified field," or "superstring field," at the basis of everything – mind and matter.... That field is a non-material field. Planets, trees, people, animals, are all just waves of vibration of this underlying unified superstring field.... It's the fountainhead of all the laws of nature; all the fundamental forces, all the fundamental particles, all the laws governing life at every level of the universe have their unified source in the unified field.... It is pure abstract potential, which rises in waves of vibration to give rise to the particles, to the people, to everything we see in the vast universe.... This isn't the world of electrons; it's the world of potential electrons.... And that's what we're made of_."

...and Dr. Fred Alan Wolf puts it this way...

" _Physicists give this a name; they call it a 'quantum wave function,' because it seems 'wavy.' However, this wave function isn't just a wave of matter, like an ocean wave or a sound wave, or any kind of wave of matter. It's a wave of possibility; it's a kind of 'thought' wave. And because it is a wave of thought, or possibility, or 'not-matter,' it's invisible to us. But we can't explain what we do see as matter...unless we picture that these matter particles somehow come out from or emerge from these thought-wave patterns_."

(You can watch a video interview about The Field with Drs. Hagelin and Wolf from What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole by clicking here.)

The problem is no one can prove that The Field exists. You can't see it; you can't photograph it; you can't measure it; you can't hold it in your hand. But when quantum physicists assume The Field is there, they can make incredibly accurate mathematical predictions about the physical universe and how it behaves, which they can't do without taking The Field into account. As Fred Alan Wolf said, " _We can't explain what we_ do _see as matter...unless we picture that these matter particles somehow come out from or emerge from these thought-wave patterns_."

Think of it as electricity. You can't see electricity itself; you can only see what electricity produces. One American comedian joked that he wouldn't pay his electric bill until the company showed him the electricity he was paying for.

But we can see the light electricity makes, and the power, and the other effects we count on every day and now take so much for granted; and when we see those effects, we know electricity must exist.

The same thing is true for The Field. Even though we can't prove it exists scientifically, nothing makes sense without it in light of the results of the most recent experiments.

Another example might help make this clearer....

If you were an Aborigine living in the Outback of Australia with no contact with the outside world, and someone brought you a radio, you might wonder how it works when you hear music coming out of the box. You might even take it apart, looking for an orchestra of very little people inside playing the music you hear. But after a while, you'd realize the only way to explain the music is to assume there are invisible radio waves in the air, and this box simply captures those waves and translates them into sound – even though you couldn't prove it.

We have finally reached the point of human understanding – now supported by scientific evidence – that there are waves all around us. But this time they're not radio waves, they're not ocean waves; they're waves of The Field. They're waves of potentiality; and when they are "observed," they turn into the physical universe we see.

I'll talk a lot more about this concept in later chapters. For now it is enough to know The Field must exist, it is outside of space and time, and it includes an infinite number of possibilities, but only in wave form. This field does not contain particles; it is not matter; it is not part of the physical universe. Instead it is what the entire universe is made from – from these waves of possibilities.

But how did this Field come into existence? Who made it? Where did it come from?

Science has no answer for these questions. They only know The Field must exist. So I will not speculate about how The Field was created, or who might have created it, or how it already contains all possibilities, because... well, simply because there is absolutely no way a Human Adult can understand or have a direct experience of anything that happens on the other side of The Field. This will also become clearer in later chapters.

The next question we _can_ ask, though, is: How is "physical reality" created from this Field?

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Goswami, Amit, Ph.D., theoretical nuclear physicist. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole __ – Back to reading

2. Talbot, Michael. The Holographic Universe, p. 34 __ – Back to reading

3. __Ibid _._ – Back to reading

4. Wolf, Fred Alan, Ph.D., theoretical physicist. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole __ – Back to reading

5. Herbert, Nick. " _How Large is Starlight: A Brief Look at Quantum Reality_ ," Revision 10, no. 1 (Summer 1987), pp. 31-35 __ – Back to reading

6. _Ibid._ – Back to reading

7. McTaggert, Lynne. The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe, p. xxi. – Back to reading

8. Hagelin, John, Ph.D., Physics Professor, Maharishi University. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole __ – Back to reading

9. Wolf, Fred Alan. Id. __ – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 6

THE HOLOGRAM

Back to the Table of Contents

How is "reality" created from The Field?

Most quantum physicists agree it is a very similar process to the creation of a hologram. In other words, the universe we see is a "holographic universe."

" _When we look at some of the scientific views of 'reality' that have tried to get down, down, down to the nitty-gritty, we see at its ultimate level... that reality is not solid – it's mostly empty space – and whatever solidity it has seems more to resemble a hologram picture rather than material, harsh, solid reality_."

" _University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes... that despite its apparent solidity, the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram_."

Let's back up for a minute....

Quantum Physics is actually a science of mathematics, and it is the most accurate mathematical science to date to explain what we see in our "reality."

" _Quantum mathematics – which is, in our belief, the most fundamental mathematics, the most accurate mathematical description of nature that we have discovered – this mathematics shows us clearly that the movements of objects are describable only in terms of possibilities, not the actual events that happen in our experience_."

The mathematics used in quantum physics to "describe nature" and explain the behavior we see in our "reality" is also the same mathematics used to create a hologram. This is why quantum physicists say the universe seems to be more like a hologram than solid reality.

So, to understand the "holographic universe," we have to understand how a hologram is created. But first, a very brief background....

Holography was invented by a Hungarian physicist, Dennis Gabor, for which he received the Nobel Prize in physics in 1971. But it was not until the laser was invented in 1960 that holography became workable and practicable. Today it is used for many things, including credit cards and product packaging.

There are actually three different kinds of holograms, some using lasers and others using white light. But let's talk about the basic laser process for creating a hologram, in simplified form.

The first thing to understand about creating a hologram is that it is a two-step process.
The first step is that you shoot a laser beam out of a gun, and then immediately split it into two beams. One half of the original beam (called the "reference beam") is directed toward a special holographic film (or plate). The other half of the original beam hits and bounces off an object, and then goes to the same piece of holographic film.

#

At this point, what you've got is a holographic image (a pattern) on the holographic film; but you can't see the image of the object. If you look at the film, all you can see is a bunch of nothing – indiscernible waves.

You may remember a craze in the 1990's about so-called "3-D pictures." These were pictures where, if you looked at them normally, all you could see was... nothing, really. Just a bunch of wavy lines.

#

Looking at the original image on a piece of holographic film after Step 1 is very similar. You really can't see anything.

But now let's do Step 2. If you take the reference beam from Step 1 and shine it on the holographic film again....

...out pops the object from Step 1. This would be the equivalent of changing your focus to have the 3-D picture pop out as a discernible image.

Now, the most interesting thing about this holographic image of an apple that pops out in Step 2 is that it looks very real and very solid – so real that your mouth can water, and you want to pick it up and take a bite. But if you try to pick it up, your hand will go right through it, since there's nothing there.

" _Creating the illusion that things are located where they are NOT is the quintessential feature of a hologram.... If you look at a hologram, it seems to have extension in space, but if you pass your hand through it, you will find there is nothing there.... Despite what your senses tell you, no instrument will pick up any energy or substance where the hologram appears to be hovering. This is because a hologram is a virtual image, an image that appears to be where it is not_."

So how can quantum physics say we live in a holographic universe? That doesn't make any sense. What we see and touch looks and feels very real and very solid. We can reach out and grab and eat the apple we see in front of us; so how can it be a hologram? We also don't fall through the floor; nor can we walk through walls (well... the vast majority of us can't).

The first answer is to say that many quantum physicists don't actually say our physical reality _is_ a hologram; they say it _acts like_ a hologram, since the mathematics used to explain both is the same.

But more and more scientists are now going further and suggesting we do, indeed, live in a hologram, based on the most recent experiments. For example, in 2008 Craig Hogan, director of Fermilab's Center for Particle Astrophysics, said, " _If the GEO600 result is what I suspect it is, then we are all living in a giant cosmic hologram_."

" _The idea that we live in a hologram probably sounds absurd, but it is a natural extension of our best understanding of black holes, and something with a pretty firm theoretical footing. It has also been surprisingly helpful for physicists wrestling with theories of how the universe works at its most fundamental level_."

And according to Dr. Jacob Bekenstein, Professor of Theoretical Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, " _An astonishing theory called the holographic principle holds that the universe is like a hologram.... The physics of black holes – immensely dense concentrations of mass – provides a hint that the principle might be true."_

So at this point I would simply ask you to suspend all judgment and consider the possibility we live in a holographic universe, as the scientific results of quantum physics suggest. You don't have to "believe" this forever; just try it out as an experiment. I admit this is a radical way of thinking; but after all we've been through trying to find "the truth" – most of which didn't work very well – maybe it's time to get a little more radical.

" _It is relatively easy to understand this idea of holism in something that is external to us, like an apple in a hologram. What makes this difficult is that we are not looking at the hologram; we are part of the hologram_."

* * *

If we look around carefully and pay attention, there are "clues," or "hints," we're being given all the time about how this universe actually works. I'm going to mention a few of those hints over the course of this book, and I'm going to be suggesting some Hollywood movies for you to rent and watch. Now you might say, "That's all just fiction; it's just a movie;" and you would be right. But fiction and movies can also give us hints about what is really going on.

Especially science fiction. When I was young there was a comic book called _Dick Tracy_ , and Dick had this really incredible wrist-watch-two-way-radio-thingy. I say "incredible" because in the 1950's it was pure science fiction. Today it's a reality. I could – and you could – list hundreds of things in the field of technology, for example, first mentioned in some artistic medium that have come true in the last few decades, not the least of which are George Orwell's _1984_ and Ayn Rand's _Atlas Shrugged_ – unfortunately.

So there are two short videos on YouTube I want you to watch to get a better idea what this whole holographic concept is about, and how real a hologram can seem.

One is a scene from the movie, The Thirteenth Floor. In this movie, a German scientist figured out how to create a full-blown hologram that one can become part of, like a total immersion movie. But the scientist gets murdered, and his friend and partner (Douglas Hall) wants to find out who did it. So Douglas gets in the "hologram machine" and enters into a hologram of Los Angeles in 1937 where the scientist had left him a clue about his murder.

The scene you will watch is Douglas' first time in the hologram machine. Please note how he reacts to being in a hologram and his astonishment at how real it looks and feels to him.

Click here to watch the video.

The second video clip is from Star Trek: The Next Generation __ (Episode 16, _11001001_ ). Since the Starship Enterprise was traveling around the universe all the time, they had to figure out how to make it possible for the crew to take a vacation. So they created the Holodeck – a room where any hologram could be requested and created for their relaxation and enjoyment.

The scene you will watch is Commander Riker asking to spend time in New Orleans playing some jazz, with a very interesting audience. Again, notice how surprised he is that the woman looks and feels and smells so real.

Click here to watch the video.

But if all of this is possible, the question then arises: How is _our_ holographic universe created for us to experience as the physical universe?

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Ledwith, Miceal, Ph.D., Professor of Systematic Theology, Maynooth College, Ireland. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

2. Talbot, Michael. An essay also entitled The Holographic Universe __ – Back to reading

3. Goswami, Amit, What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

4. Talbot, Michael. The Holographic Universe, p. 25 – Back to reading

5. Chown, Marcus. Our world may be a giant hologram, New Scientist, January 15, 2009 – Back to reading

6. Ibid. __ – Back to reading

7. Bekenstein, Jacob D., Ph.D., Professor of Theoeretical Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Information in the Holographic Universe, Scientific American, August 2003 – Back to reading

8. Talbot, Michael. Id _._ , p. 46 – Back to reading

9. Sutter, John. HP developing a 'Dick Tracy' wristwatch, CNN, June 3, 2010 – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 7

THERE IS NO "OUT THERE" OUT THERE

Back to the Table of Contents

Dr. Karl Pribram has had a long and illustrious career. Born in Austria in 1919, Pribram is both a neurosurgeon and a neurophysiologist who spent many years trying to find out where memories are stored in the brain.

The problem was that in the 1920's a brain scientist by the name of Karl Lashley had found " _no matter what portion of a rat's brain he removed, he was unable to eradicate its memory of how to perform complex tasks it had learned prior to surgery_." So Pribram set out to solve the mystery of memory storage that seemed independent of brain cells (neurons).

But it wasn't until he met David Bohm, one of the pioneers in quantum physics, that Pribram found his answer. " _Bohm helped establish the foundation for Pribram's theory that the brain operates in a manner similar to a hologram, in accordance with quantum mathematical principles and the characteristics of wave patterns_."

Technically, " _Pribram believes memories are encoded not in neurons, or small groupings of neurons, but in patterns of nerve impulses that crisscross the entire brain in the same way that patterns of laser light interference crisscross the entire area of a piece of film containing a holographic image. In other words, Pribram believes the brain is itself a hologram._ "

Memory storage is not the only thing that becomes more understandable in light of Pribram's theory.

" _Another is how the brain is able to translate the avalanche of frequencies it receives via the senses (light frequencies, sound frequencies, etc.) into the concrete world of our perceptions. Encoding and decoding frequencies is precisely what a hologram does best. Just as a hologram functions as a sort of lens, a translating device able to convert an apparently meaningless blur of frequencies into a coherent image, Pribram believes the brain also comprises a lens and uses holographic principles to mathematically convert the frequencies it receives through the senses into the inner world of our perceptions_."

In short, Pribram believes " _our brains mathematically construct 'hard' reality by relying on input from a frequency domain_."

Okay. Let's translate all of this into simple English. According to Karl Pribram and the results of many scientific experiments, the human brain itself is a hologram. Its function is to receive holographic wave frequencies and translate them into the physical universe we see "out there."

And now the fun begins....

I want to talk about two specific scientific experiments – out of many – that not only seem to prove Pribram's theory, but go beyond it to an amazing conclusion.

The first began in the 1970's with a researcher in the physiology department of the University of California, San Francisco, Dr. Benjamin Libet. Put very simply, Libet would experiment with brain surgery patients during their operations. The patients' brains were exposed and they were fully conscious, having received only local anesthetic.

Libet would, for example, stimulate the patients' little finger on one hand (like a pin prick) and ask the patients to tell him when they felt it. Then he would stimulate the area of the brain associated with that little finger, and ask the patients to tell him when they felt that as well.

Before I tell you what he discovered, we need to understand how we feel things, like a pin prick. The stimulus (pin prick) is transmitted from the location on the body where it happened to the brain, and then the brain lets us know about the sensation. Technically, we don't actually "feel" things where they happen; we "feel" them in the brain.

So it would make sense that if you stimulate someone's little finger, it would take time (fractions of a second) for the nerves to move that sensation to the brain where it would be "felt," since the physical body is limited by space and time and nothing in the physical universe (according to Einstein) can travel faster than the speed of light. Basically, it would take time for a stimulus on the little finger to get to the brain and for the person to then become "aware" of it.

On the other hand, it would also make sense that if you stimulated the brain directly at the exact location where the little finger sends the sensation to be "felt," the person would be "aware" of it immediately. In other words, there would be no time delay since the brain already has the information about the stimulus and only needs to alert the person to the sensation.

What Libet found, and others after him, was that the exact opposite was true. In fact, you will probably read many times in this book that the information we're getting from the scientific research in quantum physics is proving that the opposite of a lot of what we have always believed is true.

Libet's patients would tell him instantly (no time delay) when he stimulated their little finger, and yet there was a delay when he stimulated the brain directly. (Watch a video here.)

Libet was flabbergasted. He tried to find an explanation, as did many other scientists; and the prevailing theory became that time can travel backwards. It's called the "time reversal theory," or "subjective backward referral," or "antedating." However, after trying to prove this and failing, Libet himself later said " _there appeared to be no neural mechanism that could be viewed as directly mediating or accounting for the subjective sensory referrals backward in time_." In other words, there is no evidence in the brain for time reversal as the explanation for this phenomenon.

For now, just file that information away and let's talk about another experiment....

This one started in the 1990's conducted by Dr. Dean Radin and other colleagues. Dean Radin is a Senior Scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, on the Adjunct Faculty at Sonoma State University, and part of the Distinguished Consulting Faculty at Saybrook Graduate School and Research Center. He earned an undergraduate degree in electrical engineering from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and both a master's degree in electrical engineering and a doctorate in educational psychology from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He worked at AT&T Bell Labs and GTE Labs, mainly on human factors of advanced telecommunications products and services, and then held appointments at Princeton University, Edinburgh University, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, SRI International, Interval Research Corporation, and the Boundary Institute.

I say all that because Radin's research is admittedly not widely accepted by the mainstream scientific community, which is why you may have never heard of it, although his credentials are beyond question. Here's why his results are so hard for some scientists to swallow....

Radin would hook a person up to various machines to measure a number of different bodily responses, such as heart rate, EKG, skin conductants, the amount of blood in the fingertip, and respiration.

The person then sits in front of a computer screen with a button in their hand. They're told to press the button whenever they're ready, and five seconds later the computer will randomly select a picture and display it on the screen.

There are two different types of pictures the computer can choose from. One group of pictures will evoke an emotional response in normal people – like a picture of violence, or war, or rape, or ugliness, or the Twin Towers coming down on 9/11. The other group of pictures are designed to be neutral, to normally not have any emotional impact when viewed, like a scene of a city street in Anytown.

We already know what happens in the body when people see an emotional image – what happens to their heart rate, to their EKG, skin conductants, the amount of blood in the fingertip, and respiration. They "spike."

We also know what happens in the body when people see a neutral (non-emotional) image. They remain "calm."

When the person in this experiment pushes the button, the computer has not yet chosen which picture to display, or from which group, and will not make that decision until five seconds later when it immediately puts the picture on the screen.

Now here's the amazing thing: The person's bodily responses being measured would occur _before_ the computer chose the picture and displayed it on the screen. In other words, the person's heart rate, EKG, skin conductants, the amount of blood in the fingertip, and respiration would all spike _prior_ to the picture coming up if the picture were an emotional picture, and the bodily responses would all remain calm if the picture about to appear would be neutral.

To repeat, all of these bodily responses (or lack of bodily responses) would occur _before_ the computer had even chosen which picture to put on the screen. The only conclusion that makes any sense is that the brain knows what picture is coming before the person is aware of it – indeed, before the computer has even chosen which picture to display – and the body is responding accordingly  (Watch a video here.)

* * *

The very latest evidence (July, 2010) comes from a BBC documentary called Neuroscience and Free Will. Here's the setup....

The subject lies in a CT scanner holding a button in each hand. All the subject has to do is decide to press the button in his left hand or the button in his right hand, and then press the appropriate button immediately while the CT scanner records his brain activity.

The result is that the brain clearly shows up to _6 seconds in advance_ which button the person will press - left or right. This is 6 seconds _before_ the subject consciously decides which button he will press. The brain activity is so clear and 100% consistent that the technician watching the scanner could easily predict with absolute certainty which button the subject would press before the subject makes his own conscious decision.

You really need to watch the video to believe it!

This gives further proof of the Radin experiments and verifies what Dr. Andrew Newberg says....

" _There have been other studies that have shown that when people are beginning to move a hand, or beginning to say something, there is actually activity in certain nerve cells of the brain even_ before _they become consciously aware of what they're trying to do_."

* * *

What does all this mean?

Before I answer that question, I have to introduce one last scientific concept called "Occam's Razor," a principle that's been hanging around for almost seven-hundred years. It is often paraphrased as, "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best," although that's technically not the correct interpretation of Occam's Razor. It is also called the "scientific principle of parsimony," which is a "preference for the least complex explanation for an observation." The general rule is that the best answer requires the least number of assumptions and postulates the fewest entities.

There have been many different attempts to explain the results of these brain experiments, by as many different scientists. But the simplest and most logical explanation – the one that seems to satisfy Occam's Razor the best – is that the brain knows what is going to happen before it happens "out there" in the physical universe. The sequence, apparently, is that the brain receives holographic wave information, and then sends it "out there," creating a physical universe for the person to perceive and experience.

For example, in the Libet experiments, the brain "knew" the little finger was going to be stimulated before the actual stimulation took place, and therefore there was no time delay for the person to become aware of it. However, when the brain was stimulated directly – as if a new hologram was being downloaded to it – it took time for the brain to send the sensation out to the little finger and bring it back to the brain to be perceived.

In Radin's experiments, the only thing that makes sense is that the brain knew what picture would appear because it was creating the reality that was about to happen, not simply responding to a reality after it happened.

Let me repeat that, because it is so critical to understanding how the Holographic Universe works.... _the brain knew what picture would appear because it was creating the reality that was about to happen, not simply responding to a reality after it happened._

So let's put this together with Pribram's holographic brain model....

Pribram says the human brain is itself a hologram, and it will "mathematically construct 'hard' reality by relying on input from a frequency domain."

Remember The Field? The Field is Pribram's "frequency domain" – an infinite number of possibilities existing as waves of frequencies.

So Pribram is saying the brain receives wave frequencies from The Field, which it then translates into "'hard' reality" – what we normally call the physical universe. In fact, all these experiments suggest your brain receives a hologram in wave frequencies from The Field, collapses the wave function and converts them into particles to create physical "reality," and then sends that "reality" "out there" for you to experience.

This is confirmed by the CT scan experiments in the BBC documentary, Neuroscience and Free Will. In fact, if you watch the video, you can even see the exact area of the brain where it is converting the downloaded wave frequencies into the hologram that six seconds later will be projected "out there" for you to become aware of and experience.

It means, first of all, the human brain is the "observer" that "collapses the wave function" that I talked about in Chapter Five, since quantum physics says it is the "observer" that changes an electron from a wave into a particle.

Put more simply, it's the brain that takes those wavy 3-D pictures....

#

...and converts them into something we can see.

( _actually hidden in the 3-D picture above,_

_from_MagicEye.com)

It also means our senses – seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching, etc. – are not really sensing some independent "reality" "out there," but in fact are projecting that reality so it appears to be "out there." In addition to being "receivers," then, our eyes are "projectors," since your brain knows what you are about to experience before you perceive it with your senses.

Apparently, once our brain converts the wave frequencies from The Field, it projects them "out there" and makes it appear we are surrounded by a "total immersion movie." Then, and only then, our senses "read" what has been projected "out there" and bring that information back to the brain.

_"David Bohm had suggested that were we to view the cosmos without the lenses that outfit our telescopes, the universe would appear to us as a hologram. Pribram extended this insight by noting that were we deprived of the lenses of our eyes and the lens-like processes of our other sensory receptors, we would be immersed in holographic experiences."_

I don't think anyone knows exactly how this works right now, but I feel confident as the research in quantum physics continues, someone will discover the process.

Meanwhile, we have been given a big clue – one of those "hints" I talked about in the last chapter – in the form of the modern computer....

Most computers currently use what is called "binary code," which is made up of nothing but zero's and one's. If you look at the zero's and one's themselves, they look random and chaotic, like the 3-D pictures.

But inside every computer is a CPU – a Central Processing Unit – that acts as the "brain" of the computer. This CPU receives the binary code in sequences of zero's and one's, translates that binary code, and projects the results onto a computer screen where we can see it in a form that makes sense to us.

A computer also has its own sensory perceptions, which include things like a mouse, a touch screen, a microphone, a video camera, etc. When we interact with the computer through one of its senses – like clicking the mouse – that message gets sent back to the CPU for further processing.

Therefore, in the same way a computer's CPU receives its binary code, translates it, projects the results onto a screen, and then processes the inputs that come back through the mouse and other sensory perceptions, our human brain receives wave frequencies from The Field, translates them into particles by collapsing the wave function, projects the results "out there," and then processes the inputs that come back through our own sensory perceptions.

I invite you to try an experiment yourself. Go outside, or just look around wherever you are, and imagine for a moment you are not looking at some independent or objective reality "out there," but you are projecting that reality "out there" much in the same way a projector puts a movie onto the theater screen.

" _If the holographic brain model is taken to its logical conclusions, it opens the door on the possibility that objective reality – the world of coffee cups, mountain vistas, elm trees, and table lamps – might not even exist.... Is it possible that what is 'out there' is really a vast, resonating symphony of wave forms, a 'frequency domain' that is transformed into the world as we know it only_ after _it enters our brain?_ "

David Bohm said " _the tangible reality of our everyday lives is really a kind of illusion, like a holographic image. Underlying it is a deeper order of existence, a vast and more primary level of reality that gives birth to all the objects and appearances of our physical world in much the same way that a piece of holographic film gives birth to a hologram_."

" _If the concreteness of the world is but a secondary reality, and what is 'out there' is actually a holographic blur of frequencies, and if the brain is also a hologram and only processes some of the frequencies out of this blur, what becomes of objective reality? Put quite simply, it ceases to exist. Although we may think we are physical beings moving through a physical world, this is an illusion. We are really 'receivers' floating through a kaleidoscopic sea of frequency._ "

In other words, as Fred Alan Wolf and Lynne McTaggert both say, " _there is no 'out there' out there, independent of what is going on 'in here_.'" (Watch a video of them from What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole by clicking here.)

"W _hat is 'out there_ ,'" says Michael Talbot, " _is a vast ocean of waves and frequencies, and reality looks concrete to us only because our brains are able to take this holographic blur and convert it into the sticks and stones and other familiar objects that make up our world_."

"What is real? How do you define 'real?' If you're talking about what you can feel, what you can smell, what you can taste and see, then 'real' is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain."

\- Morpheus, from _The Matrix_

* * *

Time to sum all of this up in a nice neat little paragraph...

What we have always thought of as our life, our reality, is not real – according to quantum physics – but actually a holographic 3D movie we have been immersed in, whose wave frequencies have been downloaded from The Field to our brain, where they are translated into particles located in space and time and projected "out there" for us to perceive through our senses.

What this means is that there is no independent, objective reality "out there," but a wholly subjective reality created totally dependent on what's "in here."

In short, there is no "out there" out there.

" _There is evidence to suggest that our world and everything in it – from snowflakes to maple trees to falling stars and spinning electrons – are only ghostly images, projections from a level of reality so beyond our own that it is literally beyond both space and time_."

Even Einstein is reported to have said, " _Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one_."

" _This is the only radical thinking that you need to do. But it is so radical, it is so difficult, because our tendency is that the world is already 'out there,' independent of my experience. It is not. Quantum Physics has been so clear about it_."

* * *

MOVIE SUGGESTION: The Thirteenth Floor, starring Craig Bierko (1999)

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Talbot, Michael. An essay also entitled The Holographic Universe – Back to reading

2. Wikipedia – David Bohm – Back to reading

3. Talbot, Michael. Id. – Back to reading

4. Ibid. – Back to reading

5. Ibid. – Back to reading

6. Libet, Benjamin. Mind time: The temporal factor in consciousness – Back to reading

7. Radin, Dean. The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena – Back to reading

8. Newberg, Andrew, Ph.D., Director, Center for Spirituality and the Neurosciences, University of Pennsylvania, What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

9. Wikipedia – Occam's Razor – Back to reading

10. Wikipedia – Parsimony – Back to reading

11. Wikipedia – Karl Pribram – Back to reading

12. Wikipedia – Binary Code – Back to reading

13. Talbot, Michael. The Holographic Universe, p. 31 – Back to reading

14. Ibid., p. 54 – Back to reading

15. Talbot, Michael. An essay entitled The Universe as a Hologram: Does Objective Reality Exist, or is the Universe a Phantasm? – Back to reading

16. Wolf, Fred Alan and McTaggert, Lynne, What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

17. Talbot, Michael. The Holographic Universe, p. 54 – Back to reading

18 _._Ibid., p.1 – Back to reading

19. Goswami, Amit. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 8

THE BREAKOUT

Back to the Table of Contents

As I walked out of the Library into the back of the movie theater again, I looked up at the black ball hanging from the center of the ceiling with its bright lights streaming toward the wrap-around IMAX screens.

Finally, I knew with certainty what the ball was. It was projecting the images of the 3D movies onto the screens, creating the holograms we are all part of, totally immersing us, making them appear to be our lives, our reality.

In fact, Pribram said that black ball was a human brain – _my_ human brain – and the movies it produced were not real at all. According to quantum physics, nothing is "real," as we have always understood that word – not just the shadows on the wall of Plato's Cave, but also the fire and the men on the walkway that produce the shadows, and the Cave itself as well. It's all a hologram, popping in and out of existence as I observe it; and by definition, a hologram is not real.

But all of this brought up a lot more questions than it answered....

~ Who or what is creating the holographic movies I'm experiencing as my reality?

~ If the movies I've been watching and thinking were my life aren't real (along with the movie theater itself), then what _is_ real?

~ Why do the movies seem to contain so much drama and conflict and pain and suffering, both internal and external?

~ What does it all mean in the end?

And perhaps even more importantly, in light of the discoveries in quantum physics, I had to rethink all my previous answers to the questions:

~ Who am I, really?

~ Where did I come from?

~ How did I get here?

~ What am I doing here?

I stood there staring at the black ball hanging from the ceiling as if it would suddenly and magically speak and give me the answers I needed.

* * *

I was about to turn sixty-two years of age, sitting in my apartment one day when I realized...

~ I had no job. I had responded to a few want ads that would have been perfect for me, but no one wanted to hire me.

~ I had no money and didn't know how I was going to pay the next month's rent.

~ I had no relationship, no one to love, no female who wanted to be part of my life in an intimate way.

~ I had two marriages, both of which failed after 15+ years because of my own issues.

~ Although I had a few close friends, none of them lived within a thousand miles of me at the time.

~ I had a wonderful family, including three fantastic grandchildren; but other than my daughter and her husband, I hardly got to see them.

~ I had written two books about AIDS and HIV no one was buying and apparently no one wanted to read.

~ I had no future plans, no idea how anything would change.

...and I thought to myself, "My life couldn't get any more...." The word I used, if I recall correctly, started with an "F."

But as I sat in the apartment that day taking stock of my life and realizing how limited it had become, I did not feel any depression, any regret, any sadness or loneliness at all. It wasn't apathy or resignation, either. The "F" word was just a habit with no emotion behind it. Instead, it was a moment devoid of all judgment or resistance to my situation – a moment as if I were suspended in time and looking at myself from afar, a moment in which I completely surrendered to "what is" without any desire or need to change it.

If I had any reaction at all, it was more like, "Oh. So that's the way things are;" and what I felt the most was gratitude for still having a roof over my head and enough food to eat.

* * *

When it wouldn't speak to me, my eyes finally left the black ball and came to rest on the door at the back of the theater, the one with the sign saying, "Do Not Enter – Extremely Dangerous."

I knew the answers I wanted – I needed – were not going to be found inside the movie theater, or in any group, or in the Library.

I knew my life had reached a turning point, perhaps like an alcoholic or drug addict who hits bottom and takes an honest and dispassionate look at his life.

I knew I was tired of fighting, joining this group and then that one, trying to make things happen, working hard to make things go right, only to end up here. I had been there, done that, and brought home both the t-shirt and the hat, neither of which fit.

I could feel something inside me literally pushing me toward that door, almost as if I had no other option. There was nothing left in the movie theater for me, so why should I stay when there was somewhere else to go I had never been, and staying here made no sense at all.

It was with both fear and excitement that I walked toward the door, opened it, and went through.

* * *

The rest of this book will be my written report to you as your "scout" of what I found on the other side of the door.

At this point I want to repeat and expand on something I said in the Introduction. I am not writing this book to try to talk you into anything. I am merely passing on information I have discovered during my own journey. Whether you believe that information or not is none of my business or concern, and I am not interested in convincing you I am right. If at any time it sounds like I am arguing a point to try to get you to believe it, rest assured that is not the case. My only job, as I see it, is to try to pass on the information as clearly and completely as possible, and sometimes that isn't easy. I will often go to great lengths to make sure I have expressed the information in a way you can at least understand what I am saying, whether you agree with it or not.

I also promised you in the Introduction I would let you know when we reach the place in the book where you can only go on and not back.

We're there.

Of course, you can keep reading the rest of the book out of pure curiosity, maintaining some distance, not getting too involved, never going through the door, not reading as if the book were about you and your own spiritual evolution. There's no danger in that. Do whatever you want, and remember you can never do anything "wrong."

But I have to warn you, if you keep reading, the information is going to make its way into your mind and will stay there forever. You can do your best to ignore it and return to your life as a Human Adult inside the movie theater, but eventually it will begin to have its impact, maybe a little bit at a time. That's fine, too. I suggest, however, if you really don't want to let this affect your life in any way, you stop reading now, put the book down, and walk away. This book will always be there in the Library in the movie theater, if and when you decide you want to pick it up again.

All but a few Human Adults spend the rest of their lives in the back of the movie theater belonging to some group; and they die there as well. Most have no idea there's an alternative, so no one can blame them. Besides, the sign on the door says, "Do Not Enter," and Human Adults have a tendency to respect authority. The sign also says, "Extremely Dangerous," and most Human Adults are still controlled by their fears.

But maybe you're not one of them, and now you know there _is_ an alternative.

* * *

I want to give you as much information as I can for you to make a decision about how you want to proceed; and at this point I'm going to introduce a new metaphor, apparently a fairly common one....

_"The complete metamorphosis of a butterfly has been used as a metaphor for eternal life, as the 'earth-bound' caterpillar transforms into the 'ethereal butterfly',"_ says the New World Encyclopedia.

I said before that the Universe provides many hints and clues in plain sight for us to see and understand when we're ready. The butterfly metamorphosis is one of them, so it doesn't surprise me that various writers have picked up on it from time to time.

Once again, however, their metaphor is wrong because it's based on a faulty premise.

The metaphor of metamorphosis has nothing to do with "eternal life." It has everything to do with becoming a butterfly in the here and now.

Let's first understand that "metamorphosis" is actually the whole series of changes an insect undergoes from egg to adult. Metamorphosis commonly has four stages, which we can easily equate to our discussions about the movie theater...

Stage One: The embryo or egg, i.e., the Human Child

Stage Two: The larva, i.e., the Human Adult

Stage Three: The pupa, i.e., what comes after "the door"

Stage Four: The adult or imago, i.e., the so-called "spiritually enlightened"

What we're talking about at the moment is going from Stage Two, a Human Adult, into Stage Three, the pupa. That's precisely what happens if you walk through the door at the back of the theater.

In insect metamorphosis, the pupa stage is when the caterpillar transforms into its adult form (the imago).

_"It is during the time of pupation that the adult structures of the insect are formed while the larval structures are broken down. Pupae are inactive, and usually sessile (not able to move about). They have a hard protective coating and often use camouflage to evade potential predators."_

This "hard protective coating" takes different forms in different insects, but is most commonly known as a "cocoon."

Technically, most butterflies do not have a "cocoon." Instead, they have a "chrysalis." A "cocoon" is a silk casing spun by a caterpillar which totally encloses them during their transformation into a moth, for example. A "chrysalis" is created when a caterpillar that will become a butterfly sheds its outer layer of skin, leaving a hard shell hanging from a leaf or twig in which it is encased for the transformation.

But I'm going to take some literary license here and from now on use the word "cocoon" rather than "chrysalis" in my butterfly metamorphosis metaphor. After all, it's just a metaphor, and "cocoon" is a lot easier to type and pronounce, and much more commonly understood.

So... if you decide to walk through the door in the back of the theater, you will be leaving Stage Two and entering Stage Three, stepping into a cocoon; and one of the reasons I like this metaphor so much is that there are many similarities between a caterpillar cocoon and what's on the other side of the door. Here's what you can expect, should you take this step....

A cocoon is small and confining and desolate and lonely and dark, and it means the death of the caterpillar; and that's exactly where you will find yourself. Know right now that you will not be walking into the blinding white light of eternal bliss. Instead, things will look pretty much the same as they always have in the first few days; it will take you some time to realize just how different they are, as you begin what has been referred to (but ultimately misunderstood) by various religions inside the movie theater as the "dark night of the soul."

_"'Dark night of the soul' is used to describe a phase in a person's spiritual life, marked by a sense of loneliness and desolation.... It is referenced by spiritual traditions throughout the world..... The term 'dark night (of the soul)' is used in Christianity for a spiritual crisis in a journey towards union with God.... Typically for a believer in the dark night of the soul, spiritual disciplines (such as prayer and consistent devotion to God) suddenly seem to lose all their experiential value; traditional prayer is extremely difficult and unrewarding for an extended period of time.... The individual may feel as though God has suddenly abandoned them or that his or her prayer life has collapsed.... Rather than resulting in devastation, however, the dark night is perceived by mystics and others to be a blessing in disguise, whereby the individual is stripped of the spiritual ecstasy associated with acts of virtue. Although the individual may for a time seem to outwardly decline in their practices of virtue, they in reality become more virtuous, as they are being virtuous less for the spiritual rewards obtained and more out of a true love for God."_

Let's just say in your cocoon on the other side of the door, you will experience situations that will challenge every single belief, theory, opinion, judgment, and attitude you ever had and held sacred; and none of your prior training in any spiritual philosophy or self-help technique will do you the slightest bit of good.

For example, spiritual philosophies or self-help practices designed to alter your state of consciousness, such as meditation and breathing techniques and dream analysis, are the last thing you will want to do inside your cocoon, because you need to be in full and conscious control of all the faculties of your mind. (I'm not saying you will "think" your way into being a butterfly, but you'll quickly learn that any technique or practice you may have learned in the back of the movie theater that involved closing your eyes was actually leading you in the exact opposite direction of where you wanted to go. Everything you will need to become a butterfly will appear right there in front of you, and you'll want to be wide awake and fully focused on the here and now.)

_"Just hypothetically, what if you found out that in order to achieve the enlightenment you speak of, you had to reject all the teachings you've ever received. Could you abandon all this knowledge you've acquired?"_

How "dark" will this "dark night" be? That depends on you. All I can say right now is that the intensity of the "darkness" will depend on how resistant you are to letting go and dying, in the same way a caterpillar could make his transformation a living hell if he fought it inside the cocoon.

What else can you expect if you walk through the door? To be totally alone. Every caterpillar has its own cocoon, and so will you. That doesn't mean you have to disconnect from family or friends and go off in the woods somewhere by yourself, although some have; but your family and friends will not be able to help you, nor will they understand what you're doing or why. Only those who have gone before you – the scouts – will have any idea what you're going through, and contact with them only happens rarely while you're in the cocoon. It means there will be no group to support or comfort you like there was in the back of the movie theater; you're on your own.

Will the movies you've been watching in the theater change? Not really, not that much in the beginning; but there is definitely a change in their purpose, from leading you into more limitation in the movie theater to giving you the opportunity to eventually break out of your cocoon as a butterfly. You'll have to read the next part of this book to fully understand that concept.

Perhaps the most disturbing prospect of walking through that door into your cocoon is your certain death. A caterpillar must "die" in order to transform into a butterfly. You, too, must die – that is, the "you" you think of as "you" must die. It is only through this death that you can discover who you really are.

How long will you stay in the cocoon?

_"Pupation may be brief, for example 2 weeks as in monarch butterflies, or the pupa may enter dormancy or diapause until the appropriate season for the adult.... Pupation may last weeks, months or even years."_

From reports of two other scouts and my own experience, I can say you will probably stay in the cocoon about two to three years. Not all that time will be the "dark night of the soul;" it gets easier as you get closer to the end. But you should be prepared not to emerge as a butterfly any time soon, like next week or next year.

It all sounds like a lot of fun, doesn't it? Actually, it is, or it can be once you get the hang of it. (No pun intended... a chrysalis _hangs_ from a leaf or... oh, never mind.)

But consider this... if you decide to climb Mount Everest, you should be prepared for a lot of hard training and difficult conditions in order to reach the summit. If you want to be an Olympic swimmer, there's years of sacrificing a "normal" life and hours a day in the pool and weight room just to try to qualify; and then there's no guarantee of a medal.

I doubt any good coach or trainer would sugarcoat all the preparation you must go through if you want to achieve such lofty goals. The same is true in this case.

On the other hand, no one attempts to climb Mount Everest or win Olympic Gold or do anything challenging without knowing the end result is worth the effort. That would truly be insane. In this case, what awaits you as a butterfly is constant and true and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love. Well, maybe. I'm still in the last part of my cocoon stage, so I won't guarantee anything. What I _can_ say from my current position is that I am experiencing all the things I wished for and believed possible while still in the movie theater as a Human Adult: true contentment, peace of mind, more abundance than I could have imagined, total relief from worry and stress, more fun and excitement than I ever dreamed of, with virtually no drama and conflict or pain and suffering, and much more love and appreciation for myself and everyone else and the Universe as a whole.

Plus, I have the answers I needed to my questions; and perhaps more importantly, I have no more doubts.

To me, that alone makes the journey worthwhile, and I'm not yet at the final destination.

* * *

I found it amusing that in his _Enlightenment Trilogy_ , Jed McKenna spent the entire first book telling you all about what it's like to be "spiritually enlightened," painting a very wonderful, accurate, and appealing picture. Then in Book Two, he made it very clear how difficult and demanding it is to get there, using examples of Julie's spiritual autolysis and the travails of Captain Ahab in _Moby Dick_. But in Book Three Jed seems to go to great lengths to try to convince you _not_ to go there, but to stay in the movie theater as a Human Adult.

_"Who wants to be cast permanently adrift on a shoreless sea? Who wants to spend the rest of their life tumbling through infinite space? No one, of course. What's the point of pointlessness? How can you want nothing?"_

It's true. So-called "spiritual enlightenment" is not at all what people have dreamed it to be; and despite what some teachers and gurus have said, it is not something that happens overnight in a blinding flash of light, or as the result of a special meditation session where all of a sudden you commune with God. Getting there _is_ extremely difficult and demanding, but so is reaching the summit of Mt. Everest. Sure, you could stay in Base Camp and enjoy the view and appreciate the beauty and have a fairly decent life. Or you could climb to the top.

Why would anyone do that? Because it's there, of course; and because you simply cannot _not_ do it. Because there's something inside you that says you absolutely _must_ go through that door.

For some people the choice is clear and easy. What's the point of staying inside the movie theater when you know it's not real and the answers you're seeking can't be found there?

For others, the choice can be really tough, especially for younger Human Adults (in chronological age) who have their entire lives ahead of them. I wonder whether it takes a certain amount of time spent in the movie theater before one is ready to consider another option. After all, there's a lot of fun and enjoyment and pleasure to be found as a Human Adult – limited and restricted though it is – that someone in their twenties or thirties might not be so anxious to miss out on. The thought of leaving your group and ending up totally alone before getting to experience everything the Cave has to offer might not be that appealing.

Of course, it's also possible the younger ones don't believe me that the answers they're seeking can't be found inside the theater. Perhaps they don't _want_ to believe me, having just joined a group they think _can_ offer them the constant and true and abiding joy, abundance, power, and love they're seeking, and want to give it a go. I'm all for it – give it all you've got for as long as you can. Nothing you do will be "wrong;" the door at the back of the theater will always be there.

But I have often thought while writing this book that I could be talking almost exclusively to the Baby Boomers, the former Hippies now in their late 50's and 60's who have spent enough time in the back of the theater to fully appreciate its limitations and have virtually nothing to lose by going through the door. We'll see.

* * *

So, there it is. That's everything I can think of to help you make your decision.

The door is standing there right there in front of you, unlocked and ready for you to walk through it. (By the way, did I mention that once you walk through, it closes and locks behind you, and you can never change your mind?)

As I said in the beginning, it's your choice.

* * *

MOVIE SUGGESTION: The Truman Show, starring Jim Carrey (1998)

#

FOOTNOTES

1. New World Encyclopedia – Metamorphosis – Back to reading

2. Wikipedia – Pupa – Back to reading

3. Wikipedia \- Dark Night of the Soul – Back to reading

4. McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

5. Wikipedia – Pupa – Back to reading

6. McKenna, Jed. Id. – Back to reading

# PART TWO:

INSIDE THE COCOON

Back to the Table of Contents

There is nothing in a caterpillar

that tells you it's going to be a butterfly.

~ R. Buckminster Fuller

PREFACE TO PART TWO

Welcome to your cocoon!

The sound you just heard was the door closing and locking behind you, so let's not waste any time....

(By the way, what often happens first as you enter your cocoon is that you get a gift from the "Universe," a little "reward" for taking your first step toward self-realization. This will be different for everyone, so you'll want to be open and alert and on the lookout; and it helps to express some appreciation – to no one in particular, if you like – when the gift arrives.)

* * *

Before we start there's an important distinction that must be made between a "belief system" and a "model."

A model is defined as "a schematic description of a system, theory, or phenomenon that accounts for its known or inferred properties and may be used for further study of its characteristics," and "a systematic description of an object or phenomenon that shares important characteristics with the object or phenomenon. Scientific models can be material, visual, mathematical, or computational and are often used in the construction of scientific theories."

There's a simpler definition at Answers.com that says "a scientific model is a representation of an object or system. An example of a scientific model would be a diagram of a cell or a map.... even a model rocket!"

In other words, a model takes the evidence already at hand – in our case, the results of the scientific experiments in quantum physics and brain research – and develops a theory or representation of how that evidence might be applied if taken to the next level.

A model is designed to be tested and challenged to see how well it performs.

On the other hand, a "belief system" is often formed in contradiction to the evidence at hand, and cannot withstand testing and challenging. In fact, a belief system tries to avoid being tested or challenged at all costs.

The remainder of this book will be talking about models, _not_ belief systems – models that have been tested and found to work.

You are not going to be asked to believe anything. Instead, you are invited and encouraged to test these models for yourself.

All I can say as your scout is that the models I will present worked for me and got me where I am today – standing here looking at the Pacific Ocean, a truly amazing place I am very happy to be.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. TheFreeDictionary.com – model – Back to reading

2. Science.YourDictionary.com – scientific model – Back to reading

3. Answers.com – what is a scientific model – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 9

THE CONSCIOUSNESS MODEL

Back to the Table of Contents

Ramana Maharshi taught that you could achieve the stage of butterfly if you simply "Ask yourself again and again, 'Who am I?'"

_"The inquiry 'Who am I?' will destroy all other thoughts, and like the stick used for stirring the burning pyre, it will itself in the end get destroyed. Then, there will arise Self-realization."_

That's much more easily said than done; and like any other teaching in the back of the movie theater, if it worked, there would be a lot of butterflies populating the Earth by now.

So you're going to take a little different approach that _does_ work. For approximately the next two years in your cocoon, you're going to focus on answering the question, "Who Am I _not_?", along with the question, "What is true?" At least, that's what worked for me and a few other scouts and got us where we are today.

Basically, before you can find the _true_ answer to "Who Am I?", you have to strip away all the _false_ answers you've collected during your lifetime, especially those you picked up belonging to various groups in the back of the movie theater.

Remember that in order for a caterpillar to transform into a butterfly, it has to first realize it's not a caterpillar any more.

_"It is during the time of pupation that the adult structures of the insect are formed while the larval structures are broken down."_

So we're going to take a closer look at some of the beliefs commonly held around the topic of "Who I Am" and whether they are true or not; and one of the most common that has become very popular among New Age groups is: "You create your own reality."

But is that true?

First of all, since the New Age apparently never found out that "reality" is actually a holographic image, and not "real" at all, the saying is not true right off the bat. But that's just a minor error, and I'm very willing to amend their slogan slightly to conform to quantum physics and say, "You create your own holographic universe," so we can focus on the important issues.

"You create your own holographic universe."

Is _that_ true?

If so, exactly who is the "you" who is creating your own holographic universe?

Let's find out by picking up where we left off in our study of quantum physics in the last part. We said...

"What we have always thought of as our life, our reality, is not real – according to quantum physics – but actually a holographic 3D movie we have been immersed in, whose wave frequencies have been downloaded from The Field to our brain, where they are translated into particles located in space and time and projected "out there" for us to perceive through our senses."

...and the question we asked was, "Who or what is creating the holographic movies I'm experiencing as my reality?"

#

You'll remember that a hologram is a two-step process, and in the second step the reference beam is directed toward the holographic plate (or film) containing the object in order to get the object to pop out into "reality."

#

What we didn't discuss yet is that a single piece of holographic film is capable of storing many, many objects, and in fact holography may soon replace other laser-based storage techniques because of its capacity to hold so much information. ("The advantage of this type of data storage is that the _volume_ of the recording media is used instead of just the surface.")

Which object or objects pop out when you direct a reference beam at the film depends on the angle of the reference beam. In other words, you can choose which holographic images to create by using different angles for the reference beam to select the exact wave patterns you want that are stored in the holographic film.

Now let's apply that to our holographic universe....

#

Some sort of reference beam – we don't know what yet – is directed at The Field, which is like a gigantic piece of holographic film that already contains all the wave frequencies required for an infinite number of holograms; and out pops "reality."

#

So now we can ask our question even more specifically: Who or what is the _reference beam_ that chooses certain wave frequencies from The Field to create our holographic reality?

The best answer anyone has come up with so far is **consciousness** _._ **Consciousness** is what chooses the precise wave frequencies in The Field and downloads them to a human brain, which then converts them into space/time particles and out pops our "reality."

#

Of course, this process is not two-dimensional or linear as portrayed in this picture. A more realistic depiction might be three-dimensional concentric circles, with "reality" in the middle, The Field around it, and **consciousness** around The Field.

You could think of it like a peach, where the peach pit is "reality," The Field is the meat of the peach that you eat, and **consciousness** is the skin. However, we're stuck with two-dimensional linear pictures right now, at least until this book can be made holographically.

* * *

Consciousness _is what chooses the precise wave frequencies in The Field and downloads them to a human brain, which then converts them into space/time particles and out pops our "reality."_

This is where quantum physicists split into two main groups. One group – the "pure" scientists – cannot accept this answer, although it is the most logical and the simplest, and therefore satisfies Occam's Razor and the principle of parsimony. That's because **consciousness** __ cannot be measured or dealt with in the normal scientific way. **Consciousness** __ simply does not lend itself well to mathematical equations or statistical research.

But there are a significant number of quantum physicists who understand that **consciousness** is not only the best answer, but also the most workable. One of those is Dr. Amit Goswami, in my estimation one of the great thinkers of our time. Dr. Goswami is Professor Emeritus in theoretical physics at the University of Oregon, Senior Scholar in Residence at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, and author of eight books on Quantum Physics, including _The Self-Aware Universe_ and _Science and Spirituality: A Quantum Integration_. Dr. Goswami says:

" _Quantum Physics enables us to see directly that we can make sense of the world only if we base the world on consciousness. The world is made of consciousness; the world is consciousness.... Quantum Physics makes this as clear as daylight.... Consciousness must be involved,... and so for the first time, science encounters 'free will.' Consciousness is free because there is no mathematical description of the subject in our science; only objects can be described mathematically, and only to the extent that they are possibilities. The question still remains paramount: Who is the 'chooser?' And when we see that... we see that there is freedom of choice, and out of that freedom of choice comes our actual experience_."

Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, Teaching Fellow in Physics at Yale University, has these thoughts...

" _If you put it that there is an intangible world that effects the tangible world of our experience, and if you then say, 'That's what quantum mechanics says,' – and granted, that's a fair way of trying to put into English something which is very, very difficult to grasp – but it then leads quite naturally to the conclusion that quantum mechanics says that there is a spiritual world that makes this choice, that there is another world that is intangible that effects and influences the physical world. That intangibility, however, is itself the bedrock of physical reality. It may be intangible, but it is – well, we can't really say what it is or why it's there – but it is in fact the most fundamental feature of matter_."

Fred Alan Wolf, theoretical physicist, puts it this way...

" _Quantum Physics says that consciousness is playing a role in the universe. It says that there is a secret underground that seems to be effecting the reality we live in, and that this reality we live is not at all what it appears to be."_

And Dr. Andrew Newberg, Director for the Center for Spirituality and the Neurosciences at the University of Pennsylvania, asks...

" _Whether or not we're just living in a big 'Holodeck' is a question we don't necessarily have a good answer for.... It is conceivable that all of this really is just a great illusion.... So what is the relationship between consciousness and material reality – whether or not the material world can actually be derived from a consciousness reality, or whether consciousness itself could even be the fundamental stuff of the universe, so to speak, instead of the 'cold, dark matter' or other aspects of matter that physicists have been looking for?... Maybe it has something more to do with consciousness. In that regard, then, we really can think about the universe as being more a state of consciousness... much more so than the material reality that we normally look at_."

So a number of highly respected and thoughtful quantum physicists have concluded that **consciousness** is what chooses the exact wave frequencies from The Field it wants to use to create our holographic experiences.

However, just like The Field, no one can prove **consciousness** exists. But also like The Field, when we assume " **consciousness** must be involved," as Dr. Goswami says, we can then build a very successful model of how our world works and use that model in very practical and successful every-day applications.

So the statement "You create your own holographic universe" is _not_ true, since the "you" you think of as you, the one on the "reality" side of The Field, is not creating that reality. It might be closer to the truth to say, "Your **consciousness** creates your own holographic universe."

But... what exactly is **consciousness**?

If you would like a good laugh, click here to watch a short video from What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole, where some of the brightest people in the field of quantum physics try to give an answer!

Now, after you've stopped laughing, please appreciate the honesty and humility with which all those great minds struggled with the question, because defining **consciousness** is not easy at all.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines **consciousness** as " _the quality or state of being aware, especially of something within oneself_."

In philosophy, " _at its most basic level,_ **consciousness** _may be said to be the process of a thinker focusing the thought on some aspect of existence_."

" _In human beings,_ consciousness _is understood to include 'meta-awareness,' an awareness that one is aware_."

In many spiritual teachings, **consciousness** is synonymous with the human soul or spirit, the immortal part of a human being; and " _higher consciousness – also called super consciousness (Yoga), objective consciousness (Gurdjieff), Buddhic consciousness (Theosophy), God-consciousness (Sufism and Hinduism), Christ consciousness (New Thought), and cosmic consciousness – are expressions used to denote the consciousness of a human being who has reached a higher level of evolutionary development._ "

But, " _we may be forced to admit that consciousness, like infinity and the particle-wave concepts in quantum mechanics, is a property that cannot be made intuitively straightforward. Consciousness – like gravity, mass, and charge – may be one of the irreducible properties of the universe for which no further account is possible_."

If you visit Answers.com and Wikipedia.com and search for **consciousness** , you will find essay upon essay – dozens of them – from respected researchers trying to explain what **consciousness** is, all with a little different take on the word.

For me, the last quote is perhaps the most significant and worth repeating...

_"_ Consciousness _– like gravity, mass, and charge – may be one of the irreducible properties of the universe for which no further account is possible_."

So I think it's clear no one really knows exactly what **consciousness** __ is or how to properly define it. The truth is we will never know; we only know it must exist. We are, in fact, incapable of knowing, and always will be incapable of knowing, simply because we are on the other side of The Field from **consciousness** ; and our brains – at least according to Pribram – are designed as holographic receivers and translators, and have no capacity or ability to access or process any information on the other side of The Field.

We _do_ know that **consciousness** is not the body, the brain, the mind, the intellect, or anything else in the holographic universe. It is not a thing; it is the creator of things.

Am I saying that we – the "I" who is writing this book and the "you" who are reading it – have no **consciousness**? No, I'm saying the word **consciousness** has been applied to mean a great many things in our holographic universe, and it's very confusing to then use it to describe what exists on the other side of The Field.

Yes, we – "you" and "I" – have a kind of consciousness, which is self-consciousness. We are aware of our "selves," and we are aware of being aware; as the dictionary said, " _the quality or state of being aware, especially of something within oneself_."

That's fine, but that's not the **consciousness** we're talking about that chooses wave frequencies from The Field.

Rene Descartes said: " _I think, therefore I am_." Descartes lived inside the movie theater like everyone else, and as I mentioned before, in quantum physics we are finding the opposite of what we have always believed is actually closer to the truth: "I am, therefore I think."

The **consciousness** we're now talking about is the "I am;" you and I and our self-consciousness are the "I think."

* * *

For a long time I hesitated to do this, probably in reaction to the two complete dictionaries of new words and meanings L. Ron Hubbard created for Scientology. I don't even enjoy reading poetry; I like to read plain and simple English with clear and well-accepted words and meanings.

But because of all this confusion about the word **consciousness** , and because this concept is so essential to understand on your path to becoming a butterfly, I feel it's necessary to come up with a new label to properly describe the **consciousness** on the other side of The Field – this "irreducible property of the universe" – and differentiate it from us on this side of The Field.

I decided quite early I could not use terms like "higher self," "higher power," "higher consciousness," or "expanded self," since they, too, are so over-used and misunderstood; and frankly, they all take a Human Adult in exactly the opposite direction of where you want to go if you want to become a butterfly. We'll see why shortly.

Likewise, I didn't want to use "soul" or "spirit" or anything else with any religious connotation. This isn't about theology or ascended masters or higher levels of spirituality.

I finally decided on the term, "Infinite I," which admittedly makes some assumptions, but in the end and for our purposes turns out to be quite useful.

The assumptions are that whatever consciousness exists on the other side of The Field has qualities and attributes that are infinite, such as:

~ infinite joy

~ infinite abundance

~ infinite wisdom

~ infinite power

~ infinite and unconditional love

~ and an infinite desire to play and express itself creatively

This may or may not turn out to be the "Truth"; perhaps we'll find out when we die – or not. But for now it's as close to the truth as we're going to get, and, like the concept of The Field, provides a very workable model to continue our transformation into a butterfly.

It also serves the purpose of making a clear distinction between the _Infinite I_ on one side of The Field, and "you" and "me" on the other side, walking around in holographic bodies on a holographic Earth. Therefore, the _Infinite I_ is not the "I" who writes these words, and it's not the "you" who reads them. (I'm going to give another name to that "you" and "I" in the next chapter.)

I also want to emphasize that when I say " _Infinite I_ ," I am talking about a single, individual **consciousness** – not consciousness in general (as the word is sometimes used), or some "collective consciousness," or "cosmic consciousness," or "God." Each of us has an _Infinite I_. (Perhaps the closest anyone in the movie theater has come to this concept, as far as I can tell, is Jane Roberts in her novels, _The Oversoul Seven Trilogy_ , based on the "Seth material.")

#

So from now on I will refer to the Infinite I as the one who chooses the precise wave frequencies in The Field and downloads them to a human brain, which then converts them into space/time particles and out pops our "reality."

Before we go on, I want to be very clear about this _Infinite I_ , because I don't want any confusion with other concepts you may have developed inside the movie theater.

The _Infinite I_ is not your "higher self" or "expanded self." There are two things wrong with the term "higher self;" one is the word "higher," and the other is the word "self."

First, "higher" has no relevance here. It's a judgment word, a comparison, and we will soon see that judgment is the glue that keeps the illusions together inside the movie theater. The word "self" implies that what we think of as our "self" has a higher version. But what we think of as our "self" is not true – any of it. In fact, where we're headed with all this is toward "no-self." So the last thing we want to think of in terms of the _Infinite I_ is that it is some expanded version of us. It's not.

Nor is the _Infinite I_ some "advanced" or "spiritualized" or "ascended" or "purified" or "better" version of you. It is not some "enlightened" or "evolved" or "avatar" or "holy" version of you, either. It is not something you will ever grow into being. You will never "become" your _Infinite I_ , no matter what you do, how "good" you are, how much you meditate or eat only organic food, or pray, or perform certain ceremonies or rituals.

It is not "God," or "All That Is," or Allah, or Jehovah, or Yahweh, or "The Source" either.

It is also not your super consciousness, objective consciousness, Buddhic consciousness, God-consciousness, Christ consciousness, universal consciousness, or cosmic consciousness. Those are all movie-theater versions of the truth, and therefore skewed. It _is_ **consciousness** , yes – _your_ **consciousness** ; but not the consciousness you experience as a human being, which is self-consciousness.

Although you are in constant communication with your _Infinite I_ (whether you realize it or not), you and it exist in entirely different worlds – on different sides of The Field. The best analogy I can think of is an astronaut on the moon, representing "you," and Mission Control in Houston, representing your _Infinite I_ , with all that space (The Field) in between. I like this analogy because not only did your _Infinite I_ send you to the moon in the first place, but it is also your best friend and partner in this adventure.

But then what _is_ the _Infinite I_ , you ask? Good question.

I don't know. I know from direct experience of testing and challenging the model that my _Infinite I_ exists, and it created me and your _Infinite I_ created you. I can tell you what it's not, but I cannot tell you what it is yet; and as I said, I don't think it's possible for anyone to tell you what it is, in truth, as long as we are on this side of The Field. The only thing I can say in all my dealings and contacts with my own _Infinite I_ , it is something I would be proud to take home to meet the parents.

* * *

So here is the "Consciousness Model" in a nutshell....

Your _Infinite I_ chooses an experience for you in the form of wave frequencies from an infinite number of possibilities in The Field and downloads them to your brain. Your brain receives those wave frequencies and translates them into physical "reality," and sends them "out there" for your senses to perceive. You assign power to the holographic universe you perceive to make it "real" and to the persons, places, and things you see.

But this suggests that there is nothing you can see, hear, taste, feel, smell, or experience in any way that your _Infinite I_ has not chosen for you to experience and then sent to your brain to process into "reality." Every moment of every experience you have now – or have ever had and will ever have – has been carefully chosen and created for you by your _Infinite I_ , exactly the way it is and exactly the way your _Infinite I_ wants it to be, down to the smallest detail. Remember...

THERE IS NO "OUT THERE" OUT THERE!

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Robert Adams' blog about Sri Ramana Maharshi – Back to reading

2. Mahadevan, T.M.P., in the Introduction to Who Am I?: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi – Back to reading

3. Wikipedia – Pupa – Back to reading

4. Wikipedia – Holography – Back to reading

5. Goswami, Amit. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

6. Wolf, Fred Alan. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

7. Newberg, Andrew. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

8. Satinover, Jeffrey. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

9. Merriam-Webster Dictionary – consciousness – Back to reading

10. Wisegeek.com – consciousness – Back to reading

11. Answers.com – consciousness – Back to reading

12. Answers.com – higher consciousness – Back to reading

13. Ramachandran, V.S. with Blakemore, Colin, Answers.com – consciousness – Back to reading

14. Adapted from the various writings and seminars of Robert Scheinfeld – Back to reading

15. Roberts, Jane. The Oversoul Seven Trilogy – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 10

THE PLAYER MODEL

Back to the Table of Contents

This is your first opportunity to find out "Who am I not?"

You are _not_ your _Infinite I_. You are _not_ the one who is choosing the wave frequencies from The Field and creating your experiences.

You are not even infinite. Your body, mind, intellect, and everything associated with them are part of your holographic universe. They aren't real, much less infinite.

Your _Infinite I_ is the "I Am," and you are the "I think" part of the equation.

If you can really get this at the beginning of your cocoon stage, your metamorphosis will be so much more fun and easy and enjoyable. However, right now your ego – the false personality you've constructed over time – is probably screaming in your ear that this is all bullshit and to close the book quickly and stop listening to this lunatic; because your ego wants you to think you're something you're not, something "more," something "special" that is in fact immortal. That way, as long as "you" never die, it doesn't have to either. But that's exactly what needs to happen in the cocoon: you and your ego must die just like the caterpillar.

I realize every religion and every spiritual teaching I'm aware of in the movie theater – including the New Age – preaches that you are really a spiritual being (your "soul") having a physical experience (in your body). Even Robert Scheinfeld, who was my mentor and fellow scout, said your _Infinite I_ (which he called your "Expanded Self") is "the sun of who you really are;" and if everybody says it, why shouldn't you believe it?

Because it isn't true...

...and it is perhaps the greatest error inside the movie theater that prevents all Human Children and Human Adults from becoming butterflies.

As an astronaut on the moon, would you say you were really Mission Control, in charge of the mission?

If you were the right tackle on a football team, would you say you were really the quarterback calling the plays?

If you were a trumpet player in an orchestra, would you say you were really the conductor?

I'm sure you'd like to think you _are_ your **consciousness** , that you are the "I Am;" but the simple fact you'd like to _think_ you are your **consciousness** is evidence of which side of the equation you are actually on.

In the end, all that can be known and said to be true is that your _Infinite I_ is the one on the other side of The Field who is creating all your holographic experiences for you, and you are not your _Infinite I_ ; and, really, that's all you need to know.

* * *

What's the big deal? What's the problem if we want to think we are our _Infinite I's_ , the one creating our holographic experiences?

If the astronaut on the moon thought he was Mission Control, what do you think would happen to the mission?

If the right guard on the football team thought he was the quarterback, how many games do you think that team would win?

If the trumpet player in the orchestra thought he was the conductor, what do you think the symphony would sound like?

But more importantly, every moment you spend trying to be your _Infinite I_ is a distraction from the real job you were created to do. Now that you're in the cocoon, the sooner you can stop trying to be your _Infinite I_ , the more time you will have for finding out who you really are.

Let me use another analogy to make sure I'm being clear about this. If an _Infinite I_ saw the Atlantic Ocean and decided it wanted to go swimming, it might first wonder about the temperature of the water, and then decide to create a big toe on its right foot to test the water before taking the plunge. The job of that big toe would be to have the experience of immersing itself in the water of the Atlantic, and then sending back its feelings to its _Infinite I_ through the feedback connection.

You get the picture. You are the big toe. You are not the whole body, or the brain, or the **consciousness**. You are the big toe.

If this were the case – if you were the big toe – would you go around telling everyone you were actually the _Infinite I_? If you truly understood why you were created and your role in relationship to your _Infinite I_ , wouldn't you be satisfied to do your specific job and do it well, and not try to be more than you are?

But as long as you constantly try to claim you "really are" your _Infinite I_ , can you see you become more of a pain in the ass than a big toe?

Your _Infinite I_ has shown an infinite patience while you have tried to take its job away your entire life, and in the process ignored and denied your actual purpose for existence. But even that wasn't "wrong," and worked perfectly for your experiences while in the movie theater. It just won't work well in the cocoon.

Some of this has to do with the ego, and some with being told by all religions and spiritual teachings we aren't good enough exactly the way we are, that we're more than "just" a big toe. If we didn't feel such shame about who we are, we wouldn't need anything "better" or "higher" to be or become. When you're finished with this process in the cocoon, you will know who you _really_ are and be totally satisfied with that and not need to be anything else. "Serenity of being" is what I call it.

* * *

Maybe you don't believe there is anything other than yourself and your own mind creating all your experiences – nothing "higher," no soul or spirit or anything like that. Perhaps while in the movie theater you rejected any concept that suggested some "higher power" was at work in your life. Denying the existence of your _Infinite I_ is as much of an error as thinking you _are_ your _Infinite I_ , and in direct conflict with quantum physics and the human brain studies. It may have served you well as a caterpillar, but not any more. However, I don't blame you or judge you, especially since the "higher power" everyone was trying to convince you existed made no sense in the way they portrayed it. As Philip K. Dick said in his novel, Valis, "The Creator is insane."

But there is no doubt _something_ (what I am calling the _Infinite I_ ) is on the other side of The Field creating you and your holographic experiences. Frankly, it is only your ego that would like you to believe differently, to think _you_ – on this side of The Field – have the power to create anything. You will have a direct experience of this truth in the cocoon, if you can allow yourself to see it.

* * *

If you are not your _Infinite I_ , then what are you? And exactly what's your relationship to your _Infinite I_?

The best answer is that you are a "Player" – and so am I – a Player created by your _Infinite I_ to play a game, which it loves to do. (In the next chapter we'll start talking specifically about the game you're playing.)

Shakespeare told us over four-hundred years ago: " _All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players._ " Maybe we could have paid more attention.

I have suggested, and will suggest often, there are "hints" and "clues" all around us in plain sight about how this holographic universe works. One of them is the computer video games that have become so popular.

If you've never played a video game, you should. They can provide some very deep insights along with a lot of fun. I recommend going to Pirates of the Caribbean Online, which is free from Disney and a good example of what I'm talking about.

Most sophisticated video games, like _Pirates_ , begin by creating a Player to represent you in the game. In _Pirates_ , you can create a new Player from scratch, choosing the gender; the shape of the body; the height; the skin tone; all sorts of designs for the face; the shape of the jaw, lips, and cheeks; the eye color, eyebrows, and shape of the eyes; lots of choices for the nose and ears; the hairstyle and color, including a beard and mustache; and then all combinations of clothing. The last thing you do is choose a name for your Player.

I still marvel at this technology! It seems as if you could create an infinite number of variations of Players from all the different choices.

Now go back to Pirates __ and create another player (they let you create two for free). This time, however, imagine yourself as an _Infinite I_ who wants to play and express itself creatively, and you want to design a player who will be your representative in this adventure, since you can't go inside the game and play it yourself.

The point is that you – and I – were created by our _Infinite I's_ and custom-designed the way they wanted us to look, down to the bridge of our noses. They even gave us our names. (For those who might still believe what we were taught in school that our appearance is the sole result of DNA inherited from our parents, I recommend The Biology of Belief by Dr. Bruce Lipton.)

* * *

Am I saying you are totally "separate" from your _Infinite I_? No, not at all; not any more than a big toe is "separate" from the rest of the body.

A big toe has its separate function, its specific job to do, but it is part of the whole. A big toe, however, would never think it _was_ the whole body. That would be delusion, which is what all Players in the movie theater suffer from.

Instead, a big toe is constantly connected to its body, and happily and willing receives commands from the brain. In the same way, you – as a Player – are constantly connected to your _Infinite I_ ; and as soon as you stop trying to be something you're not, your connection to your _Infinite I_ will get a lot clearer.

* * *

By now you know I like to let you read quotes from other people who are saying essentially the same thing but in different words, to give you another perspective. In this case, I'm going to bypass quantum physics and go instead to metaphysics.

Darryl Anka is a channel, and the entity who supposedly speaks through him is called "Bashar." Here's what Bashar has to say on this topic, which I really like even though he uses the term "higher self"....

"Most of you are familiar with the idea that you have a physical consciousness – a personality as a physical being – that you relate to as 'yourself.' But then there is this mysterious idea of the 'higher self.' Simply put, most of you understand or at least intuit that the so-called 'higher self' is... non-physical. Even more simply you could say that there is a vibrational frequency above physical reality – just beyond physical reality – in which resides what you might refer to as a 'template' for physical reality or upon which your physical experience is constructed.

"It might surprise you to know, as personality constructs – as physical minds – you do not conceive of any ideas. The personality does not conceive of concepts. It perceives concepts; it does not conceive them.... The 'higher self' conceives; the physical brain receives; the personality mind perceives. That's all it does. Any idea, any inspiration, any imagination 'you' have ever had doesn't come from the physical mind portion of you; it comes from the 'higher self' portion of you through the receiver – the brain – and is translated by the brain into a vibration that the physical mind then perceives as a reflected reality.

"This may sound at first somewhat limiting, but in fact it's very, very freeing, because you can all stop thinking! You can all stop thinking you're in charge. You can all stop thinking that you have to think of everything. You can all stop thinking you're the one guiding the ship. You're not. You are just looking at the road. You're just experiencing the path....

"The reason you get into trouble, the reason you feel stuck as a physical mind is because you have been taught to believe that the physical mind is the one coming up with all this stuff. And it's not. So when you try to manipulate it, it doesn't work, because the physical mind is not designed to create those concepts. It is only designed to perceive the effect of the creation of [your 'higher self'] through the receiver, the physical brain.

_"This allows you to lighten up your load, stop carrying so much baggage, stop trying to do your 'higher self's' job, and just do your own. That's why so many of you are so tired; it's because you're trying to do a job you weren't designed to do. That's exhausting! Stop! You were not hired to do that job. Your 'higher self' already has that job and it's working for you perfectly.... Just do the job you were designed to do, which is perceive."_

* * *

Apparently Bashar, or Darryl, can mix metaphors as well as I can! " _You can all stop thinking you're the one guiding the ship. You're not. You are just looking at the road. You're just experiencing the path...."_ – ship, road, path....

So let me say it this way: You are not the one driving the bus. Your _Infinite I_ "hired" you – created you – to sit in the back of the bus and perceive and react and respond to the scenery as it goes by, and that's all. But you haven't done the best possible job at that either, since you've spent a lot of time up front trying to take the bus driver's job away from him.

You do not create the scenery (your holographic experiences); you do not choose which scenery to look at; you do not decide what direction the bus will travel. All those jobs belong to the bus driver, your _Infinite I_.

#

Who am I _not_? You are not the bus driver. You are not the one creating your reality. You – on the same side of The Field as reality itself – have no power to create anything, as a matter of fact.

When you finally surrender and accept this fact, it should actually come as quite a relief. After all, we worked very hard while inside the movie theater to create our reality – a reality we wanted – thinking we did indeed drive the bus and were responsible to decide what direction it took and what scenery we would see; and, of course, it didn't work. At least we didn't create a reality we really wanted.

Now we can sit back and relax and enjoy the ride, allowing our _Infinite I's_ to do the driving and know our only job is to react and respond to the scenery – to the experiences that pop up in front of us. "Go Greyhound, and leave the driving to your _Infinite I_."

* * *

A few people, when they first hear this, react angrily – almost violently – to the whole idea, thinking I'm suggesting they are nothing more than a puppet or a slave of their _Infinite I_ , who pulls all the strings and the Player dances accordingly. Nothing could be further from the truth. That, in fact, would defeat the entire purpose of the game the _Infinite I_ has created you to play, which is coming in the next chapter.

In order for the game to work for your _Infinite I_ , you, as a Player, must always be free – must always have free will – not to choose or create which holographic experiences you have, but how you will react and respond to them. In fact, this is why you exist as a Player, to use your free will to choose your reactions and responses, and to experience the _feelings_ associated with those reactions and responses. It's the _feelings_ the _Infinite I_ wants from you; and if you didn't have free will to choose your feelings, the whole point of the game would be moot.

So you are far from being a puppet or a slave, manipulated by some _Infinite I_ you can't see and are not even sure exists. You are an integral Player in the game, performing a valuable and unique service to your _Infinite I_. Think about it... if your _Infinite I_ has to focus on driving the bus all the time, wouldn't it make sense it would create a part of itself, a representative of itself, to sit in the back of the bus to be the one who could focus solely on the scenery, and then send the feelings from the reactions and responses to the scenery back to the _Infinite I_ through a strong and constant connection?

Do you think the astronaut on the moon considers itself a puppet or slave of Mission Control? Do you think the right guard on the football team considers itself to be a puppet or slave of the quarterback? Do you think the trumpet player in the orchestra considers itself to be a puppet or slave of the conductor?

Obviously not. They know their role and execute it willingly.

Another analogy just occurred to me. At DisneyWorld, _Pirates of the Caribbean_ is a real amusement ride – as compared to the online version I spoke of earlier. You sit in a little boat and are taken on a journey through a number of different scenes and experiences, all of which are designed to give you an inner experience, which can range from joy and excitement to fear and tension. The path of the journey and the scenes you see were created by the designer of the ride, and you don't choose where the boat goes or what experiences you encounter. Your only job is to sit in the boat and enjoy the ride, reacting and responding to what you see in any way you want; and, of course, no reaction or response you might have could ever be "wrong."

All the designer of the ride is interested in, and wants, are your _feelings_ to the experiences he has created for you; but I have yet to meet anyone who thinks they are a puppet or a slave of the designer of _Pirates of the Caribbean._

It's only your ego, feeling threatened, that is resisting the idea of being a Player for your _Infinite I_ , coming up with this "puppet" and "slave" argument. It also has to do with being unwilling to relinquish control. Apparently we all want to be the one in control of our life, the Master of our Domain, even though we'd have to admit we haven't done a very good job of it so far, since no one seems very pleased with the reality they already have.

But that's exactly the way it was supposed to be as long as you were in the movie theater. You had to believe – as every religion and spiritual philosophy led you to believe – you were the one driving the bus. It was perfect for that purpose.

You've left the movie theater now and want to become a butterfly. An important and essential part of that process is giving up the need and the desire to be in control – to let go of the steering wheel, to be willing to do the job you were created for and not try to be the bus driver.

* * *

"Okay, okay. So I'm not a puppet for my _Infinite I_. I still want to at least be a co-creator of my experiences," my friend insists.

I want to be very careful with this one, because in a sense we _are_ co-creators – but not the way we normally think of that word. However, it's possible our reactions and responses to one experience _can_ have an impact on the next experience we have.

If my _Infinite I_ is driving the bus, and I'm sitting in the back reacting and responding to the scenery that goes by my window, I might have a particular reaction or response my _Infinite I_ finds especially interesting and wants to explore. So it might turn around and drive by that scene again, giving me the same experience; or it might drive by another similar scene to see if I respond the same way. You could say my reactions and responses to the first experience helped to "co-create" the same or similar experience later.

For instance, if I react with fear to something in my hologram, my _Infinite I_ might decide to send me another very similar hologram to see how I would react the next time. Maybe it was fascinated by my fear, when it knows there was nothing to be afraid of in the experience it had created for me and wonders why I was so terrified. Or maybe it wants to give me the gift of discovering for myself there is nothing to be afraid of. Or maybe it just wanted to feel my fear again vicariously (which we'll discuss in the next chapter).

Going back to our example of the _Pirates of the Caribbean_ amusement ride, if the designer were trying to create a successful ride, I assume he would be very interested in the reactions and responses from the participants to the scenes he created for them, and their feedback would play a role in his evolving design – the path the boat took and the experiences they had.

There are all kinds of possibilities. The point is that our reactions and responses to certain experiences might influence the experiences we are given in the future. So I guess you could say, technically, you were "co-creating" those future experiences with your _Infinite I_ as a result of your reactions and responses to the present experience. But that's stretching the definition of "co-creator" as far as I am concerned; and it doesn't have to happen that way at all. Your _Infinite I_ is always free to create whatever future experiences it wants for you, regardless of your reaction or response to the present one; and you are never in any way part of the actual creation process of any experience itself.

Unfortunately, that won't make my friend very happy, because he wants to be a full-fledged co-creator of his experiences to satisfy his own ego and maintain the illusion of some semblance of control over his life.

* * *

I consider L. Ron Hubbard to be both a genius and a madman. Some of his Scientology techniques for letting go of the past can be quite workable for a Human Adult inside the movie theater. But ultimately he committed an "overt" (a wrong action) by telling his followers, "The supreme test of a Thetan is the ability to make things go right." ("Thetan" was his word for the soul or spirit.)

Consider Hubbard's two most "Valuable Final Products," John Travolta and Tom Cruise. I wonder... in light of the family tragedies and professional pitfalls, do you think they feel like they are "making things go right" all the time? How do _you_ feel when you're told you're "less than" if you fail to meet some arbitrary spiritual standard?

Inside the movie theater, not everything can "go right," ever; it was designed that way. John Travolta and Tom Cruise are no different from any other Human Adult who can achieve a few spectacular things in some areas of their lives, but can never get all their ducks in a row at one time as long as they belong to a group in the back of the theater.

Not only is "making things go right" a judgment that keeps Human Adults stuck in the movie theater, but as you now know, a Player has no ability to make anything happen at all. A Player's only job is to react and respond to what is happening in the holographic universe created for them by their _Infinite I_.

So you can stop working so hard trying to control your life, trying to "make things go right," trying to create and manage the holographic images that make up your reality and your life. It's not possible, it's a waste of time, and it will wear you out and leave you thinking you're a failure.

We spent a lot of time as Human Adults in the movie theater taking responsibility for things over which we have no control, and denying or ignoring those things over which we do. The 12-Step program is very close to the truth when it prays:

_"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference."_

You _cannot_ change your holographic experiences, since you did not create them.

You _can_ change your reactions and responses to them.

You're in the process of gaining the wisdom you need to know the difference.

You can relax now and enjoy the ride; you are not responsible for creating your reality, for making things go right in your life, for you or anyone else. You are only responsible for your reactions and responses to the life your _Infinite I_ creates for you, one moment at a time; and it turns out every single one of your reactions and responses as a Player – even the ones _you_ might consider "bad" or "wrong" – have been valuable and cherished by your _Infinite I_ since you were born.

Let me repeat that because it is so important: Every reaction and response you have had to every moment of your life – the holographic movies created for you by your _Infinite I_ – has been "right" and perfect. You have never done anything "wrong" or made any mistake – ever. Your _Infinite I_ wants each and every feeling you send to it, no matter what that feeling is.

I can say all that, and you might understand it right now intellectually – or not; but you will spend the next two years in your cocoon processing it until you have it on a cellular and emotional level as well – until you _feel_ it as well as _know_ it.

However, I imagine it might all make more sense if you know what game you're playing. So...

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Scheinfeld, Robert, The Business School of Consciousness: How to Bust Loose from the "Old" Business Game – Back to reading

2. Shakespeare, William. As You Like It – Back to reading

3. Bashar, channeled by Darryl Anka, from the Bashar Weekend Event called Permission Slips, June 23, 2007, Los Angeles, CA. – Back to reading

4. Wikipedia \- Serenity Prayer – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 11

THE HUMAN GAME MODEL

Back to the Table of Contents

"Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You felt it your entire life – that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there like a splinter in your mind driving you mad."

\- Morpheus, from _The Matrix_

There is no way any human being in this holographic universe can know with certainty why their Infinite I created them. The story I am about to tell you, therefore, cannot be called the Truth. Instead it's a model (like The Field) that comes closer to the Truth than any other model and is extremely workable and effective in the metamorphosis to a butterfly.

And it's high time for a new model. The models of how the universe works we used inside the movie theater are no longer valid, all based on the wrong premise that the movies we are watching are real. With the recent results in quantum physics and other scientific experiments, we need to come up with a new model that conforms to our new understanding of the holographic universe.

Robert Scheinfeld was the one who introduced me to this model in my early days as a scout. Although I have made certain modifications (which he may or may not agree with), I want to give him the credit for it.

It's called The Human Game Model.

Let's eavesdrop on a couple of _Infinite I's_ who are having a conversation....

"You know, I've been thinking..."

"Please tell me not to worry. You know what the Chief said the last time..."

"Not to worry. This is different."

" _Right_."

"I've been thinking I want to go to the GAP tonight."

"Where?"

"The Great Amusement Park."

" _Is that all? Then you're on! All the different games and attractions_...."

"Yes, but tonight I want to tie one hand behind my back in the dart game."

"What?"

"Am I not speaking clearly? I said I want to tie one hand behind my back in the dart game."

" _I heard you perfectly; you're just not making any sense. Why would you want to do that?"_

"Well, I keep breaking all the balloons every time I play and bringing home another stuffed animal. Now my closet's full of them."

" _What else can you expect when you have infinite power, infinite wisdom, infinite abundance_...."

"But I want to experience something a little different for a change – more of a challenge, maybe. I mean, a game you win all the time can get a little boring."

" _So you're going to throw darts with one hand tied behind your back_?"

"Yes. I thought I'd try it at least."

" _This I gotta see_...."

"You know, I've been thinking...."

" _Oh, no. Here we go again_."

"Throwing darts with one hand tied behind my back doesn't do much. I still break every balloon, and now I've got a second closet full of stuffed animals."

" _I'm well aware of that. The second closet used to be mine, remember?_ "

"So tonight I'm going to tie both hands behind my back."

_"I beg your pardon?_ _How are you going to throw darts with both hands tied behind your back_?"

"I don't know yet; but as you said, I have infinite power and infinite wisdom, so I'll figure something out."

" _This time I'm the one who's been thinking_...."

"About what?"

" _About the fact that I had to build another closet for your stuffed animals. Maybe tonight you should try throwing darts blindfolded_...."

"Wow! Great idea!"

" _This isn't working, you know. It's a good thing we've got infinite space for an infinite number of closets_."

"Yes, I know. There's gotta be a way...."

" _A way to do what_?"

"A way to experience what it would be like not to be so.... 'infinite,' so.... 'perfect' all the time."

"I'm not following..."

"I mean, here we are, with infinite joy, infinite power, infinite wisdom, infinite abundance, infinite and unconditional love.... We're just so... so perfect. Well, maybe I want to feel what it would be like to miss a balloon or two every once in a while – to experience what it would be like not to be so infinite, just for the fun of it. Who knows, maybe I'll even appreciate my infinite nature more when I know what the opposite feels like."

"But it's not possible."

"What's not possible?"

"Not being infinite. I mean, that's who we are... infinite beings. It's not possible not to be infinite."

"Maybe not. At least, not for us directly. But what if we create a new game, and then create a player to play it for us?"

_"I'm still not following you...._ "

"You know the Tunnel of Love in the Park where we experience those fantastic images from all the beautiful universes?"

"Oh, yes. It's one of my favorite rides. I especially like the music that goes along with it! Sing it with me... It's a small world after...."

"I'm not singing that right now. I'm trying to have a conversation with you about creating a new game where we could experience what it would be like to be limited instead of so bloody infinite and perfect all the time!"

"Oh, we're going to be serious, are we? Well, as I said, it's not possible. We'd always know we were infinite, so the game wouldn't work."

"You're right; it's not possible for us to limit ourselves, which is why I keep breaking all the balloons no matter what I do. As I said, that's why we have to create an attraction where we don't actually go in and play. Instead we create a player to go inside and play for us, to represent us in the game."

"How much fun could that be, if we're outside and the player is inside? Wouldn't the player have all the fun instead? And if the player is playing the game, how will we have the experience?"

"We stay connected to our player..."

"You mean, like we're always connected to the InfiNet?"

"Yes, a lot like that; and the player would send back its feelings through that connection while it was being limited, so we could experience those feelings vicariously."

"Let me see if I have this right... you want to create something like a video game, with a player who you put through various experiences in which they react to being limited, so they can send back to you their feelings during those experiences of what it's like not to be infinite."

"Precisely!"

"I must admit it sounds like it could be fun, and interesting. But how are you going to create these limiting experiences for your player?"

"Oh, that's the easy part. I'll just go to The Field, collapse some quantum wave functions and make some holograms."

"The Field? Are you sure the Chief would approve of using The Field to create a game where the goal was limitation rather than expansion?"

"Why not? You know the Chief doesn't consider one experience to be 'better' or 'worse' than any other. All experiences are equal. And the Chief created The Field – whose full name, just to remind you, is The Field of Unlimited Possibilities – because it affords us unlimited possibilities to play, which has to include the possibility to experience limitation as well as expansion. Right?"

"You've got a point. But do you really think you can create a holographic game so real, where the player will be so convinced they are being limited, they will react with feelings you could experience?"

"Well, I've got some details to work out, but doesn't it sound like a blast?"

"I don't know about a 'blast'... maybe more like a 'big bang.' But definitely very creative. I'm still not convinced it's possible to limit unlimited power or wisdom, so let me know how this works for you..."

"I've got a prototype."

"For what?"

"Did you really forget our conversation, or are you just jerking me around?"

"Remind me..."

"I'm creating a game where we can experience what it's like not to be so infinite."

"Oh, yeh, that one."

"And I created a player to play the game for me...."

"Really?"

"Yes. I went through a lot of trial and error, but I finally came up with something that works. Adam."

"What?"

"I call it 'Adam.'"

"Interesting. I won't ask why right now. Go on..."

"And I created a whole bunch of different holographic scenarios for Adam to experience being limited... and he's been sending back his feelings to me from those experiences. It's so cool, and it really works! Wanna see?"

"Sure, I'll take a look..."

"Wow! That's a beautiful game world – clear blue skies, lush green forests, turquoise oceans... really amazing. And you did all this with holograms?"

"Yes. Like I said, that was the easy part. I call it 'Earth.'"

"Okay... whatever."

"The hard part was figuring out how to make the holograms appear in space and time so Adam would think he was inside something like a total immersion movie."

"And?"

"And so I created a 'brain'."

"I can see I'm going to need a dictionary before we're through. What's a 'brain'?"

"A 'brain' is a kind of holographic processor. What I do is download the quantum wave frequencies I've chosen from The Field for my Earth Environment to one side of Adam's brain, usually while he's asleep..."

"And Adam doesn't know what's happening?"

"Actually, when he wakes up, he has these... well, sort of memories of something occurring during the night, but all the pictures are jumbled together and nothing makes any sense to him – kind of like trying to read a zip file."

"Okay, go on..."

"Then when I'm ready, I unzip them and move them to the other side of his brain; and in the process of moving from one side to the other, the brain translates the wave frequencies into particle locations, creating a holographic picture, which it then projects out through the senses into space and time for Adam to perceive and experience."

"It sounds fairly simple...."

"Yeh, it's basically like the central processing unit in our computers that takes binary code and translates it into what we see on our screens. But Adam thinks it's happening 'out there,' and all around him, independent of his own brain - as if it were some kind of objective reality."

"So what exactly is Adam doing now?"

"Chasing a rabbit."

"A what?"

"I call that little furry white thing a 'rabbit.'"

"Where are you getting these names? Oh, never mind. He'll never catch the rabbit, though; it's too fast for him."

"Exactly, and that's the point. Adam is experiencing the limitation of having a body, and he's sending his feelings about that back to me."

"Which are...?"

"I would say right now he's a little... frustrated. And that's perfect – an amazing thing to feel! If I were chasing that rabbit here, I'd catch it every time, just like I break every balloon. This is precisely what I was hoping to feel!"

"I can't feel anything."

"Of course not. Adam's my player. I'm the only one who can feel what he's feeling."

"So, if I want to have a similar experience...."

"You have to create your own player."

"Is that possible?"

"I can work on it."

* * *

This may sound incredible, and you might be laughing or thinking I've totally lost it. But is it any more incredible than all the other creation stories found in every one of the world's religions? Is it any more theoretical than a "big bang" no one can find or explain? Is it any stranger than aliens from the Twelfth Planet genetically engineering _homo sapiens_ by combining the DNA of apes with themselves, as our Sumerian forefathers apparently believed?

It's actually not entirely out of the realm of possibility that an _Infinite I_ wanted to experience what it _felt_ like to be imperfect, to limit unlimited power and joy and abundance and wisdom and love, to be involved in drama and conflict and pain and suffering. After all, if you remember, one of the attributes I gave an _Infinite I_ was the infinite desire to play and express itself creatively. I can imagine a game where an _Infinite I_ could experience being the opposite of what it really is might be very interesting and exciting – not to mention extremely difficult to pull off. How does one limit unlimited power? How does one restrict unlimited wisdom? How does one forfeit unlimited joy and love? And how does one create scarcity in the face of unlimited abundance?

The conversation went on...

"Are you ready?"

"For what?"

"To create your own player."

"Okay. Show me."

"First, there are some rules of the game you must agree to before we start. Number One, the Chief has been very clear: Any creation must have complete free will. Once you've created your player, you cannot interfere with their decisions and choices at any time for any reason."

"You mean, I just create a player and turn them loose on your 'Earth'?"

"Oh, no way. You have to create every second of every experience for your player, down to the smallest detail. They can't create anything. They're part of the hologram. They're on the wrong side of The Field and have no power at all to create any experiences for themselves. But once you've created an experience for them, they must have total free will to choose how they want to respond or react to that experience."

"I have no problem with that."

"Good. Rule Number Two, your player can't know it's your player; otherwise, it taps into your infiniteness through the connection. It must think it has its own consciousness and identity, and is not just a temporary representative, an extension of you created for the game."

"I can agree to that."

"Rule Number Three, your player also can't know it's a game. It has to believe it's real. It has to take it seriously or it doesn't work."

"You mean, Adam doesn't know it's all a hologram?"

"No! Adam is part of the hologram. A hologram looks and feels real to anything inside the hologram itself. Adam thinks the garden I made for him actually exists – he even eats the holographic apples, for example!"

"Well, I won't tell him it's not real."

"You're right – you can't tell him, unless I agree, which is Rule Number Four. You're going to create your own player with its own experiences, but I've figured out how different players' holograms can interact...."

"Wait a minute... are you saying I'm not going to use your holograms?"

"No, you can't. You can use the collection of holographic 'Earth Environments' I've created as a template for your player, if you want. And I actually suggest you do that, because if your player and my player interact, I think it would be easier if they both saw virtually the same things in their holograms; otherwise they'll spend all their time arguing about the color 'blue,' for example, or whether there are one or two suns in the sky."

"We wouldn't want that now, would we?"

"Actually, it could be interesting – probably result in some strange feelings coming back through the connection; maybe eventually get some players really upset if the reality they saw was too much different from other players. But I think it would work better for now at least if our two players saw pretty much the same things."

"But my player's holograms will be completely separate from Adam's?"

"Absolutely. Each player must have its own separate individual and unique reality. You create your own player's reality, and I create my player's reality. Because of the way I've worked it out for players' holograms to interact with each other, they might think they're connected, that they're all 'one,' or that they share the same holographic universe; but it won't be true. That's the only way this can work."

"Why's that?"

"Well, getting back to what we were talking about, Rule Number Four is – if we decide we want your player and my player to interact – your player can never do or say anything in my player's holograms I have not agreed to beforehand. Otherwise, you would actually be creating experiences for my player – and me for yours."

"And that would be bad, because...."

"Because the Chief insists no one can ever be a victim of anything at any time; and if you had the ability to create experiences for my player by doing or saying something I didn't want or didn't approve of or didn't know about, my player could then become a victim of your creations. My guess is that a player might _feel_ like it's a victim from time to time – and that's good for us because it will simply lead to more limitation – but it can never actually be the case. I must always have 100% script approval for every detail prior to anything happening in my player's holograms. And the same thing goes for you and your player."

" _I got it."_

"So now are you ready?"

"Yes, but I want a player very different from Adam."

"Well, do you want a human player, or an animal player – maybe a dolphin?"

"A dolphin looks like a lot of fun. But what's Adam?"

"Adam is a human being. This is called the Human Game."

"So I want a human, too. But still, I want a human that's different...."

"Okay, you can create whatever you want as long as it has two legs, two arms, two eyes, two ears...."

"Wow! That's interesting. What do you call it?"

"Eve."

* * *

Word about the new Human Game apparently spread quickly all over InfiniteLand via InfiMail. Soon there were many other _Infinite I's_ who wanted to play and the human population on Earth began to grow. And then...

" _Wait a minute. I have another idea_."

"Your last one was pretty good. What's this one?"

" _Let's divide the Human Game into two parts. The first half will be to see how far into limitation we can take our Players, and then the second half will be to bring them back out again_."

"Here's a million that says I can take my Player further into limitation than you can take yours and still bring it home safely!"

"You're on!"

* * *

Again, I'm not trying to claim any of this is true. We may never know. But human beings seem to have an abundance of curiosity; so although it's futile and irrelevant to speculate on why an _Infinite I_ would create the Human Game, we do it anyway. I'm no different. Here are a few of the thoughts I've had over the years....

Do Pete Sampras or Roger Federer or Martina Navratilova or the Williams sisters get bored after a while playing tennis so well? Do they play with the "wrong" hand occasionally just to see if they can – just to make the game more interesting – just for the challenge and the experience?

Does anyone play darts sometimes with their eyes closed, just for the fun?

I remember when I was three or four years old, the house I lived in had a brick walkway from the front door leading to three steps which went down to the street. I would take my tricycle, back it up against the front door, peddle as hard and fast as I could down the walkway, and then slam on the brakes and see how close I could get to the edge of the top step before I fell over. (The last time I tried this was when I fell down the stairs into the street, splitting my lip wide open.) So I can totally relate to the idea of playing a game to its maximum limits, to see how far one can push oneself.

I also remember wanting to go higher and higher on a rollercoaster, eager to find the biggest one I could, even though the first hill up was always a bitch.

Or maybe an _Infinite I_ wants to play the Human Game purely to experience what a physical universe feels like. There was an interesting 1996 movie with John Travolta called Michael, in which Travolta plays an archangel who came to Earth to experience how it felt to have a body. He reveled in it – smoking, drinking, eating as much sugar and meat as he could, exercising his very active libido, and enjoying every moment. Of course, most "new-agers" didn't like the movie because nearly everything Michael did was contrary to their beliefs of what an "enlightened" being would do. But once again this movie could provide a "clue" to an _Infinite I's_ motivation.

I'm sure you've heard the saying, "As above, so below." Now we understand the opposite is true, "As below, so above." We all go to the movies, watch sports, or listen to music in order to have an "inner experience" from the "outer experience." Even golf is played for the inner experience it creates, according to the experts. The Human Game, then, could be an "outer experience" created for a Player by its _Infinite I_ so the _Infinite I_ can have the "inner experience" – the feelings it receives through the connection to its Player.

There may be many other reasons why an _Infinite I_ would create a Player to experience life on Earth, and maybe you'll come up with one or more on your own. But the bottom line is, it doesn't matter why; and we will probably not know the complete answer as long as we are Players on this side of The Field. Fortunately, not knowing why doesn't affect the way we play the Human Game here and now.

What matters is that the Human Game, as a model, answers a lot of questions more logically and more understandably and more consistently than any other model to date – like why our movies seem to be filled with drama and conflict, pain and suffering, and what our purpose is to be here.

This model could change as we get more information, as more research is done in quantum physics, as more scouts come back with new reports of what they've found. But the most important thing is, right now, this model leads to very practical, useful, and effective ways to go through our metamorphosis in the cocoon; and that's the only real value in having such a model.

So what if the _opposite_ of everything we believed while in the movie theater is true?

~ What if life is not a school, or a training ground, or a test, or a "bitch," but a fun ride in an amusement park instead?

~ What if the purpose of life on Earth is not to learn something (thinking), but to experience something (feeling)?

~ What if we as Players are _supposed_ to feel "separate" from our _Infinite I's_ , rather than bemoaning the fact or trying to "reconnect"?

~ What if our connection to our _Infinite I_ has never been broken, but we were supposed to think it was in order to play the Game?

~ What if every experience we have ever had and will ever have is exactly the way our _Infinite I_ wants it, and there's nothing to be changed, fixed, or improved in our holograms?

~ What if all the things we have resisted are actually what our _Infinite I's_ have wanted us to experience, and it is only our judgment and resistance causing our pain and suffering?

~ What if we have never done anything "wrong," but only think we have, and believe everyone else when they tell us we're defective and deficient, sinners who need to be saved?

~ What if the Earth doesn't need to be saved either – that it has its own _Infinite I_ who is creating the precise experiences it wants as well?

~ What if it is only our ego that says we have the power to create or change anything about our reality, and that all power actually resides with the _Infinite I_ on the other side of The Field?

~ What if we don't need any "self-help" – no magic formulas, no " _Secrets_ ," no "spiritual laws," no gurus, and no special techniques to try to make things different than they are?

~ What if, no matter what we do in the first half of the Human Game – like meditate, pray, eat only organic food, and so on – it will not change anything until we have experienced all the imperfection and limitation and restrictions our _Infinite I_ wants and it's ready for us to play the second half?

~ What if all we need to do is relax, enjoy the experiences our _Infinite I_ creates for us (whatever they may be), and stop judging those experiences to be "good" or "bad," "better" or "worse," "right" or "wrong"?

~ What if humankind itself has never made any mistake either, but instead has explored the heights of limitation as a species exactly as the _Infinite I's_ wanted?

~ What if, not understanding this, we have made up many "stories" to try to explain what we experience – religions, philosophies, and beliefs – many of which contain some truth, but which are always altered so they actually lead into more limitation?

~ What if it's now time in the Human Game for many more people to enter their cocoons, to play the second half of the Human game, to go over the top of the first hill on the rollercoaster and enjoy the ride back to InfiniteLand?

* * *

MOVIE SUGGESTION: The Game, starring Michael Douglas (1997)

#

FOOTNOTES

1. RobertScheinfeld.com – Back to reading

2. Sitchin, Zecharia. Twelfth Planet: Book I of the Earth Chronicles – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 12

THE TWO HALVES MODEL

Back to the Table of Contents

Before we go on, I want to make sure I'm not confusing you with too many mixed metaphors and analogies (and there are more on the way!). For example, we just said the Human Game was divided into two halves. How does that line up with the Movie Theater and Butterfly metaphors?

The first half of the Human Game – going deeper and deeper into limitation and restriction, with all the drama and conflict and pain and suffering – would be Stages 1 and 2 of a butterfly (the egg and caterpillar), or everything that happens inside the movie theater to the Human Children and Human Adults.

The second half of the Human Game would be Stages 3 and 4 (the cocoon and the butterfly), or everything that happens once you walk out the back door of the movie theater and into your cocoon.

If we take a look at the different rules for both halves of the Human Game, I think it might become more obvious....

The rules for the first half of the Human Game (inside the movie theater) are:

1. The Players must forget who they really are and believe they are something else instead – at the extremes, for example, that they are their body or their _Infinite I_.

2. The Players must believe their holographic experiences are real and what they perceive with their senses is actually happening "out there," in some objective and independent reality.

3. The Players must believe what they encounter "out there" has power over them and the power to affect their lives.

4. The Players must believe in the judgments of "good and bad," "right and wrong," "better and worse," "good and evil."

5. The Players must believe there is something "wrong" with the reality they see "out there" that needs to be changed or fixed or improved.

6. The Players must believe they have the power to create a different reality than what they are experiencing and therefore feel defective and deficient (more limited) when they fail.

7. The Players must believe they can think their way out of the Human Game by using their mind, or love their way out of it by using their heart.

8. The Players must believe they can "make something happen," and when they fail, blame themselves for not being smarter or better or working harder.

9. The Players must believe there are goals to be reached or agendas to be satisfied or lessons to be learned.

10. The Players must believe they, and they alone, are responsible for meeting their own needs and wants, which they have to fight for.

11. Fear and resistance are the foundations of the first half of the Game, and judgment and their resulting beliefs are the glue that keeps the illusions working.

12. These illusions must never break down or the Players would see through the Game.

Did any of those sound familiar?

According to this model, the first half of the Human Game was designed to experience limitation and restriction – in all shapes and sizes – and all these rules lead to that. So if you have been following the rules (and you literally could not do anything else), you have most likely experienced a great deal of limitation and restriction in your life. You just didn't know why until now, because you weren't supposed to.

I understand you probably didn't like the limitations and restrictions of the first half of the Human Game, that they didn't feel "good," that they didn't feel "right," and that you thought you had been doing something "wrong." But you didn't do anything "wrong," and neither did I. We played the Game exactly as we should, exactly as our _Infinite I's_ wanted us to. Even our resistance and judgments weren't "wrong," since they led to more limitation, which is precisely what the _Infinite I_ wanted to feel. In other words, we've been doing a fantastic job as the Players we were created to be. We just didn't know it and couldn't appreciate it from our vantage point.

Here's something we might be able to appreciate – how an _Infinite I_ pulled this off, how it managed to limit unlimited power, unlimited joy, unlimited abundance, unlimited wisdom, and unlimited love. What a creation! What a game!

* * *

#

Since the first half of the Human Game is intentionally the opposite of the natural state of an _Infinite I_ , it takes an enormous amount of power to create it and keep it going, like a rollercoaster in an amusement park....

The first thing that happens when you get on a rollercoaster is that you go up a big hill – and for many people, the higher the better. But getting up this hill requires us to defy all natural laws, like the law of gravity. It takes a lot of power to pull us up that first hill; and on the way, we go through all kinds of "inner experiences." In many people, fear is the most common; others have a wide variety of responses, from excitement to panic and even nausea.

I would resist that first hill with everything I had. I didn't like it, it didn't feel good, it wasn't natural, and all I wanted to do was get out of there. But I also knew what was coming, the fun just over the crest of the hill.

Likewise, going as much as possible into limitation and restriction produces the same reactions as going up the first rollercoaster hill – you don't like it, it doesn't feel good, it isn't natural, and all you want to do is get out of there. So we resist the first half and wonder why we're having these experiences. But it's supposed to feel like that; that's the Game.

Another reason I like the rollercoaster analogy is that we can never experience or appreciate the ride to come if we don't first go up the big hill.

Also like the Human Game, a rollercoaster has two "halves" – you go up the hill in the first half, and down the hill in the second half. If looked at objectively, the first half is no "better" or "worse" than the second half. In fact, the second half could not exist without the first half. So there can be no "judgment" that one half is better than the other.

More importantly, someone riding on the second half of the rollercoaster is no more "enlightened" or "better" or "more advanced" or "ascended" than someone going up the first hill. They're just at a different point on the ride.

Therefore someone like me, near the end of my cocoon stage, is no more "enlightened" or "better" or "more advanced" or "ascended" than someone still inside the movie theater. I'm just at a different point in my metamorphosis, that's all, having already experienced much of the ride that comes after the top of the rollercoaster hill.

The last reason I like this analogy is that it reverses how we normally think about limitation. Rather than going "down" into limitation, or "down" into the depths, the first half of the rollercoaster is "up." So instead of saying we hit "bottom" in our lives, it's better in my mind to say we reach the pinnacle, or the peak, or the apex of limitation, when it's then time to start the second half of the Game. For me this also helps take away the judgment.

The day I told you about, sitting in my apartment, realizing I had no job, no money, no this and that, was my moment at the top of the rollercoaster hill – a brief moment of seeming weightlessness, when you've stopped climbing that interminable and awful first hill, when you can let go of all the resistance you had going up but have not yet started the ride down. This is the moment of no judgment, the moment of clarity, the moment of complete objectivity. This is a very brief moment when you can be appreciative you made it to the top, and even appreciative of the climb itself. You're not even looking ahead to the next part of the ride, but simply suspended in space and time.

And then you walk through the door in the back of the movie theater and the second half of the Human Game begins. (How's that for mixing metaphors!)

* * *

Basically, the second half the Human Game is the opposite of the first half. (Some of these will be discussed in more detail in later chapters.)

1. The Player knows what it has been calling "reality" is not real at all, but a hologram created by its _Infinite I_ to play the Human Game. This Game is being played by consciousness, in consciousness, and for consciousness; and in fact "there is no 'out there' out there,' no independent objective reality.

2. The Player knows once it has moved into the second half, all holograms experienced by the Player will be totally in support of its metamorphosis into a butterfly, rather than toward more limitation and restriction.

3. The Player knows it can never and will never experience anything in any hologram its _Infinite I_ has not created and wanted to experience, and that its _Infinite I_ has written and approved the script being used by anyone else appearing in the Player's hologram. No one in the Player's hologram can ever do or say anything its _Infinite I_ has not requested.

4. The Player knows its focus changes from thinking to feeling. In the second half there is nothing to analyze, dissect, or understand – never any reason to ask "why?" Thinking and studying are now only the result of an inner curiosity to expand one's knowledge instead of being required to figure out the world or make a Player "better" or more "enlightened."

5. The Player switches from "giving its power away" to make a hologram real, to "taking its power back" from it. When holograms appear that cause any kind of discomfort, it is an indication that the Player assigned some power to that hologram to make it real while playing in the first half, and this is the opportunity to recognize the hologram was in fact not real at all and reclaim that power from it.

6. The Player leaves behind any and all judgment of anyone or anything in any hologram at any time, such as "good" and "bad," or "right" and "wrong." As Rudyard Kipling said in his poem, _If_ : "If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster, and treat those two imposters just the same...."

7. The Player knows there is never anything that needs to be fixed or changed or improved in the holograms it experiences.

8. The Player changes from being " _pro_ active" to being " _re_ active." There is nothing the Player ever again needs to "make happen." Being "reactive" means that when a holographic illusion that appears "out there" seems to require a decision, a response, or an action, the Player takes it (as long as it does not include discomfort). Or, when the Player feels an internal motivation or impulse to act, it does. In other words, the Player follows its inner excitement as long as it is fun and brings total joy.

9. The Player lives from moment to moment, one day at a time. There are no goals, no planning, no targets, no objectives, and no agendas. There is no past and no future – just "now."

10. The Player develops a deep love and sincere appreciation for its _Infinite I_ , for itself as the Player, and for all the first half holographic creations, even though at the time of the experience they may have seemed less than joyful. The Player marvels in awe at the beautiful, perfect, and miraculous job the Player did in the first half to convince itself it was real, and that the holographic world it saw around it was real.

11. The Player has the "knowing" and the complete trust its _Infinite I_ will take care of all its needs (including money), and there is no reason to worry about anything. The _Infinite I_ would not create a hologram it wanted the Player to experience if it did not also give it everything it needs for that experience.

12. The Player wakes up each day looking forward with curious anticipation to the experiences its _Infinite I_ will create for it that day; and the Player buckles up, relaxes, and enjoys the ride.

* * *

At the risk of overkill, I would like to offer two more analogies (or are they metaphors?) to ensure I've expressed myself well.

Actually, I mentioned one before, which I now want to expand on....

Imagine a Greyhound bus driving down the highway. At the wheel is an _Infinite I_. The _Infinite I_ realizes it cannot drive the bus and fully enjoy the scenery along the way at the same time, so it creates a Player to sit in one of the seats and enjoy the scenery for it. In fact, the _Infinite I_ realizes it can create forty different Players, if it wants, to occupy all the seats in the bus and get forty different viewpoints of the scenery. (If this surprises you, read Chapter Twenty-Six, "One Player per Infinite I?", in Part Three of this book.)

There is a wire connecting the _Infinite I_ in the driver's seat to each of its Players in the passenger seats, like an Ethernet connection. Through this wire the _Infinite I_ downloads a holographic movie to each of its Passenger/Players, which is then projected on the window next to the Passenger. But rather than just seeing the 3D movie that is projected on the window, the Passenger actually becomes immersed in the scenery and part of the movie itself.

Each Passenger can only see out its own window, and therefore each Passenger has a totally unique experience. As it reacts and responds to the scenery it sees, it sends its feelings back up the Ethernet wire to the _Infinite I_ , which can then experience the scenery vicariously through this Passenger.

The Passenger's job is not to drive the bus or decide what pictures it will experience. Its job is simply to have the experience and the feelings that result from it.

Does this make the Passenger "separate" from the driver? Yes, in a sense. It _has_ to be separate in order not to think about driving the bus so it can fully experience the scenery. But no, it's not "separate," in that it was created by its _Infinite I_ as an extension of itself and is always connected to the _Infinite I_ through the Ethernet wire.

Is it "wrong" to feel like we are separated from our _Infinite I's_? Absolutely not. That's the way the Game was designed to work.

Our problem as Passengers is that we have been trying to drive the bus, trying to decide what experiences we will have, mainly because we have had experiences in the past which we judged to be "wrong" or "uncomfortable," and decided we wanted to avoid those experiences in the future and so tried to take over the bus driver's job. Or we had experiences in the past we liked a lot and wanted to repeat.

Any Passenger who truly accepts their role as a Passenger and lets go of any judgments or beliefs about the scenery it experiences can sit back and relax and totally enjoy the ride. There is also tremendous relief in realizing, as a Passenger, no reaction or response it has can be "wrong" – that every reaction and response of each Passenger on the bus is valuable and desirable and wanted by its _Infinite I_.

* * *

The second analogy has to do with one of my favorite games, a treasure hunt. In fact, I considered calling this book _The Great Treasure Hunt_ , and using that as the main metaphor, because that's what the Human Game really is.

In a good treasure hunt, someone hides something and then makes up clues for the players to try to find it. The game excites me so much because it combines mental acuity – figuring out what the clues mean – along with obstacles to overcome, and in some cases physical demands as well in the process of finding the treasure.

In the Human Game, it was even harder. We didn't know we were playing a game; we didn't know we were looking for a treasure or what the treasure was; we didn't know all the experiences we were having were perfect for the game; we didn't know there were clues we were being given from time to time, nor what the clues meant. We even got stuck during the treasure hunt, stopping in one particular location or situation or experience and staying there, never getting to the treasure itself.

In short, most of us didn't have a lot of fun.

In fact, many people get really pissed at their _Infinite I_ for putting them through such drama and conflict and pain and suffering in the first half of the Human Game; and yet those same people seem to enjoy a good treasure hunt, where they have only hints and clues and many obstacles to overcome before they can find the treasure. No one gets pissed at the designer of a good treasure hunt, do they?

Very few people I know get angry at their parents for bringing them into this world as a defenseless, helpless, totally dependant baby. But they rage at their _Infinite I_ , for some reason, for creating them to play the Human Game.

"That's all well and good," you might be saying, "but I didn't agree to being a Player for my _Infinite I_. I didn't agree to go through years of pain and suffering so my _Infinite I_ could play some kind of sick game for its own entertainment!"

Maybe; maybe not. But this anger, while seemingly justified on the surface, is full of judgment and blame. It's also not true. Your _Infinite I_ did not create your pain and suffering; your resistance to your experiences did. We will talk more about this later.

The important thing is that it's all over now. You got to the treasure chest and opened it. There was a note inside saying, "It isn't real; it's just a game;" and now you're on your way back to the starting line to claim your prize.

There is only one problem. The only way to get back to the starting line is to fly; and on your way to the treasure, you picked up a lot of baggage at each of your stops – too much baggage and too heavy to fly with as a butterfly. So now you've got to let go of all that baggage, which in this case is the personality you constructed along the way – your "self," your ego.

* * *

Now that the two halves of the Human Game make more sense, you might be asking, "What's the point of all of this?"

The point is, what are you going to do in your cocoon? What's going to happen now that you're playing the second half of the Human Game?

During the first half, you encountered numerous holographic experiences which, based on the fears we will discuss later, you judged as "bad," "wrong," "worse," "evil," or just plain "undesirable;" and you tried everything in your power to change or fix or improve those experiences. In doing so, you assigned power "out there" and made the holograms seem real.

As time went on, you formed beliefs and opinions about the experiences, about other people, and about the world around you. Those judgments and beliefs and opinions, in fact, defined who you believed you were. They became part of your "self," the layers of false identity called the ego.

Now it's your job to reverse that process.

Every judgment you made while inside the movie theater of "good" and "bad," "right" and "wrong", "better" and "worse," good" and "evil" – both as a Human Child and a Human Adult – are no longer valid.

Every belief and opinion you held was based on a false premise – that the movies you were watching were real – and are therefore untrue.

Every attachment you made to these judgments, beliefs and opinions created a new, false layer of identity you believed was who you really were.

So now you're going to be given the opportunity by your _Infinite I_ to revisit all those judgments and beliefs and opinions and, this time, change your reaction or response to the experiences that created them. In the process you will be able to let go of the layers of false identities that make up your ego – and the fears underlying them – and make your way toward the true answer to "Who Am I?"

How this happens is relatively simple.

In fact, you don't have to do anything. It's much better if you don't try to make things happen any more. Your _Infinite I_ will create everything for you, as it has always done. All you have to do is become fully conscious and aware of your reactions and responses to your experiences on a moment-to-moment basis, and be willing to look at them in the present time honestly and without justification. This means you have to stay awake with your eyes open, and not in some meditative sleep or altered state of consciousness.

But this is no cake walk. It requires high mental acuity, and includes deep emotional and even physical demands.

Basically, you will "re-live" or "re-visit" many of the key experiences from your past, which means the movies that surround you in the cocoon for the next little while will look very much the same as they did in the movie theater. Some of the characters involved may be slightly different than the first time through the movie, but the basic theme is the same or very similar.

This time, however, you have the choice of changing your reaction and response to these experiences by seeing the power you assigned "out there" to make your holographic universe seem real, and then letting go of the judgments, beliefs, and opinions you formed as a result. This will be a good start, and then it's on to the next experience.

I want to be clear that you don't have to go searching in your past for an experience to process. Your _Infinite I_ will re-create these experiences in the present for you to deal with in the here and now. This is not psychotherapy designed to discover your mother didn't breastfeed you long enough, or to overcome a dysfunctional family history.

It's about "what is, _now_."

It's about letting go of the fears that dominate your thoughts in the present and about the attachments to your "self," the layers of false identities, the personality construct called the ego you think is you.

It's about a war with Maya, the Goddess of Illusion, as Jed McKenna would say.

It's about finding out who you really are.

It's about discovering what is true.

It's about becoming a fully realized "no-self" with serenity of being.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Based loosely on the work of Robert Scheinfeld – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 13

THE PROCESS

Back to the Table of Contents

I said at the end of the last chapter "you will 're-live' or 're-visit' many of the key experiences from your past, which means the movies that surround you in the cocoon for the next little while will look very much the same as they did in the movie theater. Some of the characters involved may be slightly different than the first time through the movie, but the basic theme is the same or very similar. This time, however, you have the choice of changing your reaction and response to these experiences by seeing the power you assigned 'out there' to make your holographic universe seem real, and then letting go of the judgments, beliefs, and opinions you formed as a result."

Different scouts have different methods for processing the holographic experiences created for you in the cocoon by your _Infinite I_ , and I doubt there's a "right" way or a "wrong" way, or just one way.

There's no question there's only one place to end up – as a butterfly. But there may be as many ways to emerge from the cocoon as there are routes across the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean.

It might be helpful to look at a couple methods used by other scouts to give you a clue about where and how to find what works for you.

* * *

Robert Scheinfeld, whom I have called my mentor, came up with a Process that goes something like this...

1. Remind yourself it isn't real

2. Dive right smack into the middle of it

3. Feel the "discomfort energy" fully

4. When it reaches a peak, call it what it is and tell the truth about it

5. Reclaim your power from the creation

6. Express appreciation

In other words, as you continue with your life, immersed in the movies in your cocoon, there will be times when an experience brings you less than total joy – "discomfort" Robert calls it, which includes mental discomfort as well as physical and emotional discomfort, all the way from a slight emotional reaction to intense pain and suffering. The easiest way to spot this is that you will wish something about your present hologram would change, because you don't like some part (or all) of it very much.

Let's be very clear and specific about what we mean by "discomfort." Physical discomfort should be fairly obvious, ranging from an "owie" to severe and debilitating pain. Emotional or mental discomfort, on the other hand, can be a little more subtle.

L. Ron Hubbard invented an "emotional tone scale" in which he lists a lot of the "uncomfortable" emotions we can feel from time to time, including (in part): anger, antagonism **,** anxiety, apathy, blame, covert hostility, despair, dying, fear, grief, hate, hiding, hopeless, hostility, no sympathy, pity, propitiation, regret, resentment, self-abasement, shame, sympathy, terror, total failure, unexpressed resentment, useless, victim.

I can think of some other feelings that could be considered as "discomfort" as well, such as bitterness, condemnation, condescension, depression, embarrassment, envy, exasperation, frustration, humiliation, impatience, indecision, indignation, intolerance, jealousy, mistrust, reproach, revenge, sadness, sarcasm, spite, worrying.

But we can make this very simple by saying "discomfort" is anything you feel that is less than total excitement, joy, and enthusiasm.

Whenever we feel one of these emotions, or physical pain, the first thing we do is judge it to be "wrong" or "bad" or "undesirable" – something we don't want to feel. Then we resist it. Then we assign power "out there" to the person, place, or thing that made us feel less than totally joyful. "He," "she", or "it" caused me to feel this way, whether it's an emotional upset or an upset stomach. In other words, we "blame" whatever is "out there" that "did this to me." Then we try to change, fix, or improve that situation somehow.

Even those of us who have believed for years "you create your own reality" do this, whether we like to admit it or not, or whether we might think we're too "enlightened" for that. We do it anyway, in greater or lesser ways, if we're really honest with ourselves; and rightfully so, because it's an intrinsic part of the first half of the Human Game which we played for so long and which led into more limitation.

In the cocoon you're going to have similar experiences to those from the first half of the Game. Basically, you're going to find yourself immersed in movies with people, places, and things that make you feel "discomfort" from time to time. Some of the people you encounter, for example, might piss you off the same way they did the first time you met them – or the second time, or the umpteenth time.

Rest assured this is not a hologram created by your _Infinite I_ in order to create more limitation in your life. This hologram is a gift to you from your _Infinite I_ , showing you exactly where you assigned power in the past to something "out there," and, most importantly, where that power _still resides_. It is your chance to respond differently to this hologram – to, in a sense, "reclaim" the power you gave away and rewrite the ending to this storyline.

Whenever you feel this discomfort – whenever you have the slightest thought you wish something "out there" in your present experience would change – Robert says to run his Process; so let's take a little closer look at it. (Again, Robert may or may not agree fully with some of my extended explanations.)

1. _Remind yourself it isn't real_. Remember that you are immersed in a hologram, and by definition a hologram is not real. You only make it real if you assign it the power to be real and give it control over you.

2. _Dive right smack into the middle of it_. This is the opposite of what we normally did in the first half of the Human Game. Whenever we would meet something "out there" that made us uncomfortable – pain and suffering, for example – we would try to get away from it, resist it, suppress it, change it, ignore it, drug it, deny it, hide from it, escape it, or otherwise make it go away. Robert says, on the other hand, to embrace it fully, to see it in all its glory, to invite it closer and get yourself into the middle of it as completely as possible.

3. _Feel the "discomfort energy" fully_. Rather than rushing through the Process as soon as you feel the least little discomfort, let it build as much as possible.

There's a very simple reason for this. What we want to do next, according to Robert, is "reclaim the power" we assigned "out there" in these holograms. In many cases, we have "given" a lot of power away to certain people, places, and things that resulted in our feeling less than joyful. In fact, it may take more than one experience in the second half of the Human Game to switch off that power flow; and the more we can get at one time, the faster and easier the process will be to "reclaim" it all. Therefore let the discomfort grow as much as possible to process as much as you can at one time; and then be prepared to do it again later, either with the same person, place, or thing, or a similar situation, until all the power you have placed "out there" has been turned off.

(There are some workable techniques you might want to use to help the discomfort build, like "Focusing" developed by Dr. Eugene Gendlin.)

4. _When it reaches a peak, call it what it is and tell the truth about it_. When the discomfort has become as much as you can stand at that moment, it's time to honestly assess the situation and look for your judgments, beliefs, and opinions. For example, is there someone or something in this experience you think is "wrong" or "bad" and should change or be different than it is? Who or what, specifically? And is that true?

Is there a belief you hold causing the discomfort? Exactly what is it? And is it true?

Did you form an opinion that is now causing you discomfort in this experience? What is it, and is it really true?

(It can help a lot to actually write these things down as you go through the Process, at least in the beginning.)

One of the things you _don't_ ask is "Why" this experience is happening to you. That's a distraction that has no relevance and will keep you from focusing on what _does_ matter. Asking "Why" is what everyone does inside the movie theater, because it leads into more and more limitation; but inside the cocoon it's a useless concept. Maybe you will understand "Why," and maybe not; it doesn't matter.

As the experiences in your cocoon continue, you might start to see patterns in your life that revolve around certain key judgments and beliefs and opinions. You can expect to have similar holograms appear that give you the opportunity to follow those patterns, perhaps back to the first time you formed that judgment, or adopted that belief, or created that opinion.

So "calling it what it is" means acknowledging and owning up to the fact that your discomfort is based on the judgments, beliefs, and opinions you formed as a reaction or response to this situation.

The "truth about it" is that no one and nothing "out there" is going to change to make you happier. _You're_ the one who's going to have to change your reactions and responses to your experiences; _you're_ the one who's going to have to take 100% responsibility for how you feel and your condition in life; _you're_ the one who jumped into this uncomfortable hole, rather than being pushed or forced or tricked into it.

The "truth about it" is that no one can ever be a victim of anyone or anything at any time in any experience; likewise, there are no unwanted perpetrators. As long as you feel like you're a victim, you have assigned power "out there" that isn't real.

The "truth about it" is that you have no power to change the experience or anyone or anything "out there." The only power you have as a Player is using your free will to change the way you react and respond to the holographic experiences created for you by your _Infinite I_.

5. _Reclaim your power from the creation_. "Reclaim" is Robert's word, and I think it can be a little misleading. A Player has no power; we didn't create the hologram to begin with. We definitely made the hologram real by assigning it power, but the power we assigned was as imaginary as the hologram itself.

"Reclaiming your power" also suggests that when you have finished with the Process, you will have more power than before you started, by taking the power back you had assigned to the hologram "out there." This is also not true.

What I prefer to say is that you disconnect or turn off the power you assigned to the hologram, like pulling the plug or turning off a light switch. It was your judgments, beliefs, and opinions that provided the power in the first place. Think of it this way...

In the first half of the Human Game, you entered a holographic experience and flipped a switch that lit it up and made it appear real. It's still there, fully illuminated, when you re-visit it in the second half – which is helpful, because you need it as bright as possible to clearly see the judgments, beliefs, and opinions that were your reactions and responses, and which became part of your false self, the personality construct, the ego you have been thinking is you.

When you have finished processing that hologram, you simply unplug the power source or turn the light switch off. In the beginning, it helped to visualize myself doing that.

(If there are still judgments, beliefs, and opinions associated with that holographic experience – in other words, you didn't get them all the first time – the light won't go off completely and your _Infinite I_ will give you another opportunity later to run the Process on the same or similar circumstances again.)

6. _Express appreciation_. Expressing appreciation is perhaps the most important step. Even if you don't "like" the experience you are having, do whatever possible ("fake it until you make it") to express appreciation to your _Infinite I_ for the experience – and especially thanks and appreciation to the person, place, or thing that was causing you the discomfort. After all, your _Infinite I_ has just given you the gift of showing you where you assigned power "out there" in the past, and that's worthy of some appreciation; and the people, places, or things that caused your discomfort have given you the gift of expertly playing a role in your holographic movie to assist you in your process of becoming a butterfly – definitely worthy of appreciation.

I realize this may be difficult in the beginning; but in fact, you may soon be wanting other people, places, or things who make you feel less than totally joyful to show up in your holograms as much and as often as they can, just so you can see where you've assigned power "out there" and "reclaim" it. (For a more complete discussion of "other people" in your holographic experiences and the roles they play, please see Chapter Twenty-Three, "Other People," in Part Three of this book.)

If you keep doing this Process, you will eventually come to sincerely and completely appreciate each and every experience you have had, and all the people, places and things in it for the absolute perfection they represent.

* * *

Remember what you're seeing "out there" causing you discomfort is just a total immersion movie. If you went to a play one night and were moved to tears by an emotional scene – let's say a woman who was dying of cancer, à la _Love Story_ – you wouldn't blame the writer or director or the actors for making you feel bad. That's why you went to the play in the first place, to have an "inner experience" from the "outer experience."

If you then went to the café next door after the play and saw the actress who played the part of the dying woman, I doubt you'd blame her for causing your discomfort, or consider yourself a victim of her performance, or ask her to change the way she plays her part. To the contrary, you'd probably praise her for doing such a good job to elicit your emotional response.

That's what Robert's Process is all about... recognizing we are immersed in an amazing 3D holographic movie in order to have an "inner experience" from the "outer experience," that our _Infinite I_ is writing and directing every scene of that movie down to the smallest detail, that there are actors playing their roles in our movies to which we are reacting and responding, that any discomfort we feel is based _solely_ on our reactions and responses and the power we assigned "out there" to the movie, that the only power we have is to change our reactions and responses if we are not happy with them, and then express our appreciation to the writer, director, and actors who did their job so well to show us the true source of our discomfort and give us the opportunity to write a new ending for ourselves.

* * *

I found Robert's Process easy to do and very effective for the first little while inside my cocoon, and I recommend it (as I have explained it above) for all Players new to their cocoon. At least it gets you started and produces some beneficial results in letting go of judgments, beliefs, and opinions.

In this chapter and the next, I want to give you a couple examples in some detail from my own life that might be helpful in better understanding this Process. This first example contains virtually all of the elements I've just been discussing....

I had been in my cocoon about six months and I was living with two-hundred good friends in an intentional community in southern Portugal called Tamera. One of my jobs for the community was running an evening café, which I totally enjoyed. It was a chance to see many friends from the community I wouldn't normally meet during the day, who would come to the café at night to relax and have fun. I loved creating a special atmosphere and energy for them, and serving them and treating them with popcorn and great music.

This café was a source of pride and pleasure for me, and I treasured it and protected it, which is why on this one particular evening I got very upset.

There was one member of the community, I'll call her Betty, whom I had known for fifteen years, ever since the community of ZEGG in Germany. It wasn't that I didn't like Betty; I hardly gave her a thought. But I didn't enjoy her company, and I honestly don't know anyone who did. She seemed to always have this sour and angry and arrogant attitude that was simply not fun to be around. For some reason the community never kicked anyone out – at least not for being sour and angry and arrogant – so she was still there after fifteen years. Fortunately, I didn't have to see her a lot.

However, on this particular night of my café, Betty suddenly drove her car onto the same gravel lot where I ran my café and parked it. Granted, the car was off to one side somewhat, so it didn't really bother my guests; but it was ugly sitting there, ruining the ambiance I worked so hard to create. Besides, there was a rule against parking cars in that location.

My first reaction was to assume Betty had just parked there temporarily since her room was close by and perhaps she had to unload something and would be back soon to move her car. But when ten minutes went by and the car was still there, getting uglier by the second and infecting the entire atmosphere, I went to her room to make sure she would move it. My very polite request was met with an antagonistic, "Mind your own business!"

I was beginning to feel more and more "uncomfortable." "Pissed" is the better word. I let another ten minutes go by and, when she hadn't moved the car, went back to her room and ordered her with all the authority I could muster to park it where it belonged. She was in the middle of an angry diatribe about "Who was I to tell her what to do" when I turned and walked away.

She never did move the car. It sat there the entire night poisoning my carefully orchestrated café ambiance. I was too busy at the time serving drinks and popcorn to have the time and space I needed to run the Process, but I couldn't let myself look at the car or think about Betty or I would get seriously angry.

As "luck" would have it, that particular night a female guest in the community fell and broke her leg, and we had to call an ambulance. The way Betty's car was parked was blocking one of the main dirt roads the ambulance could use to get to the injured guest, so my indignation at her refusal to move it suddenly gained legitimacy. It was no longer just my personal desire to have the car gone from my beloved café; it was now interfering with a serious medical emergency, which is one of the reasons why there was a rule against parking there.

So I went back to Betty's room and told her to move her car one more time before the ambulance arrived. She didn't. That was Betty. (The ambulance eventually found another route to get to the injured patient.)

The next morning I allowed myself to let the discomfort – the anger I felt – come back up. I wanted to make Betty "wrong." I blamed her for ruining one of my greatest pleasures at the time, my café night. I knew if she would only change what she was doing, I would be a lot happier.

So I began running Robert's Process, or at least my version of it, and I reminded myself that the discomfort was a red flag pointing to where I had assigned power to this hologram to make it seem real; and I let the discomfort build and build inside me until I was feeling it full force.

I had long since stopped asking "Why" this had happened. I knew "Why," or I knew the only reason that counted for anything: My _Infinite I_ was trying to help me by showing me something. So I didn't waste time speculating about the reason I had this experience.

Instead I reminded myself none of it was real, that this was a holographic experience created specifically for me by my _Infinite I_ as a gift on my path toward self-realization. I had done this enough by this time that it only took five seconds before I knew with certainty this was true. I just didn't know what was inside the gift wrapping yet.

I admitted to myself I felt like a victim, that I believed Betty had interfered with the pleasure I got from my café, and that I was judging Betty for being "wrong" for what she had done. I even had a great justification for my judgment in the form an ambulance that needed the right of way. In fact, I could have found a lot of support from other members of the community about how "right" I was and how "wrong" Betty was.

But that road leads nowhere.

Instead I decided to let go of all my judgments and stop blaming Betty, recognizing instead she was simply reading a movie script my _Infinite I_ had written for me. This had nothing to do with her and everything to do with me. Betty's behavior was not "wrong" at all; in fact, she had performed her part in my movie with great expertise. How could I possibly blame her for that?

I also realized I believed she should follow the rules and that it was my place to make her do that; and my opinion was that she didn't even belong in this community, much less in my hologram! My anger then extended to the whole community for not kicking her out sooner.

The "truth of it" was that _I_ had given Betty the power to ruin the total joy I got from running my café, and it had been my reaction and response to Betty that created my discomfort, not anything Betty did or said. More importantly, they were reactions and responses I had full control over through my own free will and could change in an instant.

So I consciously "reclaimed" all the power I had given to Betty and to the incident itself to make it real; or at least that's the way Scheinfeld would say it. As I said earlier, I think in terms of turning off the power source to the hologram, of flipping the switch.

By the time I had done all this, and it only took a few minutes, all my discomfort was gone, and I was feeling enormous appreciation to my _Infinite I_ for the experience – thankful for the opportunity to see where I had formed judgments, beliefs and opinions I no longer wanted to hold.

But more importantly, I was deeply and sincerely appreciative to Betty for having played her part so well, for having been willing to accept that role in my holographic experience, and for not giving in to my "authority" but playing the scene out in its entirety. In fact, I was feeling such appreciation that I wanted to go to Betty and hug her and thank her and ask her, please, to continue playing these kinds of parts in my movies so I could uncover other places where I may have judged and blamed and given away my power.

(In the end I didn't actually go to Betty and hug and thank her. How do you say to someone, "You did such a great performance in my movie last night. Thank you, sincerely, and please continue being the sour and angry and arrogant character you're playing so I can see if there are other situations like that where I have assigned power and made real." I don't think she would have understood.)

After this process, Betty never parked her car there again, although I never asked her not to; and I no longer had any discomfort being in her presence. But here's a warning: You cannot run this Process with the hope or expectation that by doing so, your experience will change. In other words, you can't lie to yourself and fool your _Infinite I_ by letting go of your judgments and expressing your appreciation scheming that if you do, someone or something "out there" will change. It doesn't work that way, and the someone or something "out there" _won't_ change. Your _Infinite I_ will keep creating experiences to show you where you assigned power and left it there until you honestly and completely accept the experience for exactly what it is and your role in it. In other words, someone or something "out there" can only change when you no longer need or want anything in that holographic experience to be any different than it is; and then it doesn't matter to you whether it changes or not!

* * *

Before we leave this chapter, let me be very clear about one thing: This process is _not_ about forgiveness, as wonderful and spiritual as most people consider that to be. It was not about me forgiving Betty; and you are _not_ trying to get to the point of being able to forgive someone for what they did. In most cases, forgiveness implies a judgment still exists that a person did something "wrong" for which you are forgiving them. If that's all the farther you get, you haven't finished the process.

On the other hand, _A Course in Miracles_ says, "" _Forgiveness recognizes what you thought your brother did to you has not occurred. It does not pardon sins and make them real. It sees there was no sin_."

That's _their_ definition of forgiveness, and a most accurate one, if everyone could understand it that way. To put it simply, when you recognize the other person never did anything to you at all for which they need to be forgiven, you will be on your way; and when you actually arrive at the point of sincerely and enthusiastically expressing your appreciation to them for what they did – for the role they played so well in your hologram – you will have arrived.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Scheinfeld, Robert. Journey to the Infinite Home Transformational System – Back to reading

2. Church of Scientology International. Illustrated Tone Scale in Full – Back to reading

3. Gendlin, Eugene T. Focusing-Oriented Psychotherapy: A Manual of the Experiential Method – Back to reading

4. A Course in Miracles/Workbook for Students, Introduction to Part II – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 14

SPIRITUAL AUTOLYSIS

Back to the Table of Contents

On average about a year into your cocoon time, based on the many successful results of your first-hand experiences using Robert's Process, you will know with certainty there is no "out there" out there; that your 3D holographic total immersion movies aren't real; that your Infinite I is creating all your experiences for you, down to the smallest detail; that you cannot be a victim of anyone or anything at any time; that if you feel any discomfort, it is solely the result of your reactions and responses to your movies, and you can run the Process in a matter of minutes – even seconds sometimes – to locate and let go of any remaining judgments, beliefs, and opinions; and that you live mainly in a state of awe and appreciation for the Game and all the Players you encounter.

That's a really wonderful place to get to and be; and yet you feel you're not done, that there is something left to process, that you still have unanswered questions, that you do not yet have the one true answer to "Who Am I?", that you're only at the point of mild contentment with your life rather than constant enthusiasm and joy, and that you continue to experience some moments of discomfort from time to time.

Although it produces some excellent results early on, I found Robert's Process has its limitations. I know of others who reached this point as well. (For a more complete discussion of why, please see Chapter Thirty-Three, "Robert Scheinfeld," in Part Three of this book.)

Robert's Process can be very effective when dealing with discomfort that seems to come from "out there," but it's not as effective when you have reached the point where there is no longer any thought of "out there" and you are more interested in looking "in here." That's because judgments, beliefs, and opinions are only the tip of the iceberg; and once you've gotten comfortable and been successful in letting go of them, you're ready for the next stage of your metamorphosis.

Underneath the judgments, beliefs, and opinions are the fears that led to them and the layers of the ego created as a result – the false self you thought yourself to be – that Robert's Process simply cannot address.

At least that was true in my case.

* * *

In 2003, still inside the movie theater, I had a car accident which broke eleven bones in my neck and back, and I came within a millimeter of being paralyzed for life. One vertebra in my neck had to be taken out and replaced with a titanium cage, and I then needed six months in bed to recover.

My ex-wife had been married to her new husband about three years by that time, and his mother had also recently come to live with them. But out of their love and caring, and going way beyond any call of duty, they put a hospital bed in their living room and that's where I spent those six months recovering. Then they bought a travel trailer at their own expense, set it up just a short walk from their house, and moved me in there as soon as I could walk sufficiently to get back and forth, continuing to feed and take care of me for another six months.

During that year, my ex-wife's new husband became my best friend, and his mother treated me as if I were her son. After fifty-seven years, I finally had the kind of mother I wished for as a child, and a real brother to boot. My ex-wife's parents, who also lived nearby, were a constant source of love and support as well. What an incredible experience! The car accident was indeed a very special gift from my _Infinite I_ on many levels.

But how do you ever repay someone for that kind of love and caring? I felt such gratitude to my ex-wife and her husband – and to the entire family – and spent the next seven years hoping to find ways to give back even a small percentage of what they had given me. This turned out to be the subject of a series of holographic experiences my _Infinite I_ would create for me once I entered my cocoon.

During our seventeen years together, I had been my ex-wife's scout and coach, as well as her husband. Part of my relationship to her, part of my ego identity, was to assist her – at her request – in seeing when she had strayed off her own chosen path and help her get back on course. Her new husband had, in fact, thanked me profusely many times for the excellent job I had done in this capacity.

Ten years after we separated I was still attached to this ego identity. So about a year and a half into my metamorphosis, when my ex-wife and I suddenly and unexpectedly started to have some communications problems, my ego said it would be a real gift to her and her husband if I once again exercised my identity as her coach and offered my assistance and support – perhaps even a big enough gift to repay their love and generosity. "If I could only get her to see and understand..."

But for the first time ever in our relationship, despite all the evidence I presented, my ex-wife did not agree she had strayed off course. This communication problem lasted about six months while I tried to do what I had done so well for her in the past, with zero success this time. I ran Robert's Process very early on, leaving me with no discomfort, no emotional or mental upset on my side with her or the situation we were in. I did not blame her or judge her for anything she was saying or doing, and I no longer had any desire to fix her or improve her or change her.

But still I knew something wasn't "right," with _me_ ; and I needed help, something more than Robert's Process to find it. So my _Infinite I_ asked Robert Scheinfeld (how ironic and perfect!) to appear in my holographic experience via email and introduce me to Jed McKenna and his _Enlightenment Trilogy_....

_"The external searching is only one part of the story. The other part is the internal part; the slow, painful sloughing away of self, layer by layer, piece by piece."_

Through this communications problem with my ex-wife, I was ready to tackle some very tough layers of my ego and the fears that created them.

* * *

In Book One of his _Enlightenment Trilogy_ , Jed introduces us to a process he calls "spiritual autolysis." I'm going to let Jed speak for himself a lot in this chapter and the next, because he says everything so clearly, and there's no point in my trying to paraphrase....

_"Autolysis means self-digestion, and spiritual means, uh. Hell, I don't really know. Let's say it means that level of self which encompasses the mental, physical and emotional aspects; your royal I-ness. Put the two words together and you have a process through which you feed yourself, one piece at a time, into the purifying digestive fires.... It's an unpleasant process.... basically like a Zen koan on steroids. All you really have to do is write the truth.... Sounds simple, doesn't it? Yes, that's all there is to it."_

The best description Jed gives of the actual process of spiritual autolysis is during a conversation with a student named Arthur in Book One, _Spiritual Enlightenment: The Damnedest Thing_...

_"Just write down what you know is true, or what you think is true, and keep writing until you've come up with something that is true._ "

"Pi is the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter," says Arthur.

"Sure," I agree. "Start with something as seemingly indisputable as that, and then start examining the foundation upon which that statement is built and just keep following it down until you've reached bedrock, something solid, something true."

"Pi isn't the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter?" he asks.

"The question presupposes that there's a circle."

"There's not a circle?"

"Maybe. I don't know. Is there?"

"Well, if I draw a circle..."

"I? When did you confirm the existence of an I? Draw? Have you already raced past the part where you confirmed that you are a separate physical being in a physical universe with the ability to perceive, to draw? Have you? If so, we have to switch seats."

Arthur is thoughtful and silent for several moments. "I guess that's what you mean by following it down. This is very confusing. I don't even know where to start."

"It doesn't matter where you start, just grab a thread and start pulling. You could start by using Ramana Maharshi's query, 'Who am I?' or 'What is me?', and then just work at it. Just try to say something true and keep at it until you do. Write and rewrite. Make it cleaner and cut out the excess and ego and follow it wherever it leads until you're done."

"And how long does that usually take?"

"I would think a couple of years. But when you're done, you're done."

"And by done, you mean...?"

"Done."

"Oh. Is this like journaling? Like keeping a diary?"

"Ah, good question. No. This isn't about personal awareness or self-exploration. It's not about feelings or insights. It's not about personal or spiritual evolution. This is about what you know for sure, about what you are sure you know is true, about what you are that is true. With this process you tear away layer after layer of untruth masquerading as truth. Anytime you go back to read something you wrote, even if it was only yesterday, you should be surprised by how far you've come since then. It's actually a painful and vicious process, somewhat akin to self-mutilation. It creates wounds that will never heal and burns bridges that can never be rebuilt and the only real reason to do it is because you can no longer stand not to."

He lets that sink in for a few moments. "What's the reason for writing it down? Why not just do it in your head like with koans?"

"That's another good question. Yes, koans and mantras are done in your head. Ramana Maharshi's 'Who am I?' query is done in your head. The reason for writing it down on paper or on a computer where you can see it is because the brain, unlikely as it may sound, is no place for serious thinking. Any time you have serious thinking to do, the first step is to get the whole shootin' match out of your head and set it up someplace where you can walk around it and see it from all sides. Attack, switch sides and counter-attack. You can't do that while it's still in your head. Writing it out allows you to act as your own teacher, your own critic, your own opponent. By externalizing your thoughts, you can become your own guru; judging yourself, giving feedback, providing a more objective and elevated perspective."...

"Does that make Spiritual Autolysis a path of intellect as opposed to a path of heart or a path of devotion or a path of service?"

_Ugh. "Frankly, you start losing me a little bit there, Arthur." He gives me a perplexed look. "I don't know what all these different paths are, Arthur. Spiritual Autolysis is an intellectual endeavor, but I balk at calling it a path of intellect. It's a process of discrimination, of unknowing what is untrue, of progressively stripping away the false and leaving only what is true. Discrimination is used in a machete-like manner for hacking one's way through the dense underbrush of delusion, or, if you prefer, in a swordlike manner for hacking off one's own delusion-riddled head. Intellect is used as the sword with which ego commits a slow and agonizing suicide; the death of a thousand cuts. Whether that makes it this kind of path or that kind of path doesn't concern us here; that's something for a student of paths to worry about. If the question stays with you then it's something you can address for yourself in the process of Spiritual Autolysis."_

* * *

This was exactly what I needed to process my current experience with my ex-wife. I needed to see my emotional attachments to her and her husband, especially the tricky ones that seemed so justified by well-earned and well-deserved gratitude. I needed to write down how these attachments were defining who I believed myself to be, and look honestly at the hold my ego had on me as a result. I wanted to find out what was really true about any of this, and spiritual autolysis was a powerful tool in that process.

What I discovered, of course, was that my ego liked this role of being the coach for my ex-wife. It defined my identity, my relationship to her, especially since I was no longer her husband.

In fact, my ego liked being a coach to anyone. It gave me the identity of a teacher, a mentor, a guru of sorts. It also satisfied a belief in helping others, in trying to mitigate their pain and suffering, in offering support by exposing the inconsistencies and contradictions that were making their lives less happy than mine – none of which can ever be true, of course. Isn't it amazing how arrogant our egos can be, thinking we know what's best for someone else or how they should live?

It was my ego that wanted me to feel this eternal gratitude to my ex-wife and her husband – without any possibility of ever being able to pay them back – to keep me attached to this identity. That's the way the ego survives and grows and gains power.

But it was clear the time had come for me to detach from the identity of a coach or mentor or teacher or guru to my ex-wife – and anyone and everyone else – and from the endless gratitude to her and her husband.

Detaching does not automatically mean disconnecting, however; although in this case my ex-wife finally asked that I take her and her husband off my mailing list, which I did, although I hope the disconnection is not permanent or even lengthy.

Detaching means... well, I'll talk about it in detail in the next chapter. For now, think of the ego like an onion. Detaching is peeling off one of the layers and throwing it away. Or maybe you prefer cutting it up into little pieces, throwing it in a hot pan with some butter, and eating it with great appreciation for the flavor it gives to a hamburger or zucchini. (For more appreciation of the ego, please see Chapter Thirty-One, "The Ego," in Part Three of this book.)

Originally, I was quite surprised when my "coaching" offers were so adamantly rejected by both my ex-wife and her husband, given our history. Now I am so extremely appreciative to both of them, for it was only through their resistance that I was able to find and let go of these ego layers. What a relief it is not to feel like playing any of those roles any more, and what a gift they gave me once again – although this time I am not bound to the ego by the gratitude.

* * *

There were many fears I discovered as well as I ran Jed's spiritual autolysis on this incident with my ex-wife and her husband. The bottom line was that I wasn't enjoying our conversations any more; I wasn't having fun being involved in her dramas; and I didn't look forward to listening to him recite conspiracy theories of government concentration camps ready to accommodate millions of Americans. The only reason I kept putting up with it was this endless gratitude.

But I was afraid to let go of her and her husband, even knowing I could never repay them no matter what I did. In addition to feeling I _should_ feel grateful for the rest of my life, there was the fear of how it would look to others if I suddenly put an end to the endless gratitude. I was afraid of what the rest of the family would think. How ungrateful would it seem if one day I said, "You know, I am and will always be very appreciative of you and everything you did for me; but I can never pay you back, and I have to stop trying. That part of my life is over, and I no longer feel joyful or interested – or compelled by gratitude – in walking down the road you seem to be heading at the moment."

What would my children think? Did I stand the chance of jeopardizing my identity as their father if they disapproved of my behavior with their step-mother?

I was also afraid of losing the mother I had always wanted and just recently found, and the new brother I had come to love. These layers of identity had made up for years of my dysfunctional childhood, and I cherished them.

Finally, and most importantly, I was afraid this was the last chance I would have to get my ex-wife out of the movie theater and into her cocoon, which was the "gift" I had been trying to give her. I still loved her and cared for her, and wanted her to find her way out of the drama and conflict and pain and suffering – the dreamstate she was so clearly still experiencing as a Human Adult. Of course, my ego loved this, feeling secure in its existence as long as I felt responsible for and was focusing on _her_ spiritual evolution instead of my own.

Detachment isn't always just from the things we don't want or like, but also from the things we want and love.

* * *

I had to let go of the attachments to all of this, to all the fears that had created layer upon layer of my ego and formed the false belief of who I thought I was: coach, friend, father, brother, son. These were all just "characters" I played – none of which were who I really am at all, all of which are who I am _not_ , in fact.

The fact is that every judgment I ever made in my life has attached me to that experience and formed another layer of my ego, defining who I thought I was. Every belief adopted as a result of these judgments has been false, solidifying and justifying the ego. Every opinion based on those false beliefs will turn out to be in error when viewed from a new perspective of truth.

That's why our _Infinite I_ gives us the opportunity to revisit, or re-live, those experiences while in the cocoon; to let go of those judgments, beliefs, opinions; to look head-on at the fears and break the attachments that have formed the false identity layers of the ego.

* * *

This is all well and good, you might say, for something as insignificant as a little emotional upset over Betty's parked car, or a spat with your ex-wife – for the minor drama and conflicts in life. But what about _real_ discomfort? What about physical abuse? What about a rape, domestic violence, divorce, child abuse, war, poverty, starvation, depression, severe illness, and the really difficult experiences of true pain and suffering?

The severity of the discomfort does not matter; the process is exactly the same regardless of the content of the hologram. None of it is real, no matter the intensity, whether it is a minor cut on your finger or a near-fatal car accident. It just _seems_ real – it looks and feels real – and the more emotional or physical pain, the more real it becomes, which means the more power we have assigned to it.

That's why I suggest starting with Robert's Process to take the "heat" and the "reality" out of the situation, and then work your way into Jed's spiritual autolysis, always reminding yourself that the experience has been created by your _Infinite I_ to show you where you assigned power, to give you the opportunity to change how you react and respond, and then decide whether you want to continue living with the fears and the layers of false ego identities.

Yes, it might take a little longer to process the more extreme feelings of discomfort, but the Process itself doesn't change. It might mean you "reclaim" some power the first time through the Process, but there's still a lot left to go back and get the next time, or the third time, or the three-hundredth time through the experience. The "good" thing is that each time you run the Process on a particular situation and turn off some of the power associated with it, it gets less intense and therefore a little easier the next time.

Eventually, within a couple years, you will do all of this with ease and excitement, appreciating the experiences of discomfort – if they come up – as an opportunity to locate and process the last remnants of judgment and fear, but living more as a "witness" to your own life.

* * *

In Book Three of his _Enlightenment Trilogy_ , called _Spiritual Warfare_ , Jed mentions "witnessing" in a conversation with a teenage student, Maggie....

"Ultimately, the only spiritual practice is observation; seeing things the way they really are. That's what Spiritual Autolysis is; a tool to help us do that, to see more clearly, to use our brains the best we can. In witnessing, you want to take a step back from yourself so you're not just living your life, you're also observing it. Not in reflection, like a diary, but as it's happening; in real time. Like right now, I'm sitting here talking with you, but I'm also in this witnessing mode of impartial observer. I am not fully in character, I'm also an audience member. I'm aware that I'm acting on a stage and I am, somewhat disinterestedly, monitoring my performance."

She looks confused but eager. "How do I do it?" she asks.

"Well, in a way, you're already doing it, except your witness is kind of unfocused. She's bored, hungry, aggravated, muffled. You want to bring her into focus, sit her down and have her pay attention."

"Her? Her who?"

"The little voice in the back of your mind. You know what it's like when you're bored, and in the back of your mind you're thinking about something else? You're not fully present, your mind is somewhere else; wandering, daydreaming.... Daydreaming is a very good word for it because it suggests that we're asleep while we're awake, which is exactly the point. We want to transfer our primary awareness out of the character we're playing and into the actor that's playing the character. We want to accentuate that distinction to help us stop blending the character we play with the actor playing the character. We want to take up primary residence in the actor instead of the character we're portraying. Does that make sense?"

"I don't know. You mean like being self-conscious all the time?"

"Yes, but in an impartial sense, not in a judgmental sense. When you have internal voices holding imaginary conversations or worrying that you wore the wrong blouse, those are character elements too. The actor can just sit back and watch all that. In this way you can observe yourself just like you observe anyone else, except with a better view."

"I'm not sure I can do that."

_"Of course you can, it just sounds weird."_

Sounds to me a lot like the Fair Witness in Heinlein's _Stranger in a Strange Land_ , for those of you who know the reference; and as far as I am concerned, witnessing is an advanced process that takes a lot of training and discipline and is probably not suitable for the early stages in a cocoon.

But it's how you begin to live all the time toward the end of your metamorphosis....

_"There's nothing to it except observation, awareness, vigilance. Wakefulness. First you learn to do it, to have this detached awareness; you do it consciously, a little at a time, just to get the hang of it. Practice witnessing other people to get the idea. Watch them, wonder about them, deconstruct and reverse-engineer them, then just watch yourself the way you've been watching others. Then you start doing it more and more until it becomes second nature and you're almost always in the witnessing mode and you see your own character from the same impersonal perspective as you see other people."_

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Another pun, because my ex-wife's "own chosen path" was _A Course in Miracles_ – Back to reading

2. McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

3. Ibid. – Back to reading

4. Ibid. – Back to reading

5. Ibid. – Back to reading

6. Ibid. – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 15

DETACHING & "DESIRELESSNESS"

Back to the Table of Contents

I said in the last chapter that "detachment isn't always just from the things we don't want or like, but also from the things we want and love."

That may sound like you have to forsake everything in order to become a butterfly, which would make becoming a butterfly a lot less attractive to many people. But it's not true. So let me explain "detachment" a little more; and, as usual, let's first look at what "detachment" is _not_....

"Detachment," sometimes called "non-attachment" or "desirelessness," is a concept that can be found in all the major religions inside the movie theater; and, as is necessary, it has been altered and twisted so that it doesn't work for the Human Adults who try it.

_"Detachment as release from desire and consequently from suffering is an important principle, or even ideal, in the Bahá'í Faith, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Jainism, Kabbalah and Taoism.... In Buddhist and Hindu religious texts the opposite concept is expressed as upādāna, translated as "attachment." Attachment, that is the inability to practice or embrace detachment, is viewed as the main obstacle towards a serene and fulfilled life. Many other spiritual traditions identify the lack of detachment with the continuous worries and restlessness produced by desire and personal ambitions."_

_"One of the most important teachings of Zen Buddhism is non-attachment. The teaching of non-attachment may be easy to understand, but it is not easy to practice. Nevertheless, it is very essential to cultivate non-attachment if we are to live a serene and happy life in a world of constant change.... Our world is a world of desire. Every living being comes forth from desire and endures as a combination of desires. We are born from the desire between of our father and mother. Then, when we emerge into this world, we become infatuated with many things, and become ourselves well-springs of desire. Through desire we give rise to attachments. For every desire there is a corresponding attachment, namely, to the object of desire. For example, we are most conspicuously attached to our bodies. When someone threatens the body, we grow anxious and try to protect it. We relish physical comforts and the enjoyment of the senses. Thus, we are strongly attached to the body. But if we consider this attachment, we will see that it is a potential source of suffering."_

One of the main reasons this concept doesn't work is that it is based on judgment – the judgment that desire is "bad" and desirelessness is "good." It also contains resistance to desire; and as many others have pointed out, to desire desirelessness is a desire in itself.

The truth is there is nothing "wrong" with desires and no reason to resist them or try to live without them. We are free to desire anything and everything we want. Our desires make life interesting and exciting. The problem only starts when we become attached to having those desires fulfilled. In other words, you cannot be attached to realizing or achieving your desires, so that whether you realize or achieve your desires or not has no effect on your happiness or state of mind. It is not the _desire_ that needs to be detached from; it's the attachment to its _fulfillment_.

I can well imagine the Buddha knew this and taught this, but his followers either didn't get it, or couldn't do it. So they made "desire" the focus of detachment rather than the attachment to the outcome of the desire. As quoted above...

"For every desire there is a corresponding attachment, namely, to the object of desire."

No, no, no! The attachment is to the _fulfillment_ of the desire, not the desire itself! All suffering comes from being attached to the fulfillment of the desire, and being disappointed when that desire is not realized despite all the meditation, prayers, visualization and hard work. The suffering is _not_ because of the desire itself.

Jed McKenna says it very simply...

_"All attachments to the dreamstate are made of energy. That energy is called emotion. All emotions, positive and negative, are attachments."_

I have any number of desires I'm not attached to. For example, I have a strong desire to build a 65-foot wingsail catamaran where I can spend my days as a butterfly sailing the oceans, scuba diving, and enjoying the company of the whales and dolphins. But I am not attached to having that desire fulfilled; that will depend entirely on what my _Infinite I_ wants me to experience. I also don't have the catamaran as a plan or a goal or an agenda, nor am I doing anything to try to make it happen other than what excites me in the moment. I simply have fun with the desire, dream about it, enjoy drawing designs of the boat, and am curious to see if the ripples of my universe flow in that direction.

_"No spiritual teaching that talks about non-attachment has any right to. None of them are talking about this. 'Cultivate a sense of detachment,' they say. A sense of detachment? What planet are they from? They have no idea whatsoever what detachment means. They seem to be talking about detaching from your desire for a BMW or for Mr. Right. Try detaching from what you love! From what you are! From everything that characterizes your membership in the human race! And that's just for starters."_

* * *

Very briefly, you can consider yourself "attached" to someone or something when that someone or something can affect the way you feel. In other words...

...you are attached to another person if something they do or say determines your happiness or lack of it.

...you are attached to something when _it_ has to be "right" in order for _you_ to feel "right."

...you are attached to a false layer of the ego when it defines who you think you are.

The detachment we're most interested in is detaching from these layers of the ego that have led to a misconception of who we really are, and that detachment happens automatically as we do our spiritual autolysis and discover who we are _not_. We don't have to actively pursue or practice detachment; those layers of false identity simply fall away, stripped off the onion and left for trash. As we find out who we are _not_ on our way to finding out who we really are, we detach from those identities in the process. _That_ is detachment.

_"You can forget about non-attachment.... You're putting the cart before the horse. Non-attachment isn't a key to liberation, it's a by-product."_

* * *

One of the many wonderful gifts I have been given by other Players in my life happened when I was fifty-five years old and fell in love with a woman who would soon start to act like my mother. For the first time in my life, she allowed me to closely examine the attachments I still had to both my parents, even though they were already dead at the time. Needless to say, these were less than pleasant memories. In fact, I cried almost every day for a solid year as I processed this part of my childhood.

In addition to loving her, I became very attached to this woman, to the point that how I felt was totally dependent on what she did or said every minute of every day. It was so bad that if she didn't kiss me exactly right when we said goodbye in the morning, I was devastated and my day was ruined.

It was the Al-Anon program that helped me break these attachments. Al-Anon doesn't teach that you have to leave an alcoholic you love, but that you can detach from them and the effects of their alcoholism, still love them, still live with them, and still be happy regardless of anything they do or say. Once I was able to detach from my parents and my fiancée, my happiness was no longer dependant on anything she said or did, or how she kissed me, and I grew to love this woman unconditionally.

So when I talk about "detaching," it doesn't mean you have to give up anything except your attachment. It doesn't mean you can't continue to love someone; it means you can no longer be attached to that love, or to that someone either. It doesn't mean you can't continue to want nice things in your life; it means your joy in life can't be attached to having those nice things. It doesn't mean you can no longer find total pleasure in your favorite meal with a good glass of wine; it means your happiness can't be dependent on whether you get it or not.

It means letting go of the cave and your fellow prisoners in order to experience what it's like outside the cave. It means letting go of the movie theater and your fellow Human Children and Human Adults in order to find out what is true and who you really are.

_"The process of awakening looks like it's about destroying ego, but that's not really accurate. You never completely rid yourself of ego – the false self – as long as you're alive, and it's not important that you do. What matters is the emotional tethers that anchor us to the dreamstate; that hold us in place and make us feel that we're a part of something real. We send out energetic tendrils from the nexus of ego like roots to attach ourselves to the dreamstate, and to detach from it we must sever them. The energy of an emotion is our lifeforce, and the amount of lifeforce determines the power of the emotion. Withdraw energy from an emotion and what's left? A sterile thought. A husk. In this sense, freeing ourselves from attachment is indeed the process of awakening, but such attachments aren't what we have, they're what we are._ "

Think of it this way... in order to become a butterfly, a caterpillar has to give up the attachment to its body, the feel of the earth as it crawled along, the leaves it enjoyed eating, the 4000 muscles it possessed, the hair it used as protection, and so on. But letting go of those attachments is well worth it when the end result is a butterfly with its bright colors, light body, wings to fly, and the magnificent taste of flower nectar.

Being a caterpillar is a wonderful experience; being a butterfly is total freedom.

* * *

In Book Two of his _Enlightenment Trilogy_ , called _Spiritually Incorrect Enlightenment_ , Jed McKenna includes the spiritual autolysis writings of one of his students, named Julie....

_"My mind is haunted, my thoughts are haunted. I am haunted; possessed, plagued with demons! My mother is here! My unborn children are here. My future is here, my dreams. Everyone who means anything to me, good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant, is here. How do they all fit? How could I have not seen them right away? Of course they're here. This is where they are. My attic is me, there is no place else. Whether or not they have physical counterparts out in the real world is meaningless to me, just as the fact that I might be a real person in the real world is meaningless to them. Perception is reality. I am possessed by my own perceptions; not by things and people, future and past, but by my perceptions of them. These are my connections, my attachments. Maybe all I really am is the sum of all these connections, these fearful longings and graspings. What is an attachment anyway? It's a belief, that's all. A strong one maybe, but just a belief. And yes, Jed, I know: No belief is true. The pen is mightier than the sword, isn't it Jed? You wrote about a sword, but that was just a metaphor. It's the pen. Spiritual Autolysis is the power of the pen, which is the power of the mind, the power to see, to see clearly. Yes, I will kill these people inhabiting my mind. I will kill them by clearly seeing the attachments that keep them here. I can see those attachments now. I can see the emotions at work and I am starting to see them for what they are. I am starting to understand of what stuff this prison of self is really made."_

* * *

I hope it is clear now what you are going to do as you go through daily life in your cocoon, first processing any physical or emotional discomfort that arises in your interactions with other people and the world "out there," and then searching to find and let go of the false knowledge and emotional attachments that have formed layer upon layer of your ego, defining who you thought you were, until you discover who you really are.

" _The external searching is only one part of the story. The other part is the internal part; the slow, painful sloughing away of self, layer by layer, piece by piece. Spiritual self-debridement. Some layers of selfhood just fall away, some tear off in long strips or flabby hunks, and some have to be meticulously, pain-stakingly; surgically removed. Everything I had become in decades of life I now had to unbecome. All I really was was belief, so everything I believed I now had to unbelieve. My new world was cold and bright and honest, but my old mind was still full of a lifetime's accumulation of belief and opinion and false knowledge and emotional attachment – all the noxious debris and toxic waste that make up the ego – and it all had to go. That's a process and it takes time. The world might be annihilated in a flash, but self takes a little longer to burn away. There's no bomb for that. There's no pretty Latin phrase or Sanskrit mantra that annihilates self quickly or painlessly. There's no realization or insight or epiphany that wipes away the false self in a flash. Those who claim to have awakened in a flash are the most deluded of all..._

_"It should now be easy to understand that a true and complete spiritual teaching can be conveyed in three words [Who Am I?], while those that require entire libraries of books and legions of graybearded scholars to decrypt them can succeed only in producing ever more darkness and confusion. It should now be clear that there are no cases of instant enlightenment, that awakening is not the result of a single epiphany, but of a long, arduous journey wherein every step itself is a long, arduous journey. It should now be obvious that all dogma, beliefs, doctrines and philosophies are strictly dreamstate phenomena with no independent existence in truth. It should now be easy to look at any teacher or teaching, at any book, at any spiritual or religious assertion, and to instantly know its exact and certain value. It should now be easy to look at every internal thought, belief and emotion and know without the possibility of error what is real and what is imagined. It should now be clear that there is no room for debate or opinion with regard to what is true and what is false. The distinction is absolute: Truth exists. Untruth does not."_

* * *

Robert's Process and Spiritual Autolysis. I'm personally not aware of any other processes from other scouts that I know for a fact will work in your transformation into a butterfly. But, of course, you are always free to come up with your own process if you think you've found something "better." I would caution you to remember that any process developed inside the movie theater will _not_ work in the cocoon, simply because it's based on incorrect premises (i.e., the movies are real). Now the opposite of everything is true, so you would be wise not to try to bring any process into the cocoon with you.

Furthermore, any process you come up with inside the cocoon is going to have to include certain specific elements, like...

...acknowledging there is no objective, independent reality "out there" and the experience you're processing isn't real

...locating and letting go of all judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears

...withdrawing, disconnecting, or switching off any power assigned to a person, place, or thing within the hologram

...expressing appreciation to the people, places, and things in your hologram for their role in your process, and to your _Infinite I_ for its creations

...identifying and detaching from the layers of the ego that were created while in the movie theater, always with the purpose of finding the true answer to "Who Am I?"

In addition, any process must be done unilaterally and alone; that is, it cannot depend on anyone or anything else outside of you saying or doing anything at all. You initiate and run the process regardless of what anyone else does in your experience. No one else has to change anything; you just change your own reaction or response.

It's also worth repeating and emphasizing that while you can do Robert's Process in your head, spiritual autolysis will only work well if you actually write it down. The problem with doing stuff in your head when it comes to dealing with your fears and the layers of your ego is that the ego, threatened with its annihilation, will begin fighting back, finding ways to justify your fears, fooling you into thinking the layer of ego you found is true and necessary to hang on to. So if you're going to try to come up with your own process, you will have to find a way to get it out of your head, establishing some physical distance between you and what you are looking at.

Who knows? You might, indeed, come up with a new process that can benefit others as well as you scout a new path across the Rockies. Then you can write a book about it! Meanwhile, the processes from Robert Scheinfeld and Jed McKenna now have proven track records, so we know they work; and that's saying something. In just two years, I have seen the kind of results using this combination of Robert's Process and Jed's spiritual autolysis that many people spend lifetimes in meditation and visualization and still never achieve. As they say in some 12-Step programs _, it works if you work it, and it's worth it._

* * *

If you apply yourself diligently and faithfully to whatever workable process you choose, I can tell you where you will end up.

You will drop all judgments of everyone and everything. You will see nothing any more as "good" or "bad," "better" or "worse," "right" or "wrong," "good" or "evil."

You will let go of all the beliefs you ever held, including the belief of who you thought you were.

Your opinions will cease to exist and not be replaced.

You will eliminate fear from your life, including the fear of death and non-existence, knowing everything is perfect exactly the way it is and there is never anything to be afraid of.

In short, you will become...

...nothing – a fully realized _no-self_ , as others have called it – nothing but joy and appreciation and serenity of being.

" _Truly I have attained nothing from total enlightenment_ ," said the Buddha.

A butterfly is nothing; and like the butterfly, you will finally be free – free of judgments and beliefs and opinions and false knowledge and ego attachments; free of drama and conflict and pain and suffering; " _free to fly, fly away, high away, bye bye_."

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Wikipedia – Detachment – Back to reading

2. Thich Thien-An. Zen Philosophy, Zen Practice, pp. 104-112 – Back to reading

3. McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

4. Cachalote.org – Back to reading

5. Julie's spiritual autolysis in The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

6. McKenna, Jed. Ibid. – Back to reading

7. Wikipedia – Al-Anon – Back to reading

8. McKenna, Jed. Id. – Back to reading

9. Julie's spiritual autolysis in Ibid. – Back to reading

10. McKenna, Jed. Id. – Back to reading

11. Giles, James. The No-self theory: Hume, Buddhism, and Personal Identity \- _"The no-self theory lets the self lie where it has fallen. This is because the no-self theory is not a theory about the self at all. It is rather a rejection of all such theories as inherently untenable."_ – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 16

JUDGMENT

Back to the Table of Contents

After hours upon hours of spiritual autolysis, I finally wrote something that is true:

Judgment is the source of all pain and suffering.

This might only be true for me, but I doubt it.

If you're like I, and many other people, you've had a personal experience confirming this truth you might not have recognized....

Have you ever thought you cut yourself with a sharp knife, maybe while slicing vegetables, but you weren't sure; so you stopped slicing and took a look, and then you saw the blood. When did the pain start? Not until you saw the blood and judged the injury to be painful. The cut itself caused no pain until you looked at it.

There are many other examples of people not experiencing very painful injuries because they were focused on something else, like saving a child from a car accident; and only when they stopped to take a look at themselves – or when a doctor or nurse had them focus on their own injuries – did they feel any pain. This, of course, is one of the theories behind firewalking and other popular motivational ceremonies.

Normally, however, we judge an experience to be painful – either physically or mentally or emotionally – as soon as it happens, or maybe even before it happens. We also go through life pre-judging that any number of different experiences would be painful if we should ever encounter them. But it is the judgment that creates the pain and suffering and not the experience itself.

All holographic experiences created by all _Infinite I's_ for all Players are completely neutral. It is only the Player's judgmental reactions and responses to those experiences that cause the drama and conflict and pain and suffering.

There, in a nutshell, is the answer to the age-old question of why "God" would create pain and suffering in the world. "He" doesn't. "We" do, by our reactions and responses to totally neutral holographic experiences.

* * *

Inside the movie theater, the lives of the Human Children are based entirely on judgment. They thrive on the concept; they literally cannot imagine living without it, and some object strenuously and even get angry at the very suggestion. How could one possibly survive without judging everything to be "good" or "bad," "right" or "wrong," "better" or "worse"? Of course, they can hardly imagine living without the drama and conflict, either; nor do they seem to want to.

All the world's major religions and spiritual philosophies have judgment at their core as well. "God" is the supreme judge, for example, and "He" will judge you and your thoughts and actions to determine whether you will have an eternal life of bliss or damnation.

All social mores ("any given society's particular norms, virtues or values," or "conformity to the rules of right conduct") are based on judgment of what is "right" or "wrong" behavior; and we have set up "judges" to make those determinations in court.

But as Human Children make their way to the back of the movie theater, after a while some of them start to question judgment as a concept. Perhaps it's not so "good," so "right," so "spiritual" to be so judgmental of other people. However, not even the Human Adults talk in any serious way about giving up judgment entirely.

All of this is totally understandable and perfect, since judgment is the glue that keeps the illusion going in the first half of the Human Game.

Letting go of judgment entirely is perhaps the most radical step any human being can take, which is why this book is subtitled, "A New & Radical Approach to Spiritual Evolution." It is also a most joyful way to live, for without judgment all experiences "out there" are seen as perfect and nothing needs to be changed, fixed, or improved.

Now that you're in the cocoon, I'm suggesting it's time to let go of judgment altogether if you want to play the second half of the Game and complete your metamorphosis into a butterfly. So let's take a closer look at "judgment" itself.

Like " **consciousness** ," apparently it's not easy to define "judgment" simply and precisely. Here's what the American Heritage Dictionary says (taking out the legal and religious definitions):

1. The formation of an opinion after consideration or deliberation

2. The mental ability to perceive and distinguish relationships; discernment

3. The capacity to form an opinion by distinguishing and evaluating

4. The capacity to assess situations or circumstances and draw sound conclusions; good sense

5. An opinion or estimate formed after consideration or deliberation, especially a formal or authoritative decision

_6. An assertion of something believed_.

...and here's what the Merriam-Webster Dictionary says:

1. A formal utterance of an authoritative opinion

2. The process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing

_3. A proposition stating something believed or asserted_.

At first glance, you might say these definitions have nothing to do with "right" or "wrong," "better" or "worse," "good" or "bad," since those particular words are hardly mentioned. But take a closer look....

"Drawing sound conclusions" requires a judgment that there are "unsound conclusions." Having "good sense" requires a judgment of there being "bad sense."

"Distinguishing relationships," "evaluating," "comparing" all imply and require a "comparison" – usually between "right and wrong," "good and bad," "better or worse," or "good and evil."

Let's also talk about what judgment is _not_. Saying someone is fat, for example, is not a judgment if it is a true statement of fact. It becomes a judgment if there is the slightest belief the person is "wrong" for being fat, or needs to fix, change, or improve something about their "fatness." Unfortunately, it's very easy for the ego to try to hide and justify a judgment by claiming it is really just a factual observation; so in the early stages of the cocoon it is often wise to treat all thoughts and statements like this as judgmental.

The truth is that we are all taught from a very young age to be judgmental; that is, to form a belief and opinion about someone or something by deciding first which is "better or worse." In fact, we're taught it's "good" to have "good judgment," and to know the difference between these dichotomies.

This is called "duality – the state or quality of being two or in two parts."

We all live in a state of duality as long as we are inside the movie theater.

* * *

If "duality" is "the state or quality of being two or in two parts" – the dichotomies of "right and wrong," "good and bad," "better and worse," "good and evil" – then living without judgment, without dichotomies, should be called "non-duality." However, that word has been taken to mean something else by a lot of different groups inside the movie theater. In fact, non-duality seems to have become the latest New Age fad, although it's been around for a long time, beginning with the Upanishads ("advaita") through ancient Greece to Buddhism and Yoga and Zen.

Apparently it has more to do with "Oneness," or monism ("reality is a unified whole and all existing things can be ascribed to or described by a single concept or system)....

_"I no longer see myself as a separate individual living in a world of separate objects but feel more like a wave belonging to the one ocean of energy. There is a non-dualistic view of the world that has replaced the previously held, vastly smaller self-identity. Dropping the concept of being a separate self caused an energetic expansion from the limited boundaries of the body outwards into everything. A child-like joy and wonder has replaced the adult critic. Somehow it is recognized that life's essence is a single unity."_

I had trouble getting my head around that one since I don't speak New Age. (We'll talk more about this in Chapter Twenty-Five, "Are We All One?", in Part Three of this book.) But then I ran across....

_"Nonduality is a hard concept to grasp at first because the mind is trained to make distinctions in the world, and nondualism is the rejection of distinction."_

The rejection of distinction... Hooray! I thought. Looks like someone gets it... and then he added....

_"Not to say that all differences are eliminated, merely transformed into relationships."_

Oops, sorry, I don't get it. What does that mean? Where are the lines talking about our daily judgments, which themselves are relationships between "good" and "bad," etc.

Then I discovered there are thousands upon thousands of pages of books and other stuff written about non-duality. Apparently it is quite a difficult subject to grasp and explain.

But I don't see the problem or the need for all these books. What is there to explain? Give up judgment, let go of the dichotomies, stop living in duality. End of story.

Well, if we can't call the state of living in non-judgment "non-duality," what can we call it? Unfortunately, I couldn't come up with any really cool term, so I settled on "neutrality" for now.

* * *

It seems the feeling we get the longer we remain a Human Adult – that deep-down wondering whether being so judgmental is such a "good" thing after all – has some basis in truth. Thanks to quantum physics and the Human Game model, we now know there really is nothing to judge. The holographic movies we call our lives are not real, so what good does it do to judge them? The experiences we have, created for us by our own _Infinite I_ down to the smallest detail, are perfect exactly as they are and totally neutral, so what's to judge? And who are we to think we have the ability or the authority to decide what is "right" or "wrong" anyway, and on what basis?

No, spirituality is not required any more in order to give up judgment; you don't have to "believe" it's "better" to be non-judgmental. Although it might sound very radical, once you truly understand how our holographic universe works, letting go of all judgment is simply the next logical step.

Many people, when they get to this point, can't go any further. "It's absolutely necessary," they say, "to know the difference between right and wrong. Without judgment, someone could do anything they wanted and the world would be in chaos."

My first response is to ask, "How do you think we've done so far _with_ judgment?" Isn't it judgment that has led to wars, violence, persecution, discrimination, inquisitions, witch hunts, jealousy, divorce, murder, torture, oppression, and a whole list of other traditional human activities?

It's true we've been told and taught and believed for the entire first half of the Human Game that judgment is absolutely necessary; and rightfully so, because it was essential for the first half to work. But just like we finally discovered the Earth is not flat, nor is it the center of our solar system, it's time to recognize our own judgment is the basic cause of our resistance to our experiences and therefore all of our pain and suffering. The opposite of everything is true: It's the judgment that causes the chaos, not the lack of it!

Besides, "someone could do anything they wanted and the world would be in chaos" is a statement that assigns power "out there" and ignores the fact that the "someone" and the "world" referred to are part of your individual and unique holographic experience, and nothing more. They have no independent, objective reality.

I ran across this essay on the Internet written in strictly Christian terms by someone who's clearly not an "expert" in anything (like me), and maybe his phrasing can help others understand this better....

" _God is all-loving, so there cannot be a favored mode of conduct (or thought) in the eyes of God. If there is no favored mode of thought and conduct, then _all _thought and action must be allowed by God. Therefore there is no universal standard of thought or conduct, only personal ones. If all thought and action are allowed, there can be no "right" way or "wrong" way. There cannot be any judgment of thought or action, otherwise there are conditions placed on thought and action. If there are no conditions placed on thought and action by the Creator, then there is no right or wrong! Right and wrong must then be a human concept, not a universal one. Jesus said: 'Resist not Evil' (Matthew_ _5:39 ) Jesus understood universal law. There is no evil, only contrast and diversity of thought and conduct. Evil, just like right and wrong, is a judgment, usually based in fear, placed upon the thoughts and actions of others. The more something is resisted, the more energy is supplied to it, and the larger and more powerful it becomes._"

* * *

Speaking of Christianity, one of the biggest "hints" and "clues" that letting go of judgment is the next radical step for human beings is in plain sight in the first Book of the Holy Bible...

_"And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil."_

Please note that in the middle of the Garden of Eden there was not just one tree, but _two_ trees: the Tree of Life, and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Then God created man and woman...

_"And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed."_

Please note that there was no judgment from the man or woman about their nakedness at this point. Unfortunately, this lack of shame didn't last long. A snake convinced the woman, who then convinced the man, to eat some fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil...

_"And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons."_

Eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil marked the beginning of judgment for the human race. Not only did the man and woman judge that being naked was now something to be ashamed of and to hide, but they also judged that they had done something wrong. From this point forward, life on Earth would be full of the dichotomies of "good and evil," "right and wrong," "better and worse," and it remains that way today.

So much for the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, which is just another name for the Tree of Judgment.

What about the Tree of Life? What was its effect on man when he ate from it?

Unfortunately, according to the Bible, God drove man out of the Garden of Eden before he could eat from the Tree of Life, leaving the human race to live its entire existence thus far in judgment.

_"Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken."_

That's how the Bible begins. But how does it end?

From the last Book of the Bible, "Revelation"...

_"To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the Tree of Life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God."_

So mankind is finally going to get to eat from the Tree of Life, if he "overcometh." But "overcometh" what?

In its context, the meaning is clear: "overcometh" judgment, "overcometh" what started with eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Contrary to popular opinion, the Book of Revelation is not about the end of the world, or even the final battle between Good and Evil that Good wins (because it doesn't); and although it is usually talked about as "Armageddon," that word only appears once in the entire book (at Revelation 16:16) and probably refers to an actual location some sixty miles north of Jerusalem.

Instead, the Book of Revelation is about the realization (the "revelation") that "good" and "evil" are judgments and the battle is to let go of both of them. In fact, the Bible can be seen not only as the story of mankind's evolution, but as the storyline of a single individual (but that metaphor would fill another book in itself).

Or, if you prefer the poet Rumi:

" _Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field_."

You'll recall that The Field is defined as "a field of all possibility" – not just possibilities that are "right" in someone's judgment, but _all_ possibilities. It is from this Field that an _Infinite I_ creates an experience for its Player, and considering its source (The Field), that experience cannot be "right" or "wrong" either.

* * *

You might be thinking I am falling into my own trap and judging "judgment" to be "wrong." Not so. Judgment was the perfect tool to play the first half of the Human Game, for it created the maximum amount of limitation. It simply doesn't work in the second half. It is part of the caterpillar whose " _larval structures are broken down."_

"But... but... but," you say, "how can I look around at the horrible things going on in the world – crime, poverty, disease, starvation, destruction of the Earth, war, violence, child abuse, domestic abuse, and so on – and say those things are okay, that they're 'neutral,' that I'm not supposed to judge them? I don't want those things in my life, or anyone else's for that matter. Where's your heart? Where's your compassion for the pain and suffering of others?"

Good questions – too good to pass over lightly in this chapter. So if you are really having trouble getting past this point, I recommend you read Chapter Thirty-Two, "Compassion," in Part Three of this book, and then come back here to continue.

As far as "not wanting those things in your own life," that's called "resistance," which we will discuss very soon.

* * *

It had been a long time since I had felt any discomfort at all. I was simply appreciating life with great joy, living on the Mediterranean coast of Spain and writing this book.

Then, as I was working on this particular chapter, I mentioned to a good friend a news item that Spain was trying to outlaw the Muslim burqa as France had recently done. I was amazed when he responded with full and unequivocal support for this, and then launched into a list of judgmental opinions about the burqa, Muslim men, Islam, and religion in general. I had listened patiently to other similarly judgmental opinions and beliefs on different topics over the last month, as I knew he was deep into his own process and these things would naturally come up; but this was more than I expected.

I had three immediate reactions: incredulity, disappointment, and sadness.

When I first met this friend, he was an angry, arrogant, highly opinionated and depressed man, with a very big and stubborn ego, but a huge and generous heart and a willingness to learn and grow. I say all that as an observation and none of it as a judgment, since I didn't think he was "wrong" for being that way and had no need or desire for him to change; besides, I was exactly that way myself while a Human Adult inside the movie theater. But I witnessed many changes in him over the past year of our friendship, mainly as a result of his studying the work of Robert Scheinfeld, reading all three of Jed McKenna's books, and numerous conversations we had on the subject of the holographic universe and becoming a butterfly. I really could not believe what I was hearing this time, since he seemed totally comfortable with these opinions and showed no sign of recognizing their fully judgmental basis or the need to process them if he truly wanted to live in neutrality.

For about fifteen seconds I _did_ judge him for this incident and wanted him to change, but quickly remembered he, too, was only reading a script my own _Infinite I_ had written _for me,_ and that his thinking and behavior were indeed perfect – which meant _I_ had to run the Process on my own discomfort and do my spiritual autolysis on it.

I saw clearly that my disappointment came from the thought – and fear – that I really was alone. My friend, in his interest in self-realization, had given me hope that it was possible for friends to go through this process together, to support each other, to even form a community of cocoons, and then later butterflies. We had spent hours talking about building a catamaran together and inviting others to sail with us for week-long workshops to get a taste of what it was like to live in non-judgmental neutrality. Even though I knew making plans like these was pointless – that my _Infinite I_ was in charge of creating all my experiences and not me – I totally enjoyed the daydreaming and loved the camaraderie. But how, I thought, could I continue talking like that – talking about providing an environment of non-judgment for others – with a man who was still justifying his own judgments.

My sadness was based on the question – and fear – that this whole subject was too much for anyone to really "get" if _he_ didn't get at least that much after a year of working with me on a daily basis; and that I may be totally wasting my time writing this book. I imagined Jed McKenna looking at him and saying that Maya was winning the war for his ego – that most people don't make it through the cocoon stage – and sadly wondered what would happen to him if that were true.

"I can't go back, can I?" asked Neo.

"No," Morpheus answered.

* * *

So I ran Robert's Process on all this emotional discomfort, and then I used spiritual autolysis to expose the underlying fears. This is where I found layers of my own ego, one of them still thinking this book might have an impact on someone else, rather than just being my scouting report; another layer of ego, despite what I told other people and all evidence to the contrary, still feeling arrogant enough to think it just might be possible to help each other as friends through this process.

I had to let go of my attachment to the boat and the future it represents; I had to let go of my attachment to this book and any result it may or may not have for anyone else; and I had to let go of my attachment to my friend's own spiritual progress toward becoming a butterfly. After all, there must be a lot of different routes one can take over the Rockies to get to the Pacific Ocean, and I wouldn't – and couldn't – judge which way was "right" for my friend. I have to trust _his_ _Infinite I_ knows what's best for him a lot better than _I_ do, and the fact I would like him to take the same route I did just because I think it's safer or easier than the one he appears to be taking has no relevance.

I silently expressed my appreciation to my friend and let go of it all – the boat, the camaraderie, the ego that still wanted to be a good enough writer that other people would understand what I was saying and might be able to use it successfully in their own lives.

In this case, I didn't have to disconnect from my friend at all. All I had to do was let go of my own attachments and layers of ego, and then he was free to be who he was as well, without needing to be who _I_ wanted him to be.

There's another possibility I had to consider too, that my friend really _does_ understand neutrality, but he had to "play dumb" so I could have the experience I needed. He might wake up and know exactly what neutrality is and means, and wonder how he could have possibly said those things today. That's what friends _can_ do for each other – play the difficult and dangerous roles in their movies, giving each other the special gifts that may not be possible from anyone else.

As Human Children and Human Adults inside the movie theater, we lived our entire lives in judgment, in duality. It's not going to be easy to change that pattern, and it probably won't happen quickly; and _you_ are going to be the one who has to spot your own judgments that need to be processed if you want to become a butterfly.

* * *

Sometimes this can be very difficult. Sometimes the ego, sensing a real threat to its continued existence, will try anything and everything to slow you down or divert you; and sometimes that takes the form of some very inviting detours from the path with some intriguing logic whispered in your ear. For example, after a year of processing in his cocoon, one friend was about to enter his "dark night of the soul," getting close to a powerful layer of his ego which he would then detach if he continued in that direction. He was having a lot of emotional discomfort, and his ego was able to convince him to stop doing any kind of process and take a "detour." So he started challenging the theory of the "consciousness model" itself – _not_ by testing it, which is always appropriate, but by intellectually arguing with it, as if by proving some part of it "wrong" he could escape processing his anger and judgments. But there never is any escape; the way out is the way through.

If this model is anywhere close to the truth, unless he finds a new route across the Rocky Mountains I'm not aware of, this friend will most likely have to pick up where he left off and then face what he could not face the first time. But there's nothing "wrong" with that, with taking a break for a while, with standing still and regrouping and gathering new strength, like stopping on the way up Mt. Everest and resting at a base camp, getting used to the altitude and the cold. But why not simply admit that's what you want to do and not give the ego additional power by listening to its diversions and using them as an excuse for not continuing at that moment?

Learning to differentiate the sound of your ego from the sound of your own thoughts takes practice and radical honesty. The only help I can offer is that whenever the "thought" is trying to take you away from discomfort, it is the ego, no matter how rational or attractive the "thought" may be. There's a big difference between taking a "detour" off the path out of the pure excitement and joy of exploration, and doing it in order to escape discomfort.

Your friends might help by playing a part in the movie created for you by your _Infinite I_ to bring these judgments and the voice of your ego to your attention, if you're willing to hear it. But _you_ are going to have to be completely awake and aware and vigilant, and listen to your thoughts and the words you say very carefully, to detect these judgments when they come creeping in, to have the courage and honesty not to try to justify or deny or minimize them, and to process them instead. You've heard of a "bullshit detector?" Now you're going to need a "judgment detector" to use on yourself; because no matter what route you take over the Rockies, if you are serious about becoming a butterfly, you cannot hang on to your judgmental beliefs and opinions. That simply will not get you where you say you want to go.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Wikipedia – Mores – Back to reading

2. Dictionary.com – morality – Back to reading

3. American Heritage Dictionary – judgment – Back to reading

4. Merriam-Webster Dictionary – judgment – Back to reading

5. The Free Dictionary – duality – Back to reading

6. American Heritage Dictionary \- monism – Back to reading

7. NonDualityInfo.com – Back to reading

8. Walker, A., in a book review of One: Essential Writings on Nonduality __ – Back to reading

9. Id. – Back to reading

10. MacLean, Kenneth. The Vibrational Universe – Back to reading

11. The Holy Bible, King James Version, Genesis, 2.9 – Back to reading

12. Ibid., 2.25 – Back to reading

13. Ibid., 3.7 – Back to reading

14. Ibid., Genesis, 3.23 – Back to reading

15. The Holy Bible, King James Version. Revelation, 2.7 – Back to reading

16. Gotquestions.org – Armageddon – Back to reading

17. Jalal al-Din Rumi. From the poem _Out Beyond Ideas_ in The Essential Rumi – Back to reading

18. McTaggert, Lynne. The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe \- p. xxi – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 17

BELIEFS & OPINIONS

Back to the Table of Contents

Dr. Bruce Lipton began his scientific career as a cell biologist. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Virginia at Charlottesville before joining the Department of Anatomy at the University of Wisconsin's School of Medicine in 1973, where his research on muscular dystrophy focused on the molecular mechanisms controlling cell behavior. In 1982, Dr. Lipton began examining the principles of quantum physics and how they might be integrated into his understanding of the cell's information processing systems. In the process he discovered that the brain of a cell is not in the nucleus, which is what I was taught in school, but in the membrane – the outer surface, or "skin" of the cell.

"His research at Stanford University's School of Medicine, between 1987 and 1992, revealed that the environment, operating through the membrane, controlled the behavior and physiology of the cell. His discoveries, which ran counter to the established scientific view that life is controlled by the genes, gave rise to one of today's most important fields of study, the science of _epigenetics_. Many subsequent papers by other researchers have since validated his concepts and ideas."

_Epigenetics_ is to biology what quantum physics was to physics; it has turned our age-old understanding of biology upside down; or, as I've put it many times already, the opposite of what we have always believed is true. From _epigenetics_ , we now know our perception of the environment controls our DNA, not the other way around.

Bruce is a brilliant man and a good friend. Unfortunately, he still believes what's "out there" – the human body in particular – is real; but despite that, through his best-selling book, The Biology of Belief, and his live seminars called The Biology of Perception _,_ he offers some very important insights into the effects of beliefs on our lives.

" _How we see life determines our behavior, and since perceptions can be wrong, it is more accurate to say that beliefs control biology – what you believe creates your life_."

The first example he offers is what is called the "placebo effect."

It is normally used as a medical term, meaning a patient is given something neutral – like a sugar pill – and yet it makes them feel better. There is no chemical reason in the placebo for it to have any effect at all on the body, but it does somehow. That "somehow" is because the patient _believes_ it will, and nothing else. It is the patient's belief that changes their biology and their behavior.

" _Statistics reveal that one-third of all medical healings are the result of the placebo effect_."

But this "placebo effect" does not have to be limited to medicine or pills. In fact, it is in operation a lot of the time as we, the Players, believe something – anything – is good for us that is actually neutral, and yet it makes us feel better.

This, of course, is true for all homeopathic remedies as well. Homeopathy is still based on a belief that taking something from "out there" – "natural" though it might be – will have an effect "in here."

The other side of the coin, and not nearly as well known, is the "nocebo effect." This is when a patient – or a Player – believes something, anything, that is actually neutral is harmful to them; and it makes them feel bad or worse, when in fact there's nothing in the nocebo that can hurt them at all.

" _If a doctor tells you that you have a disease, or the doctor tells you that you're going to die, and you believe the doctor because he's a 'professional,' the belief will give you a disease or will cause you to die_."

The most famous "nocebo" currently may be HIV. According to Dr. Kary Mullis, Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, and over two-thousand other medical and scientific researchers, health care professionals, and journalists, there is not one scientific paper that proves HIV causes AIDS. Dr. Peter Duesberg, a member of the United States National Academy of Sciences and professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley, was one of the world's leading retrovirologists in the late 1970's and early 80's, who received acclaim early in his career for research on oncogenes and cancer. Dr. Duesberg says there's nothing about HIV that can do damage to a human body, that HIV is a "harmless passenger virus." According to the staff report of a U.S. Congressional Sub-Committee, and the Office of Scientific Integrity of the National Institutes of Health, and the Office of Research Integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services, the man who first claimed that he discovered HIV and that HIV was the cause of AIDS was guilty of "scientific misconduct", and his research was called "of dubious merit" and "really crazy."

In fact, HIV _fails_ every traditional and accepted scientific test to be called the "cause" of AIDS, and even the AIDS experts admit that more than half of those dying from AIDS are dying from organ failure - mostly liver failure - as a side effect of the antiretroviral drugs they are encouraged to take, and not HIV.

But if someone believes what we're being told by the mass media, that HIV causes AIDS and will result in death, then the stress caused by that belief is enough to destroy their immune system and give them AIDS, and they will die, according to Dr. Bruce Lipton.

In both cases – the placebo and the nocebo – it is the Player's belief and not the actual experience that controls their perceptions and determines their behavior.

" _If you believe that something will be good for you, it will be good; and if you believe that something is harmful, it will be bad_."

Dr. Lipton stresses the fact that a lot of our beliefs are "learned" from other people, and those learned beliefs can actually override our natural perceptions and instincts. For example, all babies know how to swim when they are born. But as they grow up and watch the reaction on their parents' faces whenever they get near water, the baby learns to be afraid of water; and then it needs to be taught how _not_ to fear water and to swim again at the proper age – when their parents are no longer afraid.

Bruce likens our perception to a camera, taking snapshots of the "physical world" our brain has projected "out there." But, he says, our beliefs act like filters on that camera, filtering out certain frequencies and changing the picture that comes in; and he offers a very good example of this during his workshops when he puts one slide on the screen that makes no real sense...

#

... and has the audience put on a pair of glasses he provides with green lenses and look at the picture. Here's what they see...

#

Then he has them trade the green lenses for glasses with red lenses and look at the same picture, and here's what they see...

(You can watch a very short (poor quality) video of this here.)

In exactly the same way, Dr. Lipton concludes, our belief filters determine how we perceive our world and therefore how we react and respond to our experiences.

" _Life has everything in it, but you will only see what you have belief filters to see_."

* * *

#

Take a quick look at this playing card....

It's a red six of spades, right? Or did you see it as something else?

There's a classic psychology experiment where this red six of spades, along with other normal playing cards, is shown to a group of people who are writing down the cards they see. Many people cannot see a red six of spades the first few passes through the cards; some can never see it as a red six of spades, even when holding it in their hands.

_"The conclusion is that our beliefs can filter and affect what data comes in through our senses. We can end up seeing and hearing only what we believe. The stronger the belief system, the more powerful will be its ability to filter out data that contradicts those beliefs. You were taught and you believe that seeing is believing. It should be the other way around. You have come to understand that metaphorically speaking, the eye is a camera that passively collects light and brings it in to record photographs of what is actually out there, with no alteration of the sense data going on. What I am proposing is that in actuality the reverse of that simple phrase is true: believing is seeing. What I am proposing is that the eye is a camera that filters out most of the electromagnetic spectrum to only record visible light, and that the camera is controlled by the photographer who chooses consciously or unconsciously what to photograph."_

In this case, we start with a belief that a red six of spades doesn't exist, so it's difficult to see it for what it actually is; and for some with very strong and controlling belief systems, it's virtually impossible.

* * *

I deliberated long and hard about whether to include this next example, because it is so controversial; but it is also the most perfect example I can think of to illustrate how our beliefs affect what we perceive "out there" and prevent us from seeing "what is," and how those beliefs can contribute to so much pain and suffering in our lives.

Even if you are not a Christian, you probably know Jesus was crucified and died on a cross, to rise again from the dead three days later. Over the last 2000 years, many people have believed this and based their lives on it.

Here is the scripture from the Holy Bible on which this belief is based. (Even if you know this story already, please read it again now.)...

Luke 23:50 " _And, behold, there was a man named Joseph...._

52 This man went unto Pilate, and begged [for] the body of Jesus.

53 And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid....

55 And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.

56 And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

24:1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.

3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.

4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye him that liveth among the dead?

6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,

7 saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

8 And they remembered his words,

9 and returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.

10 It was Mary Mag'dalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.

11 And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.

12 Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.

15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.

16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.

17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?

18 And the one of them, whose name was Cle'opas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?

19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:

20 and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, today is the third day since these things were done.

22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;

23 and when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.

24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not....

28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.

29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.

30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.

31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.

32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,

34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.

35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.

36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.

41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?

42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.

_43 And he took it, and did eat before them_." __

But what if this were actually the account of a man who was taken down from his cross after just three hours, still alive, moved to a secret hiding place where he was treated for the wounds on his hands and feet and head and side, survived, left three days later under his own steam, and met his disciples on the road as he was walking out of Jerusalem.

In other words, I want to ask you to read the exact same Bible passages again, without the prior belief that Jesus died on the cross....

Luke 23:50 " _And, behold, there was a man named Joseph...._

52 This man went unto Pilate, and begged [for] the body of Jesus.

53 And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid....

55 And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.

56 And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

24:1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.

3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.

4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye him that liveth among the dead?

6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,

7 saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

8 And they remembered his words,

9 and returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.

10 It was Mary Mag'dalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.

11 And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.

12 Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.

15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.

16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.

17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?

18 And the one of them, whose name was Cle'opas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?

19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:

20 and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, today is the third day since these things were done.

22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;

23 and when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.

24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not....

28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.

29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.

30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.

31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.

32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,

34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.

35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.

36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.

41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?

42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.

_43 And he took it, and did eat before them_."

"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." I cannot imagine how that could be any clearer. Jesus is saying he's alive, that this was his actual physical body, not a spirit; and to prove it, he ate meat with them.

There are even more telling phrases in the other Gospels. In Matthew, for example...

Matthew 28:5 " _And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. 6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him_."

...and...

Matthew 28:10 " _Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me....16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him_."

A resurrected body would not need to "go before" anyone else to any place. It would just appear there spontaneously. Nor would it need to tell anyone to go someplace to see it.

The Gospel of Mark says....

Mark 15:43 " _Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus. 44 And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead_."

The synonym for "marvel" is "wonder" – Pilate _wondered_ how Jesus could be dead, because he had only been on the cross for three hours, and crucifixions normally would take a lot longer than that to kill someone. "The Romans used crucifixion as a prolonged, agonizing, humiliating death.... It is possible to survive crucifixion, if not prolonged, and there are records of people who did."

...and...

Mark 16:1 " _And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him_."

To "anoint" means "to smear or rub with oil or an oily substance," which even today is a common medical treatment for the wounds of a body that is still alive.

...and...

Mark 16:9 " _Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. 10 And she went and told them that she had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. 13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them_."

"And when they heard that he was _alive_ "!! How can that be misunderstood?

...and...

Mark 16:14 " _Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen_."

And in the Gospel of John...

John 19:39 " _And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes_."

Nicodemus was "a wealthy and popular holy man reputed to have had miraculous powers."

Myrrh and aloes were not just used for embalming, but as medicine for wounds. Myrrh is currently used in some liniments and healing salves that may be applied to abrasions and other minor skin ailments. In alternative medicine, it is said that mixing myrrh gum into vinegar increases its ability to relieve pain. The Greeks and Romans used aloes to treat wounds, as we also do today.

...and...

John 20:6 " _Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, 7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself_."

The cloth around Jesus' head where he had wounds from the thorny crown was in a different place than the rest – not likely if his body resurrected and left his "linen clothes" lying there.

...and, finally...

John 20:19 " _Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord_."

I need to add that it's quite likely Jesus' disciples really thought he had died on the cross, so I can understand their astonishment to find out he didn't. But even the Bible, when read without a prior belief, is quite clear that Jesus survived his crucifixion.

For 2000 years, Christianity has been based on the belief Jesus died on the cross (many say "for our sins") and rose again from the dead. Think of the impact this one belief has had on the world, and on many of us personally. Wars have been fought, millions have died, and millions more have lived lives of guilt and shame based on this belief.

But there is ample evidence this belief is not true, and even the Bible does _not_ say it happened that way, unless you read the Gospels with that belief already in place; and then you still have to make some very big assumptions. (Remember Occam's Razor, that the best answer is the one with the fewest assumptions.)

So we start with a judgment that we are all, as human beings, innately defective (the Roman Catholic church calls it "original sin"); we form a belief – despite the evidence – that a Son of God has been resurrected from the dead in order to save us from our sinful nature; and we are of the opinion that anyone who doesn't believe in Him cannot make it into Heaven.

It makes for a very interesting game!

* * *

Here's another quick example of how this judgment-belief-opinion cycle happens....

Let's say you judge prostitution to be "wrong," for whatever reason. You then form a belief that the government should do something to stop it, and you hold the opinion that any man or woman who engages in prostitution is acting immorally.

And let's say your _Infinite I_ creates an experience for you in your cocoon where you come face to face with this, such as your husband or wife or lover or son or daughter or good friend – someone you love and respect and admire – gets arrested on charges of prostitution, either soliciting or selling sex for money.

I can imagine this might cause you some discomfort, severe discomfort if it were your husband or wife, I'm sure. So this is your chance to run Robert's Process first, to take the "heat" and "discomfort" and "reality" out of the situation, and then run Jed's spiritual autolysis to discover the false belief, false information, and layers of ego that resulted from this judgment.

Most of the time you can simply follow the discomfort – the emotion or pain, for example – to uncover the judgment. In this example it should be fairly easy to find the underlying judgment, that you consider prostitution to be "wrong," and to use spiritual autolysis to ask, "Is that true?"

But sometimes it's not that easy; the judgment is not so readily available, buried more deeply, hiding from your awareness. So instead you can follow the emotion to find the belief, and then follow the belief to find the judgment. Or, if the belief is also hard to get at, follow the emotion to find the opinion, then follow the opinion to find the belief, then follow the belief to find the judgment. You get the picture.

Remember what Jed McKenna said...

"All attachments to the dreamstate are made of energy. That energy is called emotion. All emotions, positive and negative, are attachments."

...so consider every emotion you have that is less than total joy, excitement, and enthusiasm to be a signpost – a red flag – leading you to your opinions, beliefs, and judgments.

In fact, you can do this for any opinion or belief at any time, without needing your _Infinite I_ to create a catalytic experience for you. If you hear yourself offering an opinion – any opinion – look for the belief that led you to that opinion, then look deeper for the judgment that led to the belief.

Remember that all judgments, beliefs and opinions were formed inside the movie theater and are based on incorrect premises; so they are all untrue.

This may be difficult for some people to accept who have become very attached to their opinions with multiple layers of ego for each one, piled on top of each other. But it is exactly these attachments, and letting go of them, that are the point of this whole process in the cocoon.

* * *

"Okay," you might say, "I can see living without judgments; I can even imagine living without beliefs; but living without opinions? Isn't that kind of... boring? Do you just accept anything and everything that is put in front of you in your hologram without question or discrimination?"

Yes, and no. Yes, you accept anything and everything that is put in front of you, since your _Infinite I_ created "anything and everything" for you it wants you to experience, down to the smallest detail. It's true I no longer live with judgments and beliefs and opinions, except those occasional times when one might pop up for me to identify and process. But, no, life is far from boring, and I do have my preferences.

Jed McKenna started off Book Two of his _Enlightenment Trilogy_ saying, "I hate L.A." I never could figure out whether Jed was expressing a judgmental opinion, or just using some literary license for effect.

I don't "hate" anything; but I "prefer" a lot of things.

What's the difference? It can be very subtle and tricky at times, but I'll try to explain.

An opinion, based on a belief and judgment, includes resistance to the opposite opinion. A preference has no resistance, but is merely an expression of choice.

I prefer not to play Tic Tac Toe, unless I am engaged with a very young child. I find the game very boring _for me_ , since it's unwinable when playing with anyone who has even the slightest clue of what's up. Now that I know a game like backgammon exists, I prefer to play it instead. I have no resistance to playing Tic Tac Toe, no judgment about it, no beliefs about it, no opinions about it as a game. I just prefer not to play it under most circumstances.

Likewise, I prefer not to play the judgment game, the belief game, the opinion game, the fear game, the first half of the Human Game inside the movie theater. I have no resistance to playing any of it if the appropriate circumstances were to arise and it was clear my _Infinite I_ was creating that for my experience at the moment; and I have no judgment about it, no beliefs about it, no opinions about it other than how perfect a game it was at one stage of my metamorphosis, and how perfect it is for other people who still want to play it.

But I also prefer not to spend a lot of time with people who are playing the first half of the Human Game. I enjoy living in a way that I'm not surrounded with the constant noise of other people's drama and conflict. I prefer not to talk about Tic Tac Toe. I prefer not to listen to Tic Tac Toe players who spend the vast majority of their time talking about the game, rehashing prior games they played, accusing someone of cheating in a game they seem to have lost, describing in detail how much of a victim they are when they lose, or even discussing new strategies of how to win a game that's unwinable. But I don't judge them. In fact, I totally support them to continue doing exactly what they're doing; I just don't find it at all interesting or fun to be part of that myself.

I prefer silence to the sound of motorcycle engines. I prefer not to drink alcohol because of the way it makes me feel. I prefer to sail than motorboat. I prefer to eat protein and vegetables rather than carbohydrates. I prefer warm weather to cold, sun to snow, the beach to the mountains, and less (or no) clothes to more. I prefer watching a movie to small talk, a concert to a cocktail party, a solitary walk listening to good music in my earphones to a dinner party. I prefer diving forty feet deep in the ocean to walking on land.

Those would be my choices if I could choose. But I will be wherever my _Infinite I_ wants me to be and experience whatever my _Infinite I_ wants me to experience with full joy and without hesitation or judgment or resistance, because I totally trust my _Infinite I_ , and that is my job as its Player in the Human Game.

I would caution especially those who are new to their cocoon to be very wary of this opinion-preference thing. Judgments are sometimes hard enough to spot for processing without making it any harder; and it seems so easy to say, "I prefer not to be around that kind of person," and think it's a statement of preference when in fact it's a statement of judgment.

I found it a lot easier in the beginning to simply assume that any preference I wanted to express was in reality an opinion based on a judgment and belief, and process it accordingly. After about a year, when I was more comfortable with letting go of my judgments and beliefs and opinions – when I felt fairly secure I could spot when my ego was trying to slip something by on me – I allowed myself to have preferences again.

But I remain very vigilant and still challenge my "preferences" on a regular basis to make sure I am not resisting anything, for _resistance_ is the key.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. BruceLipton.com – Back to reading

2. Lipton, Bruce H. Intelligente Zellen \- in German and English – Back to reading

3. Wikipedia \- Placebo – Back to reading

4. Lipton, Bruce H. Id. – Back to reading

5. Wikipedia \- Nocebo – Back to reading

6. Lipton, Bruce H. Id. – Back to reading

7. The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis – Back to reading

8. Kary Mullis video – Back to reading

9. Duesberg, P. HIV and AIDS, Science 260: 1705 – Back to reading

10. Hilts, Philip J. "Federal Inquiry Finds Misconduct by a Discoverer of The Aids Virus," _New York Times_ , December 31, 1992; Crewdson, John. _Chicago Tribune_ , "In Gallo Case, Truth Termed a Casualty," January 1, 1995 - Back to reading

11. Brink, Anthony, The Pope of AIDS \- Back to reading

12. Culliton, B.J. "Inside the Gallo Probe," Science 1990; 248:1494-1498 - Back to reading

13. Davis, Stephen, Wrongful Death: The AIDS Trial – Back to reading

14. Reisler, Ronald, et al. Grade 4 Events Are as Important as AIDS Events in the Era of HAART – Back to reading

15. Lipton, Bruce H. Id. – Back to reading

16. Ibid. – Back to reading

17. Ibid. – Back to reading

18. Bruner, Jerome S. and Postman, L. On the Perception of Incongruity: A Paradigm – Back to reading

19. author unknown, link now dead – Back to reading

20. The Holy Bible, King James Version. The Gospel according to St. Luke, Chapters 23 & 24 – Back to reading

21. The Holy Bible, King James Version. The Gospel according to St. Matthew, Chapter 28 – Back to reading

22. The Holy Bible, King James Version. The Gospel according to St. Mark, Chapters 15 & 16 – Back to reading

23. Wikipedia \- Crucifixion – Back to reading

24. Merriam-Webster Dictionary \- anoint – Back to reading

25. The Holy Bible, King James Version. The Gospel according to St. John, Chapters 19 & 20 – Back to reading

26. Wikipedia \- Nicodemus – Back to reading

27. Wikipedia \- Myrrh – Back to reading

28. Wikipedia \- Aloe – Back to reading

29. Baigent, Michael et al. Holy Blood, Holy Grail – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 18

RESISTANCE

Back to the Table of Contents

After more hours upon hours of spiritual autolysis, I wrote something else that is true:

_What you resist persists_.

I think I first heard that from L. Ron Hubbard – one of his "genius" moments as a scout many years ago – before others started saying it, and before he got lost on his way. So it is not something I came up with; but I did test it, and I did find it to be true.

In searching the Internet, I see references to this sentence attributed to a lot of different sources and groups, from the famous psychiatrist Carl Jung (although I could never verify he said it), to EST (although Warner Erhard took the basics of EST from L. Ron Hubbard), to Neale Donald Walsch in _Conversations with God_. It was also used in Rhonda Byrne's _The Secret_. But as is necessary inside the movie theater, the true meaning and application were altered so the Human Adults who try to use this gem of wisdom for their own self-improvement would find themselves going deeper into limitation instead.

_"Every time we resist something, we are spending our energy in the wrong way. It is much better – and much easier indeed – to stop resisting what we don't want and focus on attracting what we do want. Instead of resisting poverty, and struggling to make more money to prevent it by getting a second job, try to focus on attracting prosperity by having positive thoughts while working. If you hate your job and are thinking about this every morning, you are resisting going to work. Therefore, it will be harder to get a promotion or find a better job."_

_"The Law of Attraction simply says that you attract into your life whatever you think about. Your dominant thoughts will find a way to manifest."_

By now you should be able to see what is not true about this interpretation of "what you resist persists," how it was twisted inside the movie theater to make it unworkable for a Human Adult (as all things must be). But just in case, let me state it clearly....

The premise is that you should stop thinking negative thoughts and focus on the positive thoughts, because if you focus on the negative thoughts, they will persist and make it impossible for the positive thoughts to manifest. Fair enough?

But that entire premise is based on a judgment: "negative" thoughts versus "positive" thoughts. It is also based on the untruth that you can manifest anything in your holographic universe, much less attract the "positive" things if you focus on them.

The truth is that all resistance is based on a judgment; or put the other way, resistance would not exist without a prior judgment. If you judge something to be "negative," you resist it. So the solution is not to try to deny or ignore the "negative" thoughts and focus on the "positive ones," but to eliminate the judgment altogether that is the source of the resistance.

You want a "better" job? Stop judging the one you have and you will stop resisting it at the same time.

Although I don't want to state this as "Truth," it has been my experience that as long as I judge and resist something, I stay in that experience. Only when I stop judging, and therefore automatically stop resisting, is it possible for my experience to change.

My first example of this came when I was twenty years old. I was deep into Peter Marshall at the time, and I called God, "The Chief," as he did. I was in Caracas, Venezuela, helping to create the Spanish equivalent of _Up With People_ for that country.

I had been with _Up With People_ about a year and spent most of that time as the drummer; but I wanted to be more than that. I wanted to be a musical director, and I kept judging my drumming to be "less than" what I wanted and was capable of, and therefore resisted it.

One day as I was going to sleep in Caracas, I had a major transformation and said a very sincere prayer....

"Chief, I have made a decision. If you want me to be a drummer for the rest of my life, if that's the best way I can serve you and the rest of mankind, I will do it – joyfully, gladly, and enthusiastically. I promise." And I meant it.

...and I gave up all judgment and resistance to drumming at that moment.

The very next day I received a call from the CEO of _Up With People_ , telling me he was creating a third cast and asking me to come back right away to be its musical director.

I could give you numerous other examples like this from my life, but I think you get the point.

* * *

_What you resist persists_.

In fact, the more you resist "negative" thoughts and try to replace them with "positive" thoughts, the more "negative" thoughts you will have. Isn't that what it says? By trying to focus only on the "positive" thoughts, aren't you automatically resisting the "negative" ones? And then won't they persist?

It's like the old game, "try not to think about elephants." Of course, elephants are all you can think about then.

That's why _The Secret_ and the "Law of Attraction" don't work; or at least, it's one reason. The other reason is that they were part of life inside the movie theater and therefore couldn't work except to create more limitation.

For example, there seem to be a lot of "peaceworkers" springing up all over the place these days. But if you resist war, war is what you will get; if you resist violence, violence is what you get; and if you are a "peaceworker," you are resisting war and violence, despite what some of them will try to say. So as more and more "peaceworkers" appear, we get more and more war and violence in the world. Just read the news these days.

Peaceworking is a great distraction from the real issue – you and your judgments and the layers of your ego. Mahatma Gandhi said "be the change you wish to see in the world." He didn't say, "be the change you wish to see in the world, and then go out and change the world," or "then go out and try to make everyone else to be the way you are."

It's really pretty simple. Only when you stop judging war and violence to be "wrong" or "bad" and understand and embrace them as perfect, along with everything else in your hologram, will you stop resisting them, at which point they no longer need to persist.

Jesus said...

_"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away."_

So it's not just about not resisting. It's about embracing what you resist; about not trying to fix or change or improve something, but about realizing it is all perfect, war and violence included. That's what "what you resist persists" means.

And what is there to resist? Every experience you have, down to the smallest detail, was created for you by your _Infinite I_ , so why resist it? What are you actually saying when you resist an experience? You're saying your _Infinite I_ got it wrong and you don't trust it.

* * *

By now I'm sure you understand that writing this book is part of my own spiritual autolysis, so it doesn't surprise me when an experience pops up in my hologram to point out something to me to process as well as include it in the book.

As I was writing the last chapter, some family of my friend had come to visit for a couple weeks, along with their four-year-old son who had a habit of screaming at the top of his lungs, both in anger and in excitement. The screams were piercing, magnified by echoes off the walls and surrounding buildings. They hit a pitch that would shatter a glass.

The parents did nothing when he screamed, except laugh a little. When I asked my friend, he said this was the way Germans and Swiss bring up their children, that only the UK would try to "suppress" their kids from screaming.

Okay, I can accept that different cultures have different attitudes toward childrearing, and I had no judgment about it, although it's not the way I raised my children nor would raise them today (which has nothing to do with "suppression"); and I had also recognized from the time I spent living in Europe that Europeans in general were often more oblivious than Americans to anyone else around them, whether they were driving a car, or standing in the center of a busy doorway, or ignoring the effects of a screaming child on those around it.

So I _did_ resist these screams for a few minutes, especially since I was trying to finish Chapter Seventeen. Then I took some moments to process my resistance, realizing I was attached to this ego layer of being an author and needing my space to write. Once I had let go of that, I was free to follow the flow and decided my _Infinite I_ wanted me to take a break before starting the next chapter in the book.

Fortunately, the day was cooler than usual for the middle of the summer, cloudy with a few thunderstorms building; so I could take a walk for the first time in several weeks without the scorching heat, something I really enjoyed doing. I donned my mp3 player and set off down the beach along the Mediterranean toward town, listening to Abba's greatest hits, doing my own version of the boogie to _Take a Chance on Me_ and _Dancing Queen_.

It was so great to be out walking again, something I appreciated very much and took as a reward from my _Infinite I_ for the hard work I had been putting in on the book. But it got better the further I walked. The wind and the Sea were picture-perfect, and I met beautiful women along the way, one after the other. One woman was so beautiful I had to stop and tell her so, which she answered with a smile and a "Thank You," in English!

At the far end of the beach, I sat at a café and had a couple ice teas and some potato chips – a treat I had not indulged in for a little while. I was so happy to have taken this walk and experienced so much pleasure and enjoyment and refreshment for both body and mind.

Of course, I expressed my appreciation (silently) to the four-year-old boy, his parents, and my friend for playing their parts to allow me to see and detach from another layer of my ego, and to get me away from my computer and out on the beach again; and to my _Infinite I_ for the amazing and beautiful experience; and to myself for be willing to examine my resistance as soon as it came up. I wouldn't have missed that walk for the world.

This time I doubt the boy will stop screaming.... Wow! He didn't stop completely, but the frequency is a _lot_ less, and now it doesn't bother me nearly as much.

* * *

I had a friend many years ago who made an obscene amount of money scraping old rubber off airport runways. Around the age of fifty-five, he was diagnosed with cancer and given two years to live.

Rather than resist the cancer, he decided to accept his fate and wanted to spend his last two years giving something back to the country he loved so much and had given him such incredible opportunities. He started a magazine called "The Duck Book," educating his readers about the true nature of the U.S. economic system, and sold lifetime subscriptions for $10 – his lifetime, not yours. He figured he'd be dead in two years, so what the hell.

Two years later his cancer had disappeared. Now he had a new problem: thousands of lifetime subscriptions for $10 to honor. That was solved when he was assassinated within a few years in Costa Rica, having become too much of a threat to the world's financial cartel. But that's not the point, obviously. The point is... well, you get it, not resisting the cancer....

* * *

In 2009 I delivered some workshops in Europe on the topic of the Holographic Universe and the Human Game. Naturally, as part of any workshop, you want to have some exercises the participants can do to make the theories real to them, to give them a personal experience of the truth you're trying to impart.

There were three particular exercises I used the most and highly recommend for you as well. The first is to take one day – just twenty-four hours – and do nothing that doesn't excite you to do. No "must do's," no "have to do's," no "should do's." You are allowed to do only what you _want_ to do and brings you joy. You might find it's not as easy as it sounds. After all, we have a lot of habits hanging over from our days in the first half of the Game – beliefs that might pop up in the process. But just remind yourself it's an experiment for a day and nothing more and see what happens. For example, see if your _Infinite I_ gives you a sign or rewards you in some special way, just to let you know it works, and will work for you as well.

The second exercise is, again, to take just twenty-four hours and not try to do anything to "make something happen," but to only react and respond to the experiences you encounter, that come to you. No goals, no agendas, no objectives. No thinking you have to do anything at all to make things happen in life. Simply react and respond to the experiences your _Infinite I_ creates for you and see what kind of experiences you get, and whether they bring you more joy and happiness than you're used to.

The third exercise is my favorite. For one day – just twenty-four hours – the participants in my workshops were only allowed to say "Yes" to whatever appeared in their hologram. They had to take the word "No" out of their vocabulary and just say "Yes" to everything that came their way. After all, if our _Infinite I_ is creating each and every experience we have, down to the smallest detail, why not simply say "Yes" to whatever it creates and see what happens?!

You can't imagine the resistance I encountered....

" _What if someone asks me to do something I don't want to do?_ "

"You say 'Yes' and do it."

" _But what if someone else tries to take advantage of me, knowing I can only say 'Yes,'?_ "

"That's another fear you'll have to face."

" _But what if it's illegal or immoral?_ "

...and the objections went on and on, all based on fear and judgment; and of course, that was the whole point, exposing these fears and judgments for them to see – that, and giving the participants the experience of saying "Yes" and realizing they could trust their _Infinite I_ and the experiences it would create for them.

Then I found out there was a movie released in 2008 which I had never seen (or heard of, since I had been isolated in Portugal the whole time) called _Yes Man_ with Jim Carrey. When I finally saw it, I thought it was one of the most brilliant films ever made, and one of the best "hints" and "clues" ever presented to Human Adults inside the movie theater. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it.

Some have tried to minimize its "Yes" message, claiming the guru character, Terrence, retracts his own advice in the end. But that's not so at all.

Here's the set-up.... Jim Carrey believes he has made a covenant to only say "Yes," and if he breaks that covenant, something bad will happen to him. He did, in fact, break the covenant and is in the hospital with Terrence after a car accident. (Watch the video here.)

"Terrence, you have to remove the covenant. It's killing me!"

"There is no covenant. There never was. I was just riffing."

"Riffing?"

"Well, I had to say something. You were being difficult, embarrassing me in front of my crowd."

"So the whole 'Yes' thing is all bullshit?"

"No, you just don't know how to use it, that's all."

"Yeh, I do. Say 'Yes' to everything – real tough to grasp."

"No, that's not the point. Well, maybe at first it is, but that's just to open you up to it, to get you started. Then you're saying 'Yes,' not because you have to, or because a covenant tells you to, but because you know in your heart that you want to."

That's the whole point: Why wouldn't anyone want to say "Yes" to any experience their _Infinite I_ creates for them? Why would anyone want anything else than the experience they are having right at the moment, knowing their _Infinite I_ designed it especially for them, down to the smallest detail? Why would anyone resist anything in their hologram?

Actually, I can think of a couple reasons why, and pretty good ones at that.

The first is that they simply don't trust their _Infinite I_ , and you can't blame them. After all, they just spent their entire lives inside the movie theater having one experience after another they weren't too thrilled about, or at least wished would be "better" and thought there was something about them that needed to be changed, fixed, or improved. Said more simply, a lot of first-half experiences resulted in drama and conflict and pain and suffering – which we now know were caused by our own judgments and resistance. But we have a history and a habit of saying "No" to those experiences and assume those kinds of experiences would continue, even multiply, if we started saying "Yes."

Another reason is that we're control freaks – all of us, to a certain degree. We spent a lot of time inside the movie theater trying to control everything – our lives, our money, the people around us, the dangerous world we live in, and so on. Of course, it was just an illusion that we had any control at all over our experiences other than our reactions and responses to them.

Saying "Yes" requires giving up that illusion of control, requires releasing the steering wheel, letting go of the tiller, going totally with the flow with no resistance.

But at the same time, starting to say "Yes" and making a new habit out of it is the easiest and fastest way to gain trust in your _Infinite I_ , once you see where it leads you. It may also be one of the most powerful and effective ways of transforming into a butterfly. So give it a try for twenty-four hours and see for yourself....

Saying "Yes" is the antidote to resistance.

Twenty-four hours is not a lot to ask – no lifetime commitment. But if you like the results of these experiments, you might want to do them for forty-eight hours next time; then for a week, and then forever. And remember, at the end of each day be sure to express appreciation to your _Infinite I_ for your experiences, and appreciation to yourself for your role as its Player and for the great job you did.

One note: you cannot do any of this "wrong." There's no trick, nothing you have to be careful of, no way to screw it up. So don't worry. As Nike used to say, "Just do it."

* * *

When my younger son was sixteen, we had a heart-to-heart, which he may or may not remember. I told him if he woke up one morning and was overcome with excitement to rob a bank, I wanted him to do just that, to go out and buy the mask and the gun (a toy one, preferably) and anything else he needed, and walk up to that bank as if he were going to rob it; because, I suggested, it didn't mean he would actually have to rob the bank, although I was not able to judge whether that would be a "good" thing or a "bad" thing in the end.

But there were other possibilities. For example, he could be walking up to the bank putting his mask on when a movie producer (this was in Hollywood) would come by, stop him and say, "You're exactly what I've been looking for. I have this part in my movie for someone just like you, and I'll pay you $100,000 if you'll take the role."

In _Yes Man_ , Jim Carrey realizes he would never have met the love of his life if he had not said "Yes," even though it was under the false impression he had to because of some covenant. (Watch the video here.)

* * *

You remember the day, a few years ago, when I sat in my apartment realizing I had no job, no income, no money, no prospects, no lover, and so on; and I totally surrendered to the reality of "what was" without emotion or regret or any desire to change my situation.

Now I can say, and you will understand, that I let go of all resistance to my holographic experience at that moment.

Within three days, Robert Scheinfeld appeared in my hologram (via one of his DVD "home transformation systems") and showed me the door in the back of the movie theater; at which point I walked through it.

I can look back on that experience now from a slightly different perspective, that when I stopped judging and resisting, I became useless to my _Infinite I_ as a Player in the first half of the Human Game. I was no longer going to have or send back to my _Infinite I_ emotional feelings in reaction or response to experiences of limitation and restriction, which is why I was playing the first half of the Game to begin with.

I can imagine my _Infinite I_ has other Players it created that may still be playing the first half of the Human Game, who can continue to feed it the feelings it wants of imperfection. It didn't need me, and I wasn't going to suit its purposes any more in that role. Instead, I began to feed it the feelings from the second half of the Game – what it feels like once you're over the top of that first hill on the rollercoaster and into the next part of the ride – which are just as valuable to it, I'm sure.

This doesn't mean that anyone can fake non-resistance in order to fool their _Infinite I_ to take them into the second half of the Game just so they can get out of the first half, which they still don't like. You can't deny or ignore or suppress resistance; you must totally and willingly let it go out of your system entirely. You must be willing to fully embrace every moment of every experience created for you by your _Infinite I_ , and love and appreciate it no matter what it is.

As long as you judge and resist playing the first half of the Human Game, you can never move into the second half. As long as you resist total surrender, letting go of all judgments and beliefs and opinions, you can never make it to the Pacific Ocean. As long as you resist giving up your identity as a caterpillar, you can never become a butterfly.

More easily said than done, perhaps, and very scary....

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Baruhovich, Tamara. What You Resist Persists – Back to reading

2. Pavlina, Steve. The Law of Attraction – Back to reading

3. The Holy Bible, King James Version. The Gospel according to St. Matthew, 5.39-42 – Back to reading

4 _._Yes Man – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 19

FEAR

Back to the Table of Contents

Inside the movie theater, I prided myself on not being afraid of anything, or not much at least. Talking dolls in horror movies were one big exception. For some reason it scared the crap out of me when a plastic doll's head would turn, its mouth would open, and it would speak. Freaked me out.

Once I got inside my cocoon, I had to be honest that I was, and had always been, afraid of a lot of things. We all are. In fact, fear is not only the first emotion we ever feel as a baby, but the basis of all judgments, beliefs, and opinions we form during the first half of the Human Game.

According to the Holy Bible, fear was also the first reaction Adam and Eve had after they ate the apple from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil....

_"And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And Adam said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid."_

If I tried to list out all the things I have been afraid of, it might take a whole book in itself. But there are a few fears I want to look at more carefully that you might have also experienced from time to time, so maybe you can relate.

* * *

Some fears are quite obvious, and everyone cops to them. "I'm afraid to walk through Central Park at night." There's no shame being afraid of _that_ , is there? It just makes good sense, right? Well, not actually....

Others are more subtle, perhaps, as well as more pervasive; and there are a few that remain unspoken but almost everyone seems to share. Not many people would come right out and say, for example, they are afraid of life itself, believing the world is a dangerous place to live. But that _is_ the case with the vast majority; and they teach that to their children.

Just think for a minute what people go through to protect themselves from what's "out there" – both physical protection and mental or emotional protection.

Home security, for example, is a multi-billion dollar business. I have always found it strange someone could think a few small pieces of metal on a door or window – called a "lock" – could protect them from anyone who really wants to rob them, as if a serious burglar would arrive at the house, find the door locked, and say, "Oops, door's locked. Can't rob this house tonight."

Of course, a lock also ignores the fact that if your _Infinite I_ wants you to be robbed – if that's the experience it has decided to create for you at the moment – you're going to get robbed regardless of a few pieces of metal. The same applies to surrounding your house or car or loved one with "white light," which is also based on fear. Besides, if you do get robbed, perhaps your _Infinite I_ is simply helping you get rid of some of the attachments that keep you from becoming a butterfly.

On the other hand, it isn't the lock that keeps a burglar away from your house; it's your _Infinite I_ who is _not_ creating the experience of your being robbed. I don't care how much a burglar wants to rob your house, or what kind of high-tech tools he has to penetrate your security, he's not getting in if that's not what your _Infinite I_ wants. He won't even be able to get through an unlocked door.

You will soon begin to understand this and have enough experiences under your belt to start demonstrating your trust in your _Infinite I_ by ceasing to lock anything – home, car, briefcase, locker, whatever; and it's important, once you've let go of some of these lesser fears, to behave differently in your daily life, acting on your new understanding and letting go of old habits along with the fears.

Seat belt laws, helmet laws, laws that require children to ride in the back seat strapped into a plastic shell, are all based on fear and our attempts to legislate against it. As a child myself, I always rode in the front seat without any restraints, like all other children my age; it's amazing my generation ever made it into our twenties! In the two car accidents I had – one at age sixteen, the other age fifty-seven – if I had been wearing a seat belt I would have died in both cases, needing to be able to move about in the car as it rolled and crushed the roof down onto the frame.

Yes, I might be the exception, or at least that's how the general public could look at it. But the truth is that a seat belt is neither going to protect you or save you if your time as a Player for your _Infinite I_ is over.

I'm not saying it's "wrong" to wear a seat belt; just recognize and admit that it's based on fear – either the fear of a dangerous world or the fear of getting a ticket from a cop – and don't try to justify it as "logical" or "necessary."

* * *

Then there are the mental and emotional protections we put up against fear. Better not commit to something or someone because it might not work. Don't give your heart completely because you never know when you'll be hurt. Keep some money in reserve in case something bad happens.

As I said, I could go on and on, and I won't. You know what you're afraid of now, and you're going to find out all the other fears you're not aware of as you continue your transformation in the cocoon.

But there are two fears in particular I want to address. One you're probably aware of – the fear of death. The other you might not recognize – the fear of non-existence.

There was a famous saying that became popular for a while, "Today is the first day of the rest of your life." I assume it was supposed to convince people to think about each day as a new start, a new beginning, and free them from their past.

Not a "bad" thought, and it might work for some people, especially if they use it to let go of all past judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears. But we both know that's not what normally happens, even though the saying on its surface might be true.

Then came "Live today as if it were your last;" or, as Mahatma Gandhi is reported to have said, "Live as if you were to die tomorrow."

Also not too "bad;" "better" in fact. Most people, thinking today were their last, might put aside all their "should's", "must's", and "have to's," and live their excitement, doing what brings them joy. That, in fact, is how we could live every moment regardless of when we think we will die.

And then there is the Native American saying, "Today is a good day to die."

Can you say that to yourself right now? Are you living your life so if you died today, you would have no regrets, no sorrow, no remorse? Could you meet death today and welcome it with open arms? You will find yourself living exactly that way when you get a little further into your cocoon and start to let go of all the fears you are carrying.

But I'm starting to sound like some other new-age philosophers, suggesting we need to let go of our fear of death; and that's not really what I'm trying to say at all. I'm saying we need to stop resisting death and begin to meet it eye to eye, embrace it, bring it into our conscious awareness on a daily basis, and make it our constant companion. I'm suggesting we need to stop judging death as "wrong" or "bad" and life as "right" or "good," to stop living in duality when it comes to life and death.

It turns out that a lot of minds greater than mine have expressed this very thought. For example, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart...

_"As death, when we come to consider it closely, is the true goal of our existence, I have formed during the last few years such close relations with this best and truest friend of mankind, that his image is not only no longer terrifying to me, but is indeed very soothing and consoling! And I thank my God for graciously granting me the opportunity of learning that death is the key which unlocks the door to our true happiness."_

...and Michel de Montaigne...

" _Death has us by the scruff of the neck at every moment.... To begin depriving death of it's greatest advantage over us, let us adopt a way clean contrary to that common one; let us deprive death of it's strangeness, let us frequent it, let us get used to it; let us have nothing more often in mind than death. We do not know where death awaits us: so let us wait for it everywhere. To practice death is to practice freedom. A man who has learned how to die has unlearned how to be a slave."_

...and Sogyal Rinpoche...

_"Perhaps the deepest reason why we are afraid of death is because we do not know who we are. We believe in a personal, unique, and separate identity – but if we dare to examine it, we find that this identity depends entirely on an endless collection of things to prop it up: our name, our 'biography,' our partners, family, home, job, friends, credit cards... It is on their fragile and transient support that we rely for our security. So when they are all taken away, will we have any idea of who we really are? Without our familiar props, we are faced with just ourselves, a person we do not know, an unnerving stranger with whom we have been living all the time but we never really wanted to meet. Isn't that why we have tried to fill every moment of time with noise and activity, however boring or trivial, to ensure that we are never left in silence with this stranger on our own_?... _When you start preparing for death you soon realize that you must look into your life – now – and come to face the truth of your self. Death is like a mirror in which the true meaning of life is reflected."_

...and the Dalai Lama...

"Awareness of death is the very bedrock of the entire path. Until you have developed this awareness, all other practices are obstructed."

...and Socrates...

"To fear death, my friends, is only to think ourselves wise, without being wise: for it is to think that we know what we do not know. For anything that men can tell, death may be the greatest good that can happen to them: but they fear it as if they knew quite well that it was the greatest of evils. And what is this but that shameful ignorance of thinking that we know what we do not know?"

Even Jed McKenna has a few nice things to say about death as well....

"We have taken death out of life and that allows us to live unconsciously. Death never left, of course, we've just turned away from it, pretended it wasn't there. If we wish to awaken – and that's a mighty big if – then we must welcome death back into our lives. Death is our personal Zen Master, our source of power, our path to lucidity, but we have to stop running from it in a blind panic. We need only stop and turn around and there it is, inches away, staring at us with unblinking gaze, finger poised, every second of our lives....

_"What I am now lives in constant death-awareness, it is suffused throughout my dreamstate being the way fear and death-denial used to be. Death is always before my eyes. I never hide it or deny it or push it away. Death is the diamond heart of my dreamstate being. It is the defining feature that shows me the value of everything I see... Death gives definition to life. Death-awareness is life-awareness. Death denial is life denial.... I love the fact of my death. It has made my life possible. There could have been no awakening without it. It's how I know the value of things. It's how I know what beauty is. It's why I am gratitude-based instead of fear-based. It's also how I know [a Human] Child from [a Human] Adult, asleep from awake. It's how I can look at someone and know if death walks before them or behind.... This isn't about death in the abstract, it's about death in the most personal, intimate sense; your death. Death is the meaning in the dream; the dreamstate shadow of no-self. Death is the boogeyman. You can't kill him or hide from him or get away from him, you can only turn toward him or away from him. If you turn toward him, befriend him, fully embrace him, not superficially, but as your own essential truth, then death is the demon you can ride into every battle."_

Well said!

But please don't misunderstand me. If I'm scuba diving at one-hundred feet and my air supply suddenly stops, I will probably not just sit there and do nothing and let death do with me as it wants. I may; it would depend on the circumstances. But most likely I will try to get to the surface, try to survive, try to find air somehow – not out of the fear of death, but more from instinct than anything else. In fact, while I'm making my way up and thinking I would like to be able to breathe again, I'll be appreciating the beautiful opportunity of dying in a place I love more than anywhere else on Earth – in the ocean with the fish and whales and dolphins.

I had such an experience. When I first lost control of my car, doing 75 mph down the Interstate on cruise control, and it swerved and started to roll over, my first thought was, "Is this how I'm going to die?" I remember asking the question with no emotion and no resistance and no panic; and the answer came back immediately, "No." So I continued to completely relax, not resisting, not trying to stop the rolling, not trying to brace myself against anything, just totally going with the flow and the motion, letting my body move freely wherever the car wanted to take it. In fact, my non-resistance to what was happening is without question the physical reason I was not killed as the roof caved in during the first roll.

Would I have reacted any differently if the answer had come back, "Yes, this is the way you're going to die." I doubt it. In that case, what's the point of resisting?

* * *

Judgments, beliefs, opinions, and the fear of death. I stumbled on a great example I think ties all this together in a nice neat package....

We begin with the fear of death, and therefore fear of anything that can cause that death. Skin cancer can cause death, so we fear skin cancer. We're told, and buy into the judgment that exposure to the sun is "bad," because it causes skin cancer. We believe we have to protect ourselves from the sun and its harmful rays, and we form the opinion that we should never go out into the sun without sunscreen or we'll get skin cancer and die.

Now let's look at the truth. Skin cancer was fairly rare until the 1950's, _the same time_ that Coppertone began marketing its patented sunscreen and created the now-famous Coppertone Girl. Let me say that again... the incidence of skin cancer began rising steadily in the 1950's, which is (coincidentally?) when Coppertone began marketing its sunscreen. Then, as more and more people used sunscreen between 1950 and 2010, skin cancer became "the most common form of cancer in the United States;" and "each year there are more new cases of skin cancer than the combined incidence of cancers of the breast, prostate, lung and colon;" while "since the 1970's, our country has witnessed a 3000% increase in the sales of sunscreen products."

Don't we have to ask, "Does sunscreen actually prevent skin cancer, or cause it?" Isn't it strange that the more people use sunscreen to prevent skin cancer, the more skin cancer we get?

We resisted death, we resisted the sun, and we resisted the skin cancer; and we did all this on a massive scale. As a result of this resistance, we took measures to try to prevent what we feared. The result, of course, was more skin cancer and more death; and we're back to "What you resist persists."

That's how it works inside the movie theater, and it's a good example of what you need to do in your cocoon – work this equation backwards, starting with your opinions and the actions you take based on them, digging deeper to find the beliefs that are under the opinions, finding the judgments and resistance that led to those beliefs, and not stopping until you can clearly state the fear that began it all. Then you do your spiritual autolysis, asking yourself: Is that fear really true?

In this case, you are probably well aware of your opinion not to go out in the sun without sunscreen. It should not be very difficult to quickly realize you hold a belief that you have to protect yourself from the sun and its harmful rays. From there you should be able to find the judgment that exposure to the sun is "bad," because it causes skin cancer. And then it's just a short jump to the fear of skin cancer and death.

_"All emotions are attachments and the energy source of all attachments is fear."_ 12

I want to repeat at this point that the choice is always yours. You can decide you like these fears, that these fears are "right" and justified, and you don't see any point in getting rid of them. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. My only job as the scout is to point out that the choice is between continuing to live in fear, or living free as a butterfly.

* * *

How do you deal with the fear of death? You make death your friend, your partner in life, your daily companion. You welcome it, accept it, embrace it, appreciate it. You understand it, look forward to it, and above all stop judging and resisting it....

_"The contemplation of death, of one's own mortality, is a real and powerful meditation. Death-awareness is true zazen, it's the universal spiritual practice, the only one anyone ever needs and the one everyone should perform, so yes, you'd want to do whatever you have to in order to bring this living awareness into your life. Develop the habit of thinking of death every time you look at a watch or clock, every time you sit down to a meal, every time you go to the bathroom. Take a walk alone every day and think about what it means to be alive, to walk, to see and hear, to breathe. It's not an exercise, it's not something you're trying to make yourself believe like an affirmation. It's something that's real and central to your every thought and act. If you knew you were going to die tomorrow, what would you do today? And why the hell aren't you doing it?"_

Basically we're talking about letting go of our attachments to life itself, peeling off the layers of the ego that determine our identity and dictate our behaviors based on our fear of death. This is a big step you will take in the cocoon.

But not the biggest.

As you process your fear of death and begin to embrace it with excitement, you're going to discover there is a more fundamental fear, a more basic fear, a more hidden and powerful fear on which the fear of death depends and from which it grows. It is the fear of non-existence. Like an iceberg, the fear of death is only the part sticking up above the water, with the fear of non-existence as the biggest part lurking below where you can't see it; and like the Titanic, you're going to hit this iceberg, guaranteed. How you handle the collision with your fear of non-existence will determine whether you survive your transformation into a butterfly or not.

So I want to take a close look at this fear of non-existence.

As we've discussed, when an _Infinite I_ creates a new Player, it gives it free will. Maybe it didn't have to, maybe there's not some ultimatum from The Chief; but that's actually the way the Human Game works best, if a Player has total free will to choose their reactions and responses to the experiences created by its _Infinite I_.

This free will and the process of choosing reactions and responses require a certain level of self-consciousness in order for them to work. This self-consciousness is a personality construct – what we normally call an "ego."

As we react to our fears and form judgments, beliefs, and opinions, we add layer upon layer to this ego – each layer with its own false identity – and the sum total of these layers creates the overall identity, the personality construct we call "I."

Inside the movie theater, the ego has a very important role; and we begin to identify with the ego, begin to think it is who we are. So when we get inside the cocoon and begin to annihilate the ego, one layer at a time, we're liable to encounter some resistance from the ego itself.

In short, the ego will fight for its life, wanting us to believe we are something we are not – it – and that we cannot live without it.

The fear that develops is all about who we are if we are not the ego; in other words, the fear of being nothing without it – the fear of non-existence.

Since the beginning of recorded history until the present time, all religions, spiritual philosophies and belief systems (including the most recent New Age theories) have all had one thing in common: a solution for this fear of non-existence – the idea we are really an immortal soul which will continue to exist after our physical death.

But is that true? Does that stand the test of spiritual autolysis? Is there any proof, any evidence we are really anything more than a temporary self-consciousness that will cease to exist when we die? Is the idea of a soul, and the immortality of that soul, simply our solution to the fear of non-existence, leading to more judgments, beliefs, and opinions? Is it possible "being an immortal soul" is just another layer of ego we need to let go of?

I see myself as a Player in a Game, much like Douglas Hall discovered in the movie _The Thirteen Floor_. I cannot honestly say it's true "I" will survive the death of this body. Perhaps, like Douglas, I might find myself on another level, in another game; but that remains to be seen, and there's nothing to suggest that here and now.

I realize this is all theoretical at the moment, but it will become very real to you as you progress inside the cocoon and start peeling off layers of the ego; and I can guarantee you the fear of non-existence will come up in full force. If you continue with your transformation into a butterfly, you're going to have to answer these questions for yourself.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. The Holy Bible, King James Version. Genesis, 3.9-10 – Back to reading

2. MultiChannel News Net Upstarts Break Into Home Security, June 17, 2007 – Back to reading

3. Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. in a letter to his father, Leopold (c. 1787) – Back to reading

4. de Montaigne, Michel. essay entitled The Laws of Manu – Back to reading

5. Rinpoche, Sogyal. The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying – Back to reading

6. McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

7. TropicalInfo.org – Incidence of skin cancer – Back to reading

8. Wikipedia – Sunscreen – Back to reading

9. Skin Cancer Foundation. Skin Cancer Facts – Back to reading

10. Ibid. – Back to reading

11. Sunscreen: A Recipe for Disaster – Back to reading

12. McKenna, Jed. Id. – Back to reading

13. Ibid. – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 20

WHO AM I?

Back to the Table of Contents

Finally I have the opportunity to tell you how I feel standing where I am, looking at the Pacific Ocean, close to emerging from my cocoon as a butterfly.

For me, life is full of excitement, joy, amazement, appreciation, fun, laughter, surprises, fulfillment, relaxation, and especially peace of mind.

I don't worry about anything any more, particularly money. I know with certainty from direct experience of testing and challenging the model that my _Infinite I_ will provide everything I need for the experiences it wants me to have; and it always has. If it doesn't, I can't have those experiences since I have no power as a Player on this side of The Field to create anything for myself. I may not know where the money is coming from all the time, but I don't need to know. I just know it will be there, often from sources I would never have guessed or planned for. (See Chapter Thirty, "Money," in Part Three of this book.)

I live in total trust of my _Infinite I_. That's easy for me to do because I've had so many experiences that have proven my _Infinite I_ is fully trustworthy, that it loves and cares for me as its representative in the Human Game, and that it will create for me – and always has – exactly what it wants me to experience down to the smallest detail. (See Chapter Twenty-Nine, "Trust," in Part Three of this book.)

I have no personal needs or wants or desires that have to be fulfilled, although I do have my preferences as I explained previously. I never think about what I do _not_ have, but only express my appreciation for what I _do_ have. After all, our needs and wants are often based on judgment – needing and wanting something we don't have because we think it's "better" than what we've got. The truth is, as you let go of judgment and beliefs and opinions, the only thing you ever need and want is exactly what's right in front of you.

I don't plan for the future, and I doubt whether the past ever existed. I have no goals, no agendas, no objectives, nothing I feel I need to do or should do or have to do or must do. I live in the moment.

But I can still dream. Rudyard Kipling said it best in his poem, "If"....

"If you can dream and not make dreams your master;

If you can think and not make thoughts your aim;

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster

_And treat those two imposters just the same."_

I have very minimal drama or conflict in my daily life and virtually no pain or suffering, with one exception I'll speak about in a minute.

I am free of the world of dichotomies, which means I simply do not see "right" or "wrong," "good" or "bad," "better" or "worse," good" or "evil" in my holographic experiences. Only occasionally, when I still need to process some lingering layer of ego in my cocoon, I might judge something "out there" that I encounter; and I trust my _Infinite I_ will create holograms for me in order to see those judgments and process them, so I don't have to go looking for anything. But it's been a long time now since any of those experiences of any consequence have appeared.

The vast majority of the time I see only perfection all around me – not only in the magnificent Earth Environment my _Infinite I_ has created for me, but also in the wars, the violence, and the pain and suffering as well. After all, I know from my direct experiences of testing and challenging the model that none of it is real, but a game being played by consciousness, in consciousness, and for consciousness.

The way I relate to other people, to the world, and to myself is the way I have always wanted to relate. I have a wonderful family and many friends whom I love but am not attached to. I do not belong to any group, but I never feel alone or lonely.

I wake up every morning with excitement and curious anticipation to discover what holographic experiences my _Infinite I_ has in store for me that day.

It's such a relaxing way to live knowing I do not create the experiences I have, and not having to think I must do something, to make something happen. As long as my _Infinite I_ wants me as its Player, I know from direct experience it will provide everything I need to survive, and I don't have to be constantly striving to make ends meet; and it's quite a load off to realize I have never done, and can never do anything "wrong" – that every reaction and response I have to every experience is valuable and wanted by my _Infinite I_ , that no reaction or response is "right" or "wrong" or "better" than any other.

I marvel every day at the beauty, the splendor, the magnificence of my life and my world. Here I am, on the Mediterranean coast of Spain, surrounded with water and trees and beach and blue sky and warmth... I am in constant awe of the hologram and its creator. Quite often I laugh, express my appreciation to my _Infinite I_ , and wonder (rhetorically) how I got here, and about the holographic universe in general. How amazing that each Player has its own unique and independent holographic experience, and yet those individual holograms can interact so seamlessly and perfectly that we can give each other gifts. What a game!

I don't meditate or pray, but try to stay fully awake and aware and observant of the ripples of the Universe going on around me, and follow them with my hands off the tiller. (How's _that_ for a koan?)

I observe – I "witness" – what goes on "out there" with other people, places, and things without getting involved or attached; and although I wish everyone else could experience the joy and peace and serenity of being I now enjoy, I know whatever experience they are having at the moment is perfect for them as well; and that any change in that experience will require a self-determined decision on their part about their reactions and responses, and there is nothing I "should" be doing other than "being the change" I would wish for them.

I have no fear of death and no fear of non-existence. Until proven otherwise, I assume I will cease to exist when this body dies, my role as a Player in the Game being over; and I'm very okay with that. It's been quite a ride while it lasted. But I know all the feelings I ever had as a Player have been transmitted to my _Infinite I_ through our connection and will forever remain part of its infinite nature.

I feel so relaxed and relieved not to be carrying around the layers of ego that were defining me and determining my identity. I no longer have to be the father, husband, ex-husband, son, lover, friend, coach, teacher, mentor, student, musician, politician, pilot, chiropractor, businessman, management consultant, jack-of-all-trades-and-master-of-none, and the list went on forever. Soon I will also let go of "scout" and be completely free to be me, which is nothing.

In short, life is even more than I ever imagined it could be, and who I am now is who I only hoped I could be for many, many years; and I haven't yet finished my transformation into a butterfly, so perhaps there is more to come.

I know I have done my job well and fulfilled my purpose, because, most importantly, I now know who I am and my purpose for being here.

I am a Player for my _Infinite I_ , created by my _Infinite I_ to represent it in the Human Game; and I am totally honored and privileged to be that and nothing more. I have given up trying to be something I'm not. I call it "Serenity of Being" – that state of complete acceptance with total joy and appreciation for "Who I Am."

* * *

I remember a night in 1995 when I was sailing in the east Atlantic Ocean from Madeira to Tenerife in the Canary Islands....

It was a night straight out of a dream. I was standing at the wheel of the _Kairos_ , an eighty-foot wooden schooner, looking up into a midnight sky overflowing with stars. There was no other light, no land in sight. A gentle wind filled the sails, and the only sound was the ship responding with ease through the peaceful waters. From time to time, dolphins would leave green phosphorescent trails as they darted toward the bow.

I was alone on deck. There were twenty others on board that week for a workshop, including a dozen beautiful women who would say "Yes!" if I asked; but at this hour they were asleep below, trusting me to captain them safely to our next destination.

"Could there be anything more perfect?" I thought, turning the wheel slightly to adjust our course.

But with the next thought, the dream was gone.

"So why am I not happy?"

It was true: When I honestly looked at the way I felt in that moment fifteen years ago, I wasn't happy. There I was, fifty years old, surrounded with everything I thought I wanted out of life. In fact, I had more than I had asked for. I had achieved it all and found myself in the very scene I always assumed would deliver me to Nirvana. This was the moment I had been working and waiting for my entire life; and yet I wasn't happy.

Of course, that was while I was still inside the movie theater, and of course I couldn't really be happy then. But it's interesting for me to compare that moment to the present, some fifteen years later, and observe how the opposite of everything _is_ true. Now I really _am_ happy, and it has nothing to do with what's going on outside of me at all.

* * *

Jed McKenna said you reach a place in spiritual autolysis when you're "done"....

_"At a crossroads a couple of miles from the house, Paul joined me. I was pleased to see him. I'm always pleased to see anyone when they get where I believed Paul was at that point. He joined me silently and we walked on. It was ten minutes before he spoke. 'I'm done.' I smiled as warmth poured through my heart. Warmed by the memory of the day I came to the same startling and improbable conclusion for myself, and warm for the times I had heard it from others. Warm knowing the journey one takes to arrive at such a place and warm knowing what lies ahead. That's how it is when you get here; no bells and whistles, no radiant backlighting, no choirs of angels. As Layman P'ang put it, you're 'just an ordinary fellow who has completed his work.' 'I have no more questions,' Paul said. He didn't just mean he had no more questions for me, he meant he had no more questions, period. That's how it is when you get to the end, you're just done."_

I may not have any more questions, or at least none of any real importance; but I can't say I'm "done." I'm not, and I know that. I'm still in the cocoon; and even though I can see it, like a bright light at the end of a tunnel, the Pacific Ocean is still some distance away.

I made it across the Rocky Mountains, although the climb up to the Divide was difficult and full of limitations and restrictions; I made it through the great North American Desert, where I had to get rid of a lot of baggage I had collected along the way if I was going to survive; and I made it past the Sierra Nevada, the last of the "ups" and "downs" before reaching the ocean.

In the process I found a way that was safe for others to travel to the same place – not an easy route, but a safe route – if they want to go there. So I chose to stop here and write this "scouting report" of what I have discovered thus far before I forget a lot of the details or lose the motivation.

Before I actually get to the Pacific, however, I have a big layer of the ego left to tackle. It has to do with the body, and it's sitting here waiting for me to process during the rest of the stay in my cocoon.

Robert Scheinfeld calls these packages of baggage "eggs" – emotional eggs, money eggs, fear eggs, and so on – and we have to open these "eggs" and process the stuff inside them.

The body "egg" is perhaps the last and most difficult aspect of the ego to let go of – at least for me, but I think also for many people. After all, we identify ourselves a lot with the body; we consider it to be who we are in many cases. Even when a Human Adult starts to get used to the idea there is no "out there" out there – that nothing in the holographic universe it perceives is real – it has a tendency to leave itself out of that equation, still thinking "it" is real or its body is real while everything else isn't.

I found it _somewhat_ difficult to process my mental, spiritual and emotional "eggs," but I am finding it _extremely_ difficult to process my physical "egg." In other words, it was relatively easy for me to let go of the judgments, beliefs, opinions, fears, and associated layers of the ego when it came to something "out there," but not nearly as easy when it comes to my own body.

I've been working on this for a while now and have made a little progress, but it's as if my ego knows this is probably its last stand before virtual annihilation and is fighting back with a vengeance. I have this image of me standing on a hilltop looking at the Pacific, knowing my body cannot take me there in the condition it's in. I recognize I put it through a lot on the journey across the Rockies and the desert and the Sierra Nevada; and I admit I didn't take very good care of it while in the movie theater either.

Put very simply, as I write these words, I'm currently in a fair amount of physical pain.

Now... I can tell you the pain isn't real, and that the body isn't real. I can tell you the body is just a hologram, and it can change in an instant and I could be totally pain-free in the next minute, as evidenced by the documented cases of multiple personality disorder....

" _Multiple Personality disorder, or MPD, is a bizarre syndrome in which two or more distinct personalities inhabit a single body. Victims of the disorder, or "multiples", often have no awareness of their condition. They do not realize that control of their body is being passed back and forth between different personalities and instead feel they are suffering from some kind of amnesia, confusion, or black-out spells. Most multiples average between eight to thirteen personalities, although so-called super-multiples may have more than a hundred subpersonalities...._

"In this sense becoming a multiple may be the ultimate example of what [quantum physicist David] Bohm means by fragmentation. It is interesting to note that when the psyche fragments itself, it does not become a collection of broken and jagged-edged shards, but a collection of smaller wholes, complete and self-sustaining with their own traits, motives, and desires. Although these wholes are not identical copies of the original personality, they are related to the dynamics of the original personality, and this in itself suggests that some kind of holographic process is involved....

"Another unusual feature of MPD is that each of a multiple's personalities possesses a different brain-wave pattern. This is surprising, for as Frank Putnam, a National Institutes of Health psychiatrist who has studied this phenomenon, points out, normally a person's brain-wave pattern does not change even in states of extreme emotion. Since brain-wave patterns are not confined to any single neuron or group of neurons, but are a global property of the brain, this too suggests that some kind of holographic process may be at work. Just as a multiple-image hologram can store and project dozens of whole scenes, perhaps the brain hologram can store and call forth a similar multitude of whole personalities....

"In addition to possessing different brainwave patterns, the subpersonalities of a multiple have a strong psychological separation from one another. Each has his own name, age, memories, and abilities. Often each also has his own style of handwriting, announced gender, cultural and racial background, artistic talents, foreign language fluency, and IQ.

"Even more noteworthy are the biological changes that take place in a multiple's body when they switch personalities. Frequently a medical condition possessed by one personality will mysteriously vanish when another personality takes over. Dr. Bennet Braun of the International Society for the Study of Multiple Personality, in Chicago, has documented a case in which all of a patient's subpersonalities were allergic to orange juice, except one. If the man drank orange juice when one of his allergic personalities was in control, he would break out in a terrible rash. But if he switched to his nonallergic personality, the rash would instantly start to fade and he could drink orange juice freely....

"Allergies are not the only thing multiples can switch on and off. If there was any doubt as to the control the unconscious mind has over drug effects, it is banished by the pharmacological wizardry of the multiple. By changing personalities, a multiple who is drunk can instantly become sober. Different personalities also respond differently to different drugs. Braun records a case in which 5 milligrams of diazepam, a tranquilizer, sedated one personality, while 100 milligrams had little or no effect on another. Often one or several of a multiple's personalities are children, and if an adult personality is given a drug and then a child's personality take over, the adult dosage may be too much for the child and result in an overdose. It is also difficult to anesthetize some multiples, and there are accounts of multiples waking up on the operating table after one of their "unanesthetizable" subpersonalities has taken over.

"Other conditions that can vary from personality to personality include scars, burn marks, cysts, and left- and right-handedness. Visual acuity can differ, and some multiples have to carry two or three different pairs of eyeglasses to accommodate their alternating personalities. One personality can be color-blind and another not, and even eye color can change. There are cases of women who have two or three menstrual periods each month because each of their subpersonalities has its own cycle. Speech pathologist Christy Ludlow has found that the voice pattern for each of a multiple's personalities is different, a feat that requires such a deep physiological change that even the most accomplished actor cannot alter his voice enough to disguise his voice pattern. One multiple, admitted to a hospital for diabetes, baffled her doctors by showing no symptoms when one of her nondiabetic personalities was in control. There are accounts of epilepsy coming and going with changes in personality, and psychologist Robert A. Phillips, Jr. reports that even tumors can appear and disappear (although he does not specify what kind of tumors).

_"Multiples also tend to heal faster than normal individuals. For example, there are several cases on record of third-degree burns healing with extraordinary rapidity. Most eerie of all, at least one researcher – Dr. Cornelia Wilbur, the therapist whose pioneering treatment of Sybil Dorsett was portrayed in the book Sybil – is convinced that multiples don't age as fast as other people...."_

Yes, it's true. My body could change in the blink of an eye; my pain could be gone and I could be totally healthy. All that would be required is for my _Infinite I_ to download a new hologram of my body and in the next second I'm off and running.

I know all of that intellectually, but damn... right now the pain is still there.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Kipling, Rudyard. If – Back to reading

2. McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

3. Wikipedia – Continental Divide – Back to reading

4. Wikipedia – North American Desert – Back to reading

5. Wikipedia) – Sierra Nevada – Back to reading

6. Talbot, Michael. The Holographic Universe, pp. 74-76, 97-100 – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 21

ON BECOMING A BUTTERFLY

Back to the Table of Contents

So why doesn't my Infinite I simply download a healthy holographic body for me and take this pain away?

It could; I know that. But that's not the point of the transformation in the cocoon. It's all about the process, and my process is not over yet. That's why I don't _want_ my _Infinite I_ to take my pain away until I'm finished.

I have run Robert's Process hundreds of times on this body egg over the last two years and uncovered a number of judgments, beliefs and opinions. For example, as a result of my Christian upbringing as a Human Child and later beliefs in New Age spiritual theories as a Human Adult, I judged the body itself to be "bad," that it was "wrong" – unspiritual – to have a body in the first place. I always thought I'd be better off without a body, that it was more of a hindrance than a gift, something to "rise above," an indication I had dropped down a level or two from my innately immortal soul.

After my car accident I gained a lot of weight because I couldn't move easily or exercise; and eating good food is one of my great pleasures in life. Eating without exercise; not a beneficial combination. So I still carry some of that extra weight, and I think of my body as "fat" – and I say that, unfortunately, with shame and as a judgment and not just a statement of fact.

In short, I cannot yet express full and sincere appreciation for my body the way it is, or even for having a body at all. Clearly there are more judgments, beliefs, and opinions for me to process in this egg.

I have uncovered some of the fears associated with my body as well. One is the fear that if I don't have a perfectly healthy body, people are going to discount the scouting information I'm offering. I've done exactly that myself in the past, especially in judgment of all the celibate "holy men" and teachers and gurus and saints: "How can he talk about world peace when he can't even create a peaceful relationship with a woman?"

So in my mind I hear people saying, "How can he talk about serenity of being if he's in pain and can't even heal his own body?"

A lot of this also has to do with vanity. I admit I'm vain; it's one of the layers of my ego I haven't fully gotten rid of yet. I have always taken pride in my appearance, probably too much pride. I still like it when people tell me I look ten years younger than I actually am. I had fun signing autographs when I was a "star" drummer in my twenties; I enjoyed being asked for my autograph when I was in my thirties by people who thought I was Tom Selleck, and then again in my fifties by people who thought I was Kenny Rogers; and for years I was sure Carly Simon was talking about _me_ in her song.

Another fear I uncovered had to do with dying. When I wrote in the last chapter, "I have no fear of death," this is true. Ever since I started believing in reincarnation over fifty years ago, I have not feared death; but I was still afraid of dying, still resisted a long, drawn-out and painful death. When my _Infinite I_ decides I have finished my role as its Player, I prayed, I want to go quickly.

I watched live with great empathy as people jumped out of the World Trade Towers on September 11th and fell one-hundred stories to their certain death. I could feel the choice they made not to stay inside and slowly burn alive, but to end it quickly and painlessly. That's how I wanted to go.

So as long as the judgments about my body and the resistance remain, the pain will too. I know that; and even though I have done a lot of work on this body egg, there is obviously stuff left inside to process. In the meantime, I am doing my best to appreciate the pain, to thank my _Infinite I_ for the gift, for the opportunity the pain gives me to process all these judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears, and let go of the associated layers of the ego. I have honestly gotten to the point where I don't want the pain to leave until I've finished processing whatever is there inside the egg.

* * *

In the last couple of weeks, since I started working on this chapter and processing the pain, I have run into one of the most key beliefs about the body, and about life in general: the belief in the "law of cause and effect;" and it's powerful – a very core belief for everyone in this holographic Human Game, it appears.

But it's too early in my process to say much more than the so-called "law of cause and effect" is simply another belief system formed inside the movie theater and a function of the hologram itself, like space and time. Clearly the diabetes associated with one of the multiple personalities discussed in the last chapter is not "caused" by some malfunction in the body, since it disappears as soon as a different personality takes over.

However I'm not prepared at this point to give a scouting report on the "law of cause and effect." That, it seems, will have to wait, and may be the subject of another book altogether – the final stages of my cocoon.

* * *

Meanwhile, since I know all pain is the result of judgment and resistance, I have to ask: What am I resisting? Becoming a butterfly?

Yes, truth be told, I am. It doesn't feel like it has anything to do with _fear_ of being a butterfly, however; or at least I can't see it that way. When I think of being a butterfly, sailing around on my beautiful catamaran, it is a most wonderful picture full of excitement and joy, with no twinge of fear I can find. I look forward to it with great anticipation.

I am also not aware of any lingering fear of non-existence.

But just as it's possible not to be afraid of death and still be afraid of dying, perhaps buried very deep is the fear of the final stages of the cocoon, of not knowing what becoming a butterfly would mean in my relationship to the people I love – my children and grandchildren, most specifically. (I know they're not "real," but I love them anyway!) Am I really ready to let go of everything, unconditionally, if that what's required?

One of the problems is that other scouts who could provide any clue of what _is_ required in the final stages of the cocoon – especially in relationship to other Players whom I care for so much – are few and far between.

Jed McKenna doesn't talk much about family or wife or kids. He mentions having lunch with his sister....

_"Visiting your sister and having lunch shouldn't be a confusing ordeal, but it is. Is she really my sister? What does that mean? We share some history and acquaintances, such as childhood and parents. Are my parents really my parents? Genetically they are related to my body, but the person who lived my childhood is no longer here. The past I share with this person is about as real and important to me as if I'd read it in a brochure.... I'm an actor playing a role for which I feel no connection and have no motivation.... Actually, it's not really confusing. I possess not the least shred of doubt about who and what I am. The tricky thing is that who and what I am is not related to this pretty, professional, salad-eating woman across from me... I have some residual fondness for my sister and if she died I'd be saddened to think that she was no longer in the world, but the simple fact is that our former relationship no longer exists. Okay, so why am I telling you this? Because that's what I do. I try to hold this enlightenment thing up for display and this seems like an interesting aspect of the whole deal. How do you relate to the people who were most important to you before awakening from the dream of the segregated self?"_

That's not very encouraging.

The last time I saw Robert Scheinfeld he had a wonderful family and what looked to be a very close and loving relationship with his wife and two children. Then he talked about a "dark night of the soul" that involved his family, so I'm not exactly sure of that situation. It doesn't matter, though, because I don't think of Robert as a scout who's close to becoming a butterfly, as I will explain in Chapter Thirty-Three in Part Three of this book.

Jesus may have been a scout; he may even have become a butterfly. I find the allegoric symbols of his life, especially his crucifixion (the death of the caterpillar) and his emergence from the cave (his cocoon) three days later, to be fascinating; but that will have to wait until the next book. The point is that all the evidence suggests Jesus had a wife and child; but that after he became a butterfly he never saw them again, since they went to the south of France and he went to live (and finally die) in a community in Kashmir.

There may be other scouts who have maintained so-called normal family relationships with ones they loved after they transitioned into a butterfly, but I don't know their stories.

So there is the chance that once you complete your transformation into a butterfly, real communication with Players in the cocoon or the movie theater is no longer possible, which is why we don't hear from any butterflies or read their books. It may be that you have to take the last step in the cocoon on total "faith," without anyone to let you know what it's like, as Harrison Ford did in _Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade_ when he had to step out from a canyon wall and risk falling into a deep gorge, not knowing there was a camouflaged bridge that would take him across to the other side. (Watch the video here.)

So whether it's out of fear or excitement, I have to admit I've had the thought I would like to postpone my final transformation into a butterfly and stay where I am in the cocoon for a while. Perhaps this is my own thought; perhaps it has been put there as part of a hologram by my _Infinite I_. I don't know yet.

However, I am excited and very curious about a game I see developing, if I'm reading the ripples in the Universe correctly.

I have a lot of friends, and am witnessing many thousands more Human Adults who seem ready to break out of the movie theater and transform into butterflies. The situation in the Earth Environment also appears to be getting more intense, like a rubber band being stretched to its limits before it breaks. How much more pain and suffering and limitation and restriction is required before millions of Players surrender, understand it is their own judgments and resistance causing that pain and suffering, and are willing to begin processing the false knowledge and layers of ego that are part of life inside the movie theater?

I think it would be a cool game to play to see how many Human Adults can be encouraged to enter their cocoons and then guided safely through their transformation into a butterfly. Everything that's needed is in place now for a mass exodus from the movie theater, and the trail has been blazed. There are even some "hints" and "clues" the Earth – itself a Player in the Human Game – might be ready to transform as well.

* * *

There have been experiments done with rats, putting them in a water maze and observing them finding their way out. It seems "each new generation of rats learned to escape quicker. After ten years, the latest generation of rats could escape ten times faster than the original rats. Interestingly, rats of the same lineage in other areas of the world also escaped ten times faster, a phenomenon which cannot be explained by any localized instruments."

Perhaps I'm simply one of the first generation of rats to find their way to the Pacific Ocean, and perhaps those who come after me will find it much easier and faster.

But it means I'm just a rat like everyone else; and I don't want to leave this book without paying tribute to all the rats who came before me and made my maze a little easier to navigate, and especially to all those other rats who died trying to find their way out of the water.

Then, maybe, if Rupert Sheldrake's theory of morphic resonance turns out to be correct, all the rats who come after me will escape ten times faster, without so many wrong turns, and this process will spread throughout the world until a critical mass is reached and all the rats turn into butterflies.

How much fun I have mixing metaphors!

* * *

What's it going to be like when I finally finish processing the layers of ego with my body?

All I can do is speculate, because I don't personally know anyone who has actually become a butterfly. I know there must be some, but I have no idea who they are.

Jed McKenna – whoever he might really be – claims he emerged from his cocoon and then...

" _I spent the next ten years trying to make sense of this new world; a non-world in which a non-I nevertheless seemed to reside. The waking dreamstate. It was like the world had turned from hard solidity into shimmering mirage. I could still see the world I had always known, but I could not find its substance. Whatever I reached out to touch, my hand passed through. Whatever I thought about dissolved in my mind. Whoever I looked at, I saw through like vapor, myself included. I looked at my own character, and it was like a face you see in a cloud for a second before it's gone._

_"My reality now is the awakened, untruth-unrealized state, and it's the same for me as for anyone who comes to it. There are no masters or novices here. There are no teachings or beliefs; no Hindus or Buddhists or Jnanis or Advaitins; no masters or yogis or swamis; no discorporate entities or higher level energies or superior beings. Awake is awake. Everything else is everything else."_

Keep peeling away layers of an onion and what do you have when you get through? Nothing. It isn't that you peel away the layers and finally get to the onion. You get to the no-onion. The same thing is true for the self. After peeling away all the layers of the ego, you get to... no-self.

Jed says it takes about ten years to get used to living as a no-self, to get accustomed to being "awake from the dreamstate," to operate without false knowledge and a false ego. I don't know about that, because I assume he's talking about living those ten years after emerging from his cocoon as a butterfly. First, I'm not certain it's true he's a butterfly; and secondly, I won't know until I get there. I _do_ know it _is_ a very different way to live – a very wonderful and joyful and peaceful and exciting way to live – and even where I am now takes some getting used to.

* * *

There were a lot of questions I had as I blazed this trail to the Pacific Ocean, and in the next part of this book I want to share some of the answers I came up with based on the information I found along the way. But before I go....

I began this book talking about Plato's Cave, that a Human Child is like a prisoner who is chained and can only see the wall in front of them; that a Human Child believes the shadows it sees on the wall are real; that when a Human Child realizes it is not really chained at all, it gets up and walks to the back of the cave and sees the fire and the men on the walkway that create the shadows on the wall; that this new Human Adult begins to recognize that the shadows are not real; and that a few Human Adults will eventually walk through the door in the back of the cave and out of the cave entirely.

Then I switched metaphors and said this Human Adult, once through the door, will enter a cocoon, where it will undergo a process of transformation, letting go of its judgments, beliefs, opinions, fears, and layers of ego that it believed itself to be as a caterpillar.

I have said I am near the end of my cocoon phase, standing at a point overlooking the Pacific Ocean, poised to become a butterfly, and that anyone who wants to can join me here.

I have achieved this serenity of being by a strong will and determination to find the truth, a lot of hard work, a lot of processing, and a lot of support from my _Infinite I_. I did it by following my discomfort – physical and emotional – to locate the judgments, beliefs, and opinions I had formed during my time inside the movie theater. I did it by going further to expose my fears and embracing them, especially the fear of non-existence. I did it by identifying the layers of the ego I had created and throwing them away, one by one, until there is virtually nothing left. I did it by letting go of the self that wasn't true and finding the no-self that was.

Anyone who wants to can stand where I am standing now. Anyone can reach the Pacific Ocean and emerge from their cocoon as a butterfly. I am not special, I am not any "better" than anyone else, and I certainly am not any more "enlightened." "Enlightenment" is a word that belongs inside the movie theater, in the first half of the Human Game, since it automatically carries a judgment with it – a judgment that one state of being is better (more "enlightened") than another.

I'm simply near the end of the rollercoaster ride, reporting back to those still going up the first hill and those just at the top ready to take the plunge, trying to give some clarity and some encouragement about the ride to come and how much fun it can be.

If you're still inside the movie theater, my best advice would be to realize it's just a game, that it isn't real, and – now that you know the true source and reason for all your drama and conflict and pain and suffering – to let go of your resistance and relax and learn to appreciate and enjoy every moment of every experience you're having. Remember you're on a rollercoaster, and that going up that first hill is an essential part of the ride. The more you resist that hill, the more needless pain and suffering you will have.

If you've walked out of the movie theater and are starting off in your cocoon, hang on for the ride of your life; and if you meet me on the road, it means I'm still playing the "scout." So kill me, and then go further.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

2. Baigent, Michael et al. Holy Blood, Holy Grail __ – Back to reading

3. Jeffrey, Scott. Hypothesis of Formative Causation (Morphic Resonance) \- (Note: I cannot verify this report because I cannot find the original Harvard study.) – Back to reading

4. Wikipedia) – Rupert Sheldrake – Back to reading

5. McKenna, Jed. Id. – Back to reading

6. Dae Kwang. Kill the Buddha – Back to reading

# PART THREE:

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Back to the Table of Contents

"I know why you're here, Neo. I know what you've been doing. I know why you hardly sleep, why you live alone, and why night after night you sit at your computer. You're looking for him. I know because I was once looking for the same thing; and when he found me, he told me I wasn't really looking for him. I was looking for an answer. It's the question that drives us, Neo. It's the question that brought you here."

\- Trinity, from _The Matrix_

PREFACE TO PART THREE

Robert Scheinfeld says when you move into the second half of the Human Game (which he calls "Phase 2"), there's no point any more to ask "Why;" and there are some good reasons for that. You can't think your way out of this Game; it isn't a matter of understanding, but of feeling; asking "why" can often be a diversion, a distraction from doing the Process itself; and the answer to "why" really doesn't matter and won't change anything.

It's true that once inside your cocoon, there really is only one answer to the question "Why?": Because your _Infinite I_ has created it that way for you as a gift.

On the other hand, we seem to be very curious as Players, and "why" can be something that excites and interests us. Nothing "wrong" with that.

Besides, since you've gotten this far in the book, you're well aware we're talking about a new and very radical approach to life, one that is often the opposite of everything we were taught while in the movie theater. So, for me, it's totally understandable and very legitimate to ask various questions, to better understand how this new model works, to be clear about how it is different from anything else you've ever encountered, and to more easily let go of previous false knowledge by seeing there are new and viable alternative ways to answer the more important questions that occupy our thoughts.

I also think "don't ask why" can be used as a cop-out sometimes, to avoid having to come up with answers to the tough questions. Any model that's worth its salt should be able to logically and consistently withstand all kinds of scrutiny.

So I welcome all legitimate questions, and by "legitimate" I mean the question comes from a sincere desire to learn and fill in some gaps in understanding this new model, or questions that result from the actual testing of the model in operation. Questions coming from the ego, from Maya, from an attitude of proving me "wrong," or simply to intellectually debate have no interest for me. They're always just another attempt to justify some judgment or belief formed while inside the movie theater.

In the following pages, then, you will find some of the questions I had, and have been asked, and the answers I came up with from my own research and experience as a scout.

Some of the answers will be very short; others will fill a normal-sized chapter.

_None_ of the answers should be taken as "Truth." They are simply the most logical, consistent, and "best guesses" I can find, especially since some deal with questions about the other side of The Field, which we can never know with any certainty. If they aren't the "Truth," then at least they serve the purpose of demonstrating there are logical alternatives to the old and inconsistent and contradictory answers we believed for so long.

The main point is to realize there _are_ other answers to our burning questions about life that make sense, that this model _is_ complete and workable and consistent with the latest findings in quantum physics, and that we _can_ begin to let go of the old belief systems that kept us limited and go totally radical.

# CHAPTER 22

ONE BIG HOLOGRAM?

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: I thought that when we speak about a holographic universe, it means we were all part of one big hologram.

_Answer:_ That's a very common misconception, but it simply can't be true.

If neurophysiologist Karl Pribram is correct when he says the human brain is a holographic receiver and translator...

_"The brain is itself a hologram... which mathematically constructs 'hard' reality by relying on input from a frequency domain."_

...then there cannot be one big hologram.

If the physical universe we live in were one giant hologram that was shared by all of us, there would have to be one giant brain to receive it as it was downloaded from The Field and convert it from its natural wave state into particles we could perceive; and we would all perceive those particles exactly the same way. We would all see the same reality.

That, obviously, doesn't happen. Each person, in fact, seems to see a slightly different reality than anyone else. In fact, our mental hospitals are full of people we call "psychotic" who see a _very_ different reality than the rest of us.

("Psychosis means an abnormal condition of the mind, and is a generic psychiatric term for a mental state often described as involving a 'loss of contact with reality'.... People experiencing psychosis may report hallucinations or delusional beliefs.")

Standing in a room next to someone who is psychotic, you might see a pleasant, safe atmosphere. The psychotic, on the other hand, could see a torture chamber. That simply would not be possible if there were one big hologram both of you were perceiving.

It _is_ possible, however, if you are each perceiving your own reality – a separate hologram downloaded to each separate brain.

A simple car accident, viewed by ten different people, can have ten different "realities" of what happened.

You could walk out of a restaurant and your friend could comment on how rude the waitress was, and although you heard the waitress say the same words, you thought she was fine and helpful.

Or...

"Who are you going to host your website with?"

"XYZ company."

"What! Them?"

"Yes, why?"

"I tried them once. Horrible experience. They really screwed me up."

"I've been hosting with them for ten years, always had great service, and they're never down."

There's even a better example I assume has happened to all of us at one point or another. You see someone walking down the street and you turn to a friend and say, "Wow! Is that Brad Pitt?" And your friend looks and says, "He doesn't look anything like Brad Pitt!" And you insist, "Yes! He looks exactly like Brad Pitt!"

So what happened here? When you look at the movies or pictures in a magazine, you see Brad Pitt one way, and the person you saw walking down the street looked just like that, to _you_. Your friend, on the other hand, sees Brad Pitt in movies or magazines differently, and also sees the person on the street differently, and therefore doesn't agree with you. If we all lived in a giant common hologram – one big "holographic universe" – we would all see both Brad Pitt and the person walking down the street the same way, and there would be common agreement on how they look.

So each individual human brain receives and translates its own separate hologram downloaded by its own _Infinite I_ from The Field. This, of course, is inherent in the truth "you create _your own_ reality," if we would just pay attention to what those words really say and mean.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Talbot, Michael. An essay also entitled The Holographic Universe – Back to reading

2. Wikipedia – Psychosis – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 23

OTHER PEOPLE

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: If we don't share one big common hologram, how can you and I go out at night and see the same stars, or watch the same movie, or see the same people? How could someone else agree with me so much on what we call "reality" unless we were actually seeing the same thing?

_Answer:_ Before we talk about whether you and "someone else" are seeing the same reality, I have to find out who you think this "someone else" is who's agreeing with you. Do you think they really exist?

_Question:_ Oh, well.... Okay. So what about the other people who appear in my hologram? Aren't they "real," or is my _Infinite I_ creating them too?

_Answer:_ The first thing you have to remember is that nothing in your hologram is "real" – not the people, not this book you are reading, and not the eyes you are reading the book with. It's all a hologram; and by definition, a hologram isn't real – at least not in the way we have always thought about things as "real."

So let's change the question a little, because I know what you're trying to ask....

"Do the other people I see in my hologram exist as separate individuals? Are they Players in their own right, as I am, with their own _Infinite I's_? Or are they just created by my _Infinite I_ for my personal hologram and have no life of their own?" Right?

Even among the growing number of people who understand how life works in a holographic universe, there is no general agreement on the answer to this question – which is a good example of why some of these questions aren't important and don't really play a role in the daily workability of these concepts.

Some of these people have decided their _Infinite I_ creates everything and everyone they see in their holograms, and that no one else exists independently from them. That may well be true, and one day maybe we'll find out; or maybe we won't.

On one hand, it is very important to realize and remember that everything we experience – and everyone in those experiences – is created by our own _Infinite I_ ; and it can be so easy to forget that and assign independent power to whom and what we see "out there" to make them real. Therefore it is very helpful to emphasize that nothing and no one can appear in your holographic universe that your _Infinite I_ has not created or agreed to. So it might be useful to adopt the belief that you are creating the "other people" you encounter in your life, and that they don't exist outside of your hologram.

But for me, this smacks too much of "solipsism," which has an overtone I don't resonate with....

_"If only I matter, then other people, animals, environments only matter insofar as they impact myself. This may be an antisocial philosophy_."

So here is what makes the most sense to me and feels the most comfortable....

If the holographic universe is like a total immersion movie, someone had to write the script for everything that happens in that holographic movie. That "someone" is your _Infinite I_.

But that script would be very limited and lonely if you were the only actor in it; and there are god-knows-how-many other _Infinite I's_ in Greater Metropolitan InfiniteLand who have Players representing them as well.

So let's say my _Infinite I_ wants me to experience a car accident, for whatever reason (which is exactly what my own _Infinite I_ did!). My _Infinite I_ could create a hologram where I have that car accident by myself, with no one else involved in the accident (which is what happened to me); and that's fine.

But let's say for some reason my _Infinite I_ would prefer me to experience a car accident that involved other people, rather than just me. My _Infinite I_ could send an Infimail around InfiniteLand asking if there is anyone who wants to have their Player be part of this car accident as well.

Most car accidents today involve more than one person, so apparently there is a lot of interest in InfiniteLand for this kind of holographic experience. Therefore my _Infinite I_ gets some positive Infimail responses from other _Infinite I's_ , and together these _Infinite I's_ work out the details and write a joint script for this accident "movie." But there is one catch....

No Player can say or do anything in any other Player's hologram that their own _Infinite I_ has not approved. In other words, whatever one Player says or does to another Player has been requested and approved by its _Infinite I_.

This means no one can be a victim of anything that is said or done in any hologram they experience, because their own _Infinite I_ has either written the script itself or had 100% script approval prior to the hologram being downloaded to its Player. No victims, no perpetrators, period.

So, now these Players get in their car accident. Each Player can, and probably will, experience that accident slightly differently than any other player, since each Player has their own individual hologram as their reality. In fact, two Players will often disagree – honestly and sincerely – about what actually happened in that accident. We already know virtually everyone who witnesses a car accident will have a different story of what happened.

But the "other person" I get into a car accident with, more than likely, will be another Player representing another _Infinite I_ , as I see it. So while my _Infinite I_ "created" them in my hologram, they actually do "exist" as a separate Player with their own self-consciousness and their own _Infinite I_.

This seems to me to be true for all the "other people" who have an impact on our lives. I would say almost anyone who has a "speaking part" in your holographic total immersion movie is another Player, whose _Infinite I_ has agreed for them to read the script your own _Infinite I_ wrote for the experience it wanted you to have.

According to Robert Scheinfeld, "other people" serve three main purposes in your holographic experience:

1. To reflect something you think or feel about yourself

2. To give you the gift of information or insight

3. To set something in motion to support you

* * *

On the other hand, there are a lot of "extras" in your holographic total immersion movie who have little or no impact on your life. They are there to make your total immersion movie seem more "real." It would be very strange to walk down Fifth Avenue in New York City and see no one else, just like it would be very strange to watch a movie about New York City with no people in it. (You can watch Tom Cruise freak out in exactly that situation in the movie, Vanilla Sky.) "Extras" play an important role in our holograms; but, as in Hollywood, those "extras" can be computer generated – a product of special effects – and do not necessarily need a life of their own.

There was a recent mini-series on HBO called _John Adams_. (Brilliant!) They also aired a short segment on how the mini-series was made, which you can watch on YouTube.

Not only is this a great example of how a background set is made to provide the scenery for a holographic movie experience, but there is a segment of this video starting around three minutes in that explains and shows how a crowd of 10,000 people was created using just 15 extras. If we've figured out how to do that in _our_ physical universe, imagine what your _Infinite I_ can do in your holographic universe! (Watch the video here.)

So the "other people" you see in your hologram are Players whose _Infinite I's_ have volunteered their Players to play a role for you and to read the script your _Infinite I_ has written; or, they are "extras" created by your _Infinite I_ to fill up your "reality."

_Question:_ But if they're not just computer-generated "extras," how does my _Infinite I_ know how to create that significant "other person" in my hologram to look and act like they do?

_Answer:_ By using the template available in The Field for this "other person," tagged with their name on it.

In other words, there's a template in The Field with the name "Stephen Davis," which contains the wave frequencies used to create me in a hologram; and there's a template in The Field with your name on it as well. All other Players that have been created by their _Infinite I's_ have templates also.

When the other Player's _Infinite I_ agrees to play a role in your hologram, it gives permission to your _Infinite I_ to access the template in The Field that describes the other person – their name, height, weight, eye color, attitudes, etc. – and then your _Infinite I_ plugs that template into the holographic experience it is creating for you. But that "other person" must read the script word-for-word _your_ _Infinite I_ wrote for _you_.

Looked at from the other direction, your _Infinite I_ has agreed and volunteered you to play a role in other Players' experiences as well, and they access the template with your name on it and plug you into the hologram they create for their own Player. But then you are always reading the script _their_ _Infinite I_ wrote for _them_.

* * *

#

Perhaps you've been fortunate enough to have a "virtual reality" experience....

It, of course, looks and feels very real.

According to quantum physics, life itself is a "virtual reality" experience, a holographic universe created for us by our _Infinite I's_.

So what about the people you meet while in one of these "virtual reality" machines? They have been created by the software programmer who wrote the experience you are having, were they not? Everything they do or say has been pre-determined and is part of the virtual reality script.

Now... what if two people, each in their own virtual reality machine, could interact? In other words, what if someone else doing their own virtual reality trip could appear in your virtual reality experience? The person on the other machine would have to be pre-programmed into your machine so they appeared normally and not in their virtual reality gear; and visa versa.

See what I mean?

This is not out of the question, not some ridiculous science fiction fantasy. The technology is not that far away when it will be possible for two virtual reality experiences to interact. What a "hint" or "clue" that will be!

And that's basically what happens in our holographic reality. We meet people, whom I am calling "extras," who are pre-programmed into the script of our experience to make it seem more real; and we meet people who are Players in their own right whose holographic experiences interact with ours.

Really an amazing game when you think about it!

So I take the viewpoint that the "other people" I meet in my holographic experiences who play any kind of significant role in my life are Players in their own right, with their own self-consciousness, who have agreed to play a role and read a script for me and either reflect something I think or feel about myself, give me the gift of information or insight, or set something in motion to support me; and visa versa.

In this way, we can give each other lots of gifts of experiences. In fact, each and every interaction between Players is a gift from one to the other, and back again, no matter how one or more Players might judge that experience and the other Player's role in it.

* * *

Now that we have that all cleared up, you can ask your original question again....

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Wikipedia – Solipsism – Back to reading

2. Scheinfeld, Robert. Journey to the Infinite home transformational system – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 24

THE "EARTH ENVIRONMENT" TEMPLATE

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: If we don't share one big common hologram, how can you and I go out at night and see the same stars, or watch the same movie, or see the same people? How could someone else agree with me so much on what we call "reality" unless we were actually seeing the same thing?

_Answer:_ The answer to that depends on how you view "other people" in your holograms, based on what we discussed in the last chapter.

If you take the position that the "someone else" in your hologram agreeing with you was created by your own _Infinite I_ and has no existence as an independent Player on its own, then what Dr. Andrew Newberg said is very pertinent....

" _When I cross-reference with somebody, they're part of my reality. If I hear someone agreeing with what I think is going on out there, it still has to do with what I am perceiving._ "

In other words, cross-referencing – when someone in your hologram agrees with you about the reality you are perceiving – is totally useless as proof that the two of you are seeing the same thing. Therefore it doesn't matter whether they see the same stars, or movie, or people you do, since they're nothing more than part of the hologram created by your _Infinite I_.

But let's say that you've decided "other people" in your hologram are Players in their own right, with their own self-consciousness, who have agreed to play a part in your holographic experience. Now the discussion gets interesting....

The first problem is that what you and any other person in your hologram see is most likely _not_ exactly the same thing, and there is no way to prove they _are_ the same.

We think when we see the color blue, for example, someone else is seeing the exact same color. But how do you know that?

My ex-wife and I would have interesting debates on whether a particular house was painted "off-white" or "pale yellow." (She always won.) This wasn't just because we disagreed on the color; but at a more basic level, we were actually seeing two slightly different colors.

However, let's face it; most Players seem to be able to agree for the most part on most things, like the stars or the movies or the people we see. Right?

So how can that be?

My guess is that there is a "template" in The Field for the "Earth Environment," so when an _Infinite I_ wants to create a "normal" holographic experience for its Player, it doesn't have to create the Earth, the stars, the sun and moon, this book, or the rest of the universe from scratch every time. It simply uses the template for the basis of the hologram and then adds whatever unique touches it wants for each situation for its Player.

It only makes sense to do it this way so Players can focus on their unique experiences and not have to deal with or spend much time arguing about whose "reality" is "real." (As noted, there are Players whose _Infinite I's_ do not use this "normal" template, and we consider them to be crazy. But it's just further proof we're dealing with individual holographic universes, not a common one; and it's entirely possible for an _Infinite I_ to choose whatever reality it wants for its Player.)

This "Earth Environment" template is a lot like the software program in sophisticated video games. The "background" is basically the same for all players, but there is a wide variety of experiences an individual player can have using that same background. You could also say it's like using one stage set and props in a movie or play but the different characters all have different experiences within it. If that kind of unique and individual experience is possible using the same template, why create a new one each time?

Or this might make more sense... when you apply for a job, you go into your computer's text-writing program and choose a "template" to write a resumé. You add your own personal information to that template to create a unique and individual resumé for yourself, but otherwise your finished product looks just like anyone else's who used the same template.

So here's how it apparently works....

An _Infinite I_ wants to have an experience in the physical universe on Earth. It, obviously, cannot come here itself – an infinite being could not come into a finite world – so it elects to create a Player to represent it. It goes to The Field and chooses specific wave frequencies to create that Player, and this unique group of wave frequencies in The Field are tagged and used as a template for that Player.

Then the _Infinite I_ decides to create an experience in the physical universe for its Player. If it wants to create a so-called "normal" experience, it will grab the "Earth Environment" template from The Field – which includes all the things we generally agree on, like the position of the stars and planets, the location of New York City, the color purple, what broccoli looks like, and so forth. This will allow its Player not to spend all its time arguing with other Players about what a "circle" is, but be able to focus instead on the core experience the _Infinite I_ wants.

On the other hand, maybe the core experience the _Infinite I_ wants is to explore differences of opinion, and therefore it might make slight modifications in this normal "Earth Environment" template, or even major modifications that would result in significant disagreements with other Players about "reality."

The point is that when an _Infinite I_ wants to create an experience for its Player in the Human Game, it doesn't have to create the sun and the stars and the moon and spaghetti each time. The template is already there, available for all _Infinite I's_ to use as they see fit – which is why the template can look almost the same to many Players.

* * *

The current buzzword for "template" is "matrix;" and just to be clear, there is no "evil" matrix" or "sacred matrix," as some have suggested; but only one matrix that is totally neutral.

"The matrix is everywhere. It is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes.... Unfortunately, no one can be told what the matrix is; you have to see it for yourself."

\- Morpheus, from _The Matrix_

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Newberg, Andrew. What the Bleep!? - Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 25

ARE WE ALL ONE?

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: Don't What the [Bleep] Do We Know? and The Secret and many other "new age" philosophies say "we are all one"? In fact, doesn't quantum physics say "we are all connected," and haven't some of the recent experiments proven that? Haven't we been told if a butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil, it can set off a tornado in Texas?

_Answer:_ Yes, yes, yes... that's what we've been told. But is any of it really true?

First of all, there is no "we." There is only "I" and "other people" who appear in the unique and individual hologram my _Infinite I_ creates for me.

Even if you believe (as I do) that many of the "other people" who appear in your hologram are other Players in their own right, with their own _Infinite I's_ , they have their own unique and individual holograms as well since there is no one big common hologram we all share.

So how did "we are all one" become such a popular new-age fad?

In the early 1980s, physicist Alain Aspect performed some very famous experiments with collaborators in France that have been used ever since to claim "we are all one," or, at a minimum, that "we are all connected." But that's not what the experiments proved at all.

What Aspect did, basically, was to send two protons (very small particles) from a calcium atom away from each other in different directions. These two protons had opposite (complementary) charges associated with them when they separated. He then changed the charge of one of the protons, and the other proton "magically" changed its own charge simultaneously. This became known as "spooky action at a distance," since there was no explanation of how the two protons were influencing each other at distances that would disallow any communication between them.

Stated more simply and generally, the experiment provides strong evidence that a quantum event at one location can affect an event at another location without any obvious mechanism for communication between the two locations; and this was jumped on by the "new age" as proof "we are all one and connected."

But Aspect's results don't prove that at all. At most they prove everything _within one hologram_ is connected, which we already know to be true. If you cut off a little piece from a larger holographic film, you can still produce the complete holographic image from that piece. (It's dimmer, but the whole picture is still there.) This is called "entanglement" in quantum physics, which basically says all the different "particles" that make up a hologram are connected.

So everything is connected within a single hologram, and maybe if a butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil in _my_ hologram, it can set off a tornado in Texas in _my_ hologram. But since there is no one big common hologram we all share, and each Player has its own unique and individual holographic experiences, Aspects' results cannot be interpreted to prove we are all one, or even all connected.

If a butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil and sets off a tornado in Texas in both my hologram and yours, it simply means this scenario was part of the "Earth Environment" template used by both your _Infinite I_ and my _Infinite I_ when they created our individual holographic experiences. But it still doesn't mean "we are all one."

Think of it this way: The Field contains an unlimited number of possibilities in wave form, and therefore can be the source of an infinite number of holograms. For example, my _Infinite I_ could go to The Field and decide to pop out a hologram of an apple for me. Your _Infinite I_ could go to The Field and decide to pop out a hologram of an orange for you. But these two holograms are not connected. They may be "interacting" in a way we don't understand yet, but it doesn't mean they're "connected." There's a big difference between the two.

In other words, I could do something with my apple in my hologram and it would have no effect on the orange in your hologram. Every Player's holograms are totally independent from every other Player's holograms. A butterfly flapping its wings in Brazil in _my_ hologram will not automatically set off a tornado in Texas in _your_ hologram. At least, we currently have no scientific proof for the theory that "we are all connected," despite what the "new age" says.

Let me try to say this in a different way.... Every Player's holograms are totally independent from every other Player's holograms. That's the only possible way that each _Infinite I_ can create its own reality for its Player. It's the only way there can be no victims or perpetrators.

It reminds me of the psychology fad in the 80's and 90's around "co-dependency." One Player's holograms are not co-dependent on any other Player's holograms. There may be interaction going on being two _in_ dependent Player's holograms, but what happens in one Player's hologram is not _co_ -dependent on what happens in any other Player's hologram. In short, there is no "co-creation" happening.

If you wanted to say "everything I see in _my_ hologram is one," you would be correct. But to say "we are all one" at the holographic level is not true.

Now, we can go to a different level, both in Alain Aspect's experiments and in our own individual experiences. My hologram of the apple and your hologram of the orange have the same source – The Field – just like the two protons in Aspect's experiment had the same source – a calcium atom. In The Field, everything is connected to everything else, waves upon waves of potentiality, of infinite possibility. But when some of those specific waves are chosen by an _Infinite I_ and downloaded to a human brain, that connection in The Field does not follow into the physical universe.

It would be true to say something like, "All our holograms have the same source – The Field," just like it's true to say a brother and a sister have the same source – their parents. But just like the brother and sister are not "connected" at the level of the physical universe (ignoring the rare anomaly of Siamese twins), and just as they are clearly not "all one," neither are our individual holograms we perceive as the physical universe we live in.

At the level of The Field, however, not only are _we_ all one, but _everything_ is all one, since The Field is the source of everything in the form of wave frequencies that later appear in the holographic universe as particles.

* * *

We've been talking apples and oranges. Now let's talk apples and apples, which gets a little trickier.

My _Infinite I_ pops out an apple in my hologram. Your _Infinite I_ pops out an apple in your hologram. Our two holograms interact; and although you see your apple slightly differently than I see my apple, both apples are sitting in the same location on a kitchen counter we both have in our holograms.

I pick up the apple and eat it, and you watch. I say, "I'm eating the apple," and you say, "You're eating the apple." But now we're back to what Dr. Newberg said, that cross-referencing proves nothing. It is still impossible to prove my eating the apple in your hologram, or your telling me I'm eating the apple in my hologram, are evidence of any connection between the two holograms.

As I said, it's entirely possible the apple both of us see sitting on the kitchen counter is part of the "Earth Environment" template our _Infinite I's_ used to create this particular experience, and therefore common to both your hologram and mine. But that still doesn't mean your hologram and my hologram are connected, or that you and I are "all one."

Imagine sitting at a table in a restaurant having a conversation with a friend of yours. What she is saying to you is a script written for her to read by _your_ _Infinite I_ , to be part of your holographic experience. What you are saying to her is a script written for you to read by _her_ _Infinite I_ , to be part of her holographic experience. Yet it appears that these two holograms are interacting.

Now imagine that in your hologram, the music playing in the background is much too loud and annoying, disrupting your ability to hear and concentrate on the conversation with your friend. Your friend, however, hardly hears the music and has no problem with it. Your friend's problem is that there is man sitting at the next table who is chewing food with his mouth open, making her sick. You see the man, but he doesn't appear to be chewing with his mouth open to you, and he doesn't bother you.

So what's happened here?

Each _Infinite I_ has used the "Earth Environment" template to create an experience for the two of you in this particular restaurant, and both of you see essentially the same things: the tables and chairs, wait staff, bar, drinks, food, etc. But each _Infinite I_ has custom-made the holographic experience for its own Player, adding little personal touches here and there.

In your friend's hologram, the music is literally not too loud. It's not just that she doesn't hear it as too loud; it literally is _not_ too loud – a different volume entirely for her than for you. You might even ask her if she doesn't think the music's too loud, and she would say, "No. It's fine."

In your own hologram, the man is not chewing with his mouth open at all. It's not just that he is and it doesn't bother you; he's not. Your friend might even ask you if it doesn't bother you that the man is eating with his mouth open, and you would say, "I didn't notice."

While they might be "interacting," how can anyone try to say these two separate holographic experiences are "connected," or that you and your friend are "all one"? At most, two interacting Players might be experiencing the same "Earth Environment Template," but that's it.

There is even one philosophy that believes the idea "we are all one" is a kind of hypnotic implant that is finally coming to the surface to be seen as an error and cleared away.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Wikipedia – butterfly effect – Back to reading

2. Wikipedia – Alain Aspect – Back to reading

3. Einstein's term. Ibid. __ – Back to reading

4. Wikipedia – quantum entanglement – Back to reading

5. Hubbard, L. Ron. From the OT3 materials – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 26

ONE PLAYER PER INFINITE I?

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: Is an Infinite I limited to having only one Player representing it in the Human Game?

_Answer:_ I can't say for sure, of course, but probably not.

Think about it this way....

An _Infinite I_ has infinite power, infinite joy, infinite wisdom, infinite abundance, infinite love, and _an infinite desire to play and express itself creatively_. I can't imagine, with the infinite number of games to play in an infinite universe, an _Infinite I_ would limit itself to playing just one game – the Human Game on Earth – with just one Player. But it's possible.

Our egos would like us to think we're very special – each one of us – and that we must each have just one _Infinite I_ that created us and looks after us, and only us. But I doubt it. It would make more sense that a unique and individual _Infinite I_ would have a number of different Players in a number of different games, perhaps even in a number of different universes.

To take this one step further, it's also possible a unique _Infinite I_ can have more than one Player on Earth at the same time! I had a friend who was "remembering" (in trance) a lifetime during World War II when she was a British soldier and got involved in a firefight with a German soldier. They killed each other at the same time over a foxhole. As my friend's "soul" left her British soldier's body, she "saw" the "soul" of the German soldier leave its body as well; and to her great surprise, she realized they both belonged to the same _Infinite I_!

Why not? An _Infinite I_ is not limited to the number of Players it can have in the Human Game, even simultaneously. Perhaps your wife, or your husband, or your children, or your best friend, or your worst enemy, is another Player from the same _Infinite I_. Won't we all be surprised to find out one day?!

But the fact that your _Infinite I_ may also have another Player – or more – does not affect your relationship with that _Infinite I_ at all. Just like a parent who has more than one child, there is not (or should not be) any favoritism, any more or less love for one than another, any dilution of the caring and the guidance and the energy for you as one of its Players simply because there may be others.

In fact, each of us can actually think about our _Infinite I_ as our "own," if somehow that makes things easier. It really doesn't matter. The possibility that you might "share" an _Infinite I_ with another Player has no relevance or bearing on how you play the Human Game. It is interesting, however, to consider the possibility that the person causing you the most discomfort in a particular holographic experience may, in fact, be your "brother" or "sister" – that you share the same _Infinite I_!

# CHAPTER 27

PAST LIVES?

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: What about past lives?

_Answer:_ I love this question, because I believed in past lives for about fifty years, before encountering quantum physics and the truth of the Human Game model. Not only did I _believe_ , but I had many detailed "memories" of a number of those past lives.

But before we can talk about past lives, we have to talk about time....

From the research in quantum physics, we know time does not exist in The Field, where all experiences are created that make up the physical universe. Space and time are created as part of a hologram – scientists would say space/time is a "function of the hologram" – and therefore time is not "real" in the same way the hologram is not "real."

In fact, as many others like Seth and Eckart Tolle have said over and over again, the only thing that's "real" – or better, "relevant" – is the present moment. This not only applies to "past lives," but the "past" in this present life as well, which should be self-evident when we see how someone can change their past by getting new information or changing their perceptions of what happened "back then."

Einstein said "reality is merely an illusion – albeit a very persistent one;" and it's true that "reality" seems to have continuity, as one moment blends into the next moment. But it's also possible to look at those moments as individual holograms coming quickly one after the other, like a movie consists of one individual frame and then another in rapid succession. Therefore, the "persistence" itself is illusory.

It's even possible there actually is nothing except the present moment, and that everything we consider to be the "past" is created in each present-moment hologram.

Karl Pribram spent years trying to find the location of "memory" in the brain and finally decided the brain itself was a hologram. So what if "memory" really doesn't exist at all? What if our "memory" of the "past" is being created in the present-moment hologram instead? What if, when we say someone is living in their past, the opposite is actually true: that their past is living in their present?

So the "past" may be a "story" that is part of the present hologram; and we are free to rewrite the ending to that story at any time by changing our reactions and responses to the experience, letting go of the judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears. This is clear, and actually very necessary, when you move into the second half of the Human Game. When the judgment is dropped, for example, of how "bad" your childhood was, and you gain appreciation and thankfulness for the perfection of those experiences in creating limitation in the first half, the "past" changes dramatically. What's actually happening is that the story in your present hologram about the "past" is changing. In essence, you are creating a new "past" in the present, since there really is no "past" per se.

A good actor does this. If it's not part of the script itself, an actor will make up a past for their character, giving them a reason – the "motivation" – for any line or action they have in the movie. But that character's past is not real and only exists in the present moment when the actor is acting, using it to give background for how they deliver their lines.

Am I making myself clear? Since time is not real, all "past memories" could actually be nothing more than parts of the present-time hologram which fill in the storyline of our total immersion movie. What we call our "history" – personal history, human history, even the history of our planet and the physical universe – could simply be one small storyline in the current "Earth Environment" template downloaded to a Player for its present-time experience.

L. Ron Hubbard, in another one of his genius moments, called these "service facsimiles" – "'service' because they serve him; 'facsimiles' because they are in mental image picture form.... The service facsimile is therefore a picture containing an explanation of self condition."

In other words, we may well be making up our "past" in the present time to explain our current condition in life.

Believing in past lives was, at least for me, a very important part of that process. I could use a past life as a reason for my present-time behavior, just as we use a dysfunctional childhood to explain a dysfunctional adult.

Quick example... I had so-called "memories" of being a pharaoh in Egypt in the 14th century BC who was murdered by the priesthood when he tried to take away their power. This explained why, in this present life, I had done everything possible to get out of politics once I got elected, believing on some level that rising up the political ladder would eventually result in my death.

But for me, past lives explained more than just the "negative" behavior in the present....

* * *

I had very little sailing experience in this life, limited mainly to building and sailing a twelve-foot Sunfish in my teens, taking my wife for a ride on a Hobie Cat on our honeymoon (bad idea!), and skippering a 42-foot Morgan from Los Angeles to Catalina to scuba dive with friends.

Then in 1994 I stepped onto the _Kairos_ – an eighty-foot wooden schooner – to be the cook for a year. But somehow I knew exactly what to do and how to sail her perfectly – even single-hand her – including how to tie all the standard sailing knots. Within a short time I was replacing the captain when he went onshore for extended vacations, performing difficult anchoring maneuvers in pitch dark, turning the ship 180 degrees in a one-hundred-foot harbor, and sailing her precisely for three days and nights on open ocean from the Canary Islands to Madeira.

#

The Kairos

I cannot explain my behavior from anything I experienced in this lifetime. However, I had these "memories" of what I thought was a "past life" as a merchant marine, sailing back and forth from Boston to the Mediterranean in the early 1900's. There's no question in my mind the knowledge and expertise I had in "that life" was accessible to me in this life when I needed and wanted it.

But if there is no "past" and therefore no "past lives" – if we are making up our past in the present – how can I explain this behavior? How could I know how to sail such a ship with virtually no experience?

There is another explanation, one that aligns nicely with quantum physics.

Physicist Fred Alan Wolf wrote a book called _Parallel Universes: The Search for Other Worlds_ ; and there is a major theory within quantum physics called the "Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI)."

" _Many-worlds claims to resolve all the paradoxes of quantum theory since every possible outcome to every event defines or exists in its own 'history' or 'world.' In layman's terms, this means that there is a very large, perhaps infinite, number of universes and that everything that could possibly happen in our universe (but doesn't) does happen in some other universe(s).... Prior to 'many worlds,' this [universe] had been viewed as a single 'world-line.' Many-worlds rather views it as a many-branched tree where every possible branch of history is realized_."

Fred Alan Wolf said...

" _What is a parallel universe? Like an everyday universe it is a region of space and time containing matter, galaxies, stars, planets and living beings. In other words, a parallel universe is similar and possibly even a duplicate of our own universe. Not only in a parallel universe must there be other human beings, but these may be human beings who are exact duplicates of ourselves and who are connected to ourselves through mechanisms only explainable using quantum physics concepts.... The possibility exists that parallel universes may be extremely close to us, perhaps only atomic dimensions away but perhaps in a higher dimension of space – an extension into what physicists call superspace. Modern neuroscience through the study of altered states of awareness, schizophrenia, and lucid dreaming could be indications of the closeness of parallel worlds to our own_."

In other words, there is speculation among very prominent and respected quantum physicists that other worlds might exist simultaneously with our world, and that we might have a connection to them. This opens to the door to a fascinating theory about past lives....

I talked in Chapter Twenty-Six about the possibility an _Infinite I_ could have many Players representing it in many different Games, or even within one Game, at one time. What if the "past lives" we think we remember are not "past" at all, but happening _now_ , in a parallel universe? What if an _Infinite I_ wanted to experience a number of different times and places in the Human Game and created separate Players for those times and places? And what if we, as Players in _this_ space and time, had access to those other Players in other spaces and times, and could receive information about them and from them through the conduit of a mutual _Infinite I_?

I understand now that my life as a merchant marine was not a "past life" at all, but a simultaneous life going on in a parallel universe, and that the merchant marine is a Player just like me, but in a different time and space; and he and I share the same _Infinite I_. From my perspective it seems like I was able to tap into his life via our common _Infinite I_ and bring the information I needed through into mine.

I have other examples as well from my own experience about the "many-worlds interpretation" of quantum physics. But first I will relate a story about Jane Roberts who channeled the entity known as Seth. Apparently one day while Jane was in her trance and Seth was speaking, someone showed Seth a picture of Jane when she was about twelve years old and asked if this was the Jane Roberts who was sitting in front of them at that time. Seth said No, it was a picture of the Jane Roberts who had gone on to become a nun. Seth explained that Jane had been torn about her future when she was young, and part of her wanted to follow a strict religious training. At the point of decision, "one Jane" went into another universe and became a nun, and the Jane that was in front of the group "stayed" in this universe, according to Seth.

My own experience was when I had to make a decision to go into the Army and to Vietnam, or go to jail as a protestor. I really wanted to go to jail, to stand on my principles and register my opposition to the war. But my fiancé and my mother weren't too keen on the idea, and I wound up volunteering to become a Physician's Assistant in the Army (to make sure I never had to kill anyone). I now am certain there is a Stephen Davis in another universe who went to jail instead, living out his life based on that decision. Once I made one choice, the other choice played out in another "world."

And why not? The whole point of the Human Game is for an _Infinite I_ to have as many experiences as possible of what it feels like to be limited in power and joy and wisdom and abundance and love. Why shouldn't an _Infinite I_ have many Players in the Game at one time? Why shouldn't an _Infinite I_ explore all the various options that arise in the course of the Game for any particular Player in many different simultaneous, parallel worlds?

The "many-worlds interpretation" basically says all possibilities occur, in one universe or another, and Seth says – especially when faced with a life-changing decision – both alternatives continue in parallel universes.

But perhaps the most interesting part of this is the possibility of communication between the various Players. As we progress inside the cocoon and restore conscious communication with our _Infinite I_ , will we have greater access to all the Players who share our _Infinite I_ by leaving behind the judgments and beliefs that currently block that communication? It's no wonder access was limited during the first half of the Game; but now that we're heading away from limitation, who knows what's possible.

The bottom line is that it's very likely your _Infinite I_ has many Players in many universes – including many Players in the Human Game at many different times and places – and that what we have been calling "past lives" are actually "present lives" occurring simultaneously.

This, of course, would completely change the idea of "past lives" being some kind of progression of identities from which we are supposed to learn "lessons," which naturally brings up the question of Karma....

* * *

MOVIE SUGGESTION: Sliding Doors, with Gwyneth Paltrow (1998)

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Wikipedia – Jane Roberts __ – Back to reading

2. Tolle, Eckhart, The Power of Now: A Guide to Spiritual Enlightenment __ – Back to reading

3. Hubbard, L. Ron. _HCOB 15 Feb 74_ – Back to reading

4. Wikipedia \- Many-worlds interpretation __ – Back to reading

5. Wolf, Fred Alan. "Introduction," Parallel Universes: The Search for Other Worlds __ – Back to reading

6. Wikipedia \- Jane Roberts __ – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 28

KARMA, CAUSE & EFFECT

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: So what about karma?

_Answer:_ As I've said all along, there is a grain of truth in every philosophy, every religion, every spiritual path; but in the first half of the Human Game, that truth had to be perverted to a greater or lesser degree in order for a Player to experience limitations and restrictions or the Game wouldn't work.

In this case, the truth about karma has been twisted in many ways until it means many different things to many different people: "an eye for an eye, or a tooth for a tooth;" "you reap what you sow;" you will be rewarded for being good and punished for your sins; you have to suffer retribution for wrong done in previous lives; if you're bad, you'll come back as a lesser form of life next time; if you do spiritually valuable acts, you deserve and can expect good luck; or conversely, if you do harmful things, you can expect bad luck.

You can see first-half "thinking" and "judgments" and "beliefs" in every one of those concepts – clear evidence that karma, no matter what it means, belongs inside the movie theater.

So what's the truth about karma?

_"Karma is not punishment or retribution but simply an extended expression or consequence of natural acts. Karma means "deed" or "act" and more broadly names the universal principle of cause and effect, action and reaction that governs all life."_

Karma, therefore, at its most basic level is "cause and effect."

Karma means if you do _this_ , _that_ will happen. "Bad" karma is seen as having done something "wrong" in the past (or in a past life) that will come back to you in the present or future for you to "work out." "Good" karma is seen as having done something "right" in the past (or in a past life) that will come back to you in the present or future as a reward.

But if a Player can never do anything "wrong" – which is the Truth – how could there ever be any karma to work out? Karma is simply another belief that will fall by the wayside during your transition in the cocoon.

* * *

Actually, most Players in the Human Game hold the belief that if I do _this_ , _that_ will happen, even if they don't call it karma. Most people just call it the "law of cause and effect"...

...except there is no "law of cause and effect."

In truth, the "law of cause and effect" is nothing more than a belief system, and, like space and time, is a function of the hologram and is therefore not real.

Remember that "believing is seeing;" so if you believe in the "law of cause and effect," you will see it in action all around you.

But what if you _don't_ believe in the "law of cause and effect?"

Various people over the years have demonstrated what could be called a "total disregard" for the "law of cause and effect." Jesus, for example, ignored the law of cause and effect when he walked on water, or fed the multitude with a few fish and some bread, or healed the sick or raised the dead.

Sai Baba apparently ignores the law of cause and effect when he produces vibuti or jewelry out of thin air.

In his book, _The Holographic Universe_ , Michael Talbot mentions other documented examples of lesser-known individuals demonstrating feats outside the law of cause and effect. For example...

_"[Biologist Lyall Watson was investigating] one of the so-called Philippine psychic healers, but instead of touching a patient, all he did was hold his hand about ten inches over the person's body, point at his or her skin, and an incision would appear instantaneously. Watson not only witnessed several displays of the man's psychokinetic surgical skills, but once, when the man made a broader sweep with his finger than usual, Watson [himself] received an incision on the back of his own hand. He bears the scar to this day."_

" _One investigator, a member of the Paris Parliament named Louis-Basile Carre de Montgeron, witnessed enough miracles to fill four thick volumes on the subject.... In one instance a convulsionaire bent back into an arc so that her lower back was supported by 'the sharp point of a peg.' She then asked that a fifty-pound stone attached to a rope be hoisted to 'an extreme height' and allowed to fall with all its weight on her stomach. The stone was hoisted up and allowed to fall again and again, but the woman seemed completely unaffected by it. She effortlessly maintained her awkward position, suffered no pain or harm, and walked away from the ordeal without even so much as a mark on the flesh of her back."_

Stories abound of yogis who can sleep on a bed of nails without pain or evidence of skin damage; and there are perhaps some 5,000 members of the Pentecostal Holiness churches who show no effects from the bite of a poisonous snake or from drinking poison.

Of course, the phenomenon of firewalking (made popular in the West by Tony Robbins) is nothing more than convincing people to temporarily suspend their belief in the "law of cause and effect," and walk across hot coals which would normally "cause" burns on the feet without suffering the "effects."

In Chapter Twenty I talked about multiple personality disorder and the large number of cases where the human body seems to defy "cause and effect." There are many other examples of diseases occurring without any "cause," or _not_ occurring when the so-called cause is present but the effect is not. If smoking "causes" cancer, for instance, how can some people smoke their entire lives and never get cancer? If HIV "causes" AIDS, how can thousands of people have lived for thirty years diagnosed HIV-Positive, not take any medications and still be happy and healthy?

The movie, _The Matrix_ , was all about Neo learning to break out of his belief in the "law of cause and effect." There are two famous scenes toward the end that demonstrate his success – first, when Neo is shot close range with six bullets, seems to die temporarily, and then gets up again to continue the fight; and then when he unravels the matrix and stops the bullets coming at him, plucking one out of the air and looking at it, then letting them fall on the ground in front of him.

Our tendency is to explain away these examples as "supernatural," when in fact they are simply occurring outside the belief system of "cause and effect."

_A Course in Miracles_ says, "This is a course in cause and not effect."

The great quantum physicist David Bohm _"argued that the way science viewed causality was also much too limited. Most effects were thought of as having only one or several causes. However, Bohm felt that an effect could have an infinite number of causes.... Bohm conceded that most of the time one could ignore the vast cascade of causes that had led to any given effect, but he still felt it was important for scientists to remember that no single cause-and-effect relationship was ever really separate from the universe as a whole."_

But despite much evidence to the contrary, "cause and effect" remains one of our most basic, most ingrained, and most unchallenged belief systems; and its history goes way back to the beginning when our Biblical ancestors, Adam and Eve, were told it was eating the apple that caused them to get in trouble with The Lord.

_"And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?"_

* * *

There is an interesting phenomenon I want to mention that, on first glance, might appear to be "karma," or "cause and effect," but it's not.

As Players in the Human Game, we seem to experience similar holograms from time to time. In fact, patterns of experiences seem to follow us – in some cases, plague us – repeating over and over. A woman might constantly attract a certain kind of man, an alcoholic who abuses her, for example. A man might find himself getting fired from one job after another, always for the same reason. I'm sure you're aware of at least a few of your own patterns.

So what's going on here?

One way to look at "karma" and "cause and effect" is that we, as Players, can continue to experience similar holograms as long as we feel like we're victims of someone or something "out there" – the "effect" of someone or something else that is the "cause," until we have accepted the fact we cannot be the "effect" of anyone or anything at any time; until we have let go of the ideas of victim and perpetrator; until we no longer think the "cause" is anywhere except with our own _Infinite I_.

This is even true in the beginning of the second half of the Human Game, as our _Infinite I_ creates situations for us similar to what we encountered in the first half when we assigned power "out there," to give us the opportunity to "reclaim" that power and no longer see ourselves as the "effect" in our holographic experiences.

In other words, "karma" could be seen as a series of holographic experiences created and offered by an _Infinite I_ to give the Player the opportunity to assume full self-responsibility – 100% "cause" – for their own reactions and responses.

On the original "grade chart" developed by L. Ron Hubbard for Scientology in the 1970's, the EP (" _E_ nd _P_ henomenon," or end result) of the level called OT VIII was "at cause over life (matter, energy, space and time)." This was revised in 1988 (after Hubbard's death) since it was impossible to achieve using the techniques offered by the Church; but it was a good thought to begin with.

And it _is_ achievable; but part of the process of getting there involves dealing with this belief in the "law of cause and effect" and the judgment and fear beneath it.

As I said in Chapter Twenty-One, this is a tough one, and I'm not finished with it myself. So that's all I can say about it for now.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. The Holy Bible, King James Version. The Gospel according to St. Matthew, 5.38 __ – Back to reading

2. Ibid. Galations, 6.7 and Job, 4.8 __ – Back to reading

3. Wikipedia – Karma __ – Back to reading

4. Wikipedia – walking on water __ – Back to reading

5. Wikipedia – feeding the multitude __ – Back to reading

6. Jesus Heals the Sick at Gennesaret __ – Back to reading

7. Lazarus Raised from the Dead __ – Back to reading

8. Haraldsson, Erlendur and Karlis Osis, The Appearance And Disappearance Of Objects In The Presence Of Sri Sathya Sai Baba __ – Back to reading

9. Talbot, Michael. The Holographic Universe, pp. 126-127 __ – Back to reading

10. Ibid., p. 130 __ – Back to reading

11. Wikipedia \- Bed of nails __ – Back to reading

12. Wikipedia \- Church of God with Signs Following __ – Back to reading

13. Wikipedia – Firewalking __ – Back to reading

14. LivingWithoutHIVDrugs.com __ – Back to reading

15. Circle of Atonement. A Course in Miracles, T-21.VII.7 __ – Back to reading

16. Talbot, Michael. The Holographic Universe, p. 40 __ – Back to reading

17. The Holy Bible, King James Version. Genesis, 3.11 __ – Back to reading

18. Operation Clambake. OT Levels & Confidential Material Summary List __ – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 29

TRUST

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: Is it true, what L. Ron Hubbard once said, "On the day when we can fully trust each other, there will be peace on Earth"?

_Answer:_ No, not really, because the way he said it makes it sound like we should be working to learn to trust each other, and if we could succeed, we'd have peace on Earth.

That's just another incorrect twist to the Truth that happens inside the movie theater.

The intentional community I have been associated with for over seventeen years has spent most of that time trying to learn to trust each other, using various techniques and processes, such as "The Forum." I can say they've made some progress, and their community is perhaps more "peaceful" than other places to live; but I can't say they've gone very far.

Trusting each other, however, is not a goal to be worked for; it's a by-product – like Jed McKenna talked about "non-attachment." It's something that happens as a result of something else.

The only thing anyone ever has to trust is their _Infinite I_. If you trust your _Infinite I_ , you automatically trust everyone and everything in your holographic experiences, since your _Infinite I_ creates them all for you down to the smallest detail.

If you trust your _Infinite I_ , and someone appears in your hologram, you know you can trust them, too – trust them to read the movie script written by your _Infinite I_ word for word – since they are only there at the request and approval of your own _Infinite I_.

In fact, it's futile to spend time trying to trust each other when there is always the possibility in the back of your mind that someone "out there" could do something "bad" to you. If you fully trust your _Infinite I_ , you know that's simply not possible.

Therefore, it would be more accurate to say, "On the day when you can fully trust your _Infinite I_ , you will experience peace on Earth."

Yes, individual peace _is_ possible, regardless of what is going on "out there" in your hologram. In fact, individual peace is the only thing you have any control over through your free will to react and respond to your holographic experiences. War and violence may be raging all around you, and you can still be in peace because you fully trust your _Infinite I_ and the experiences it creates for you.

We could also say, on a larger scale, "On the day when we all can fully trust our _Infinite I's_ , we will experience peace on Earth." But that will only happen one Player at a time, unilaterally trusting their own _Infinite I_...

...which, as I said in Chapter Eighteen, is not something that comes easily at first. We have spent many years not trusting our _Infinite I_ , blaming it for our condition in life, resisting the experiences it was creating for us. It can take time to change that.

But if you use Robert's Process and spiritual autolysis, and let go of your judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears – and especially the layers of ego that want you to think you're driving the bus – you will soon know with certainty your _Infinite I_ can be trusted, and in fact is the only thing you ever need to trust. All else follows.

As the Holy Bible says...

_"Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?... for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you."_

Paraphrased in the language of the holographic universe....

" _Focus on trusting your Infinite I and know that it will take care of all the rest_."

"But," you ask, "are you saying I really do not have to do anything? I mean, am I just supposed to sit back and trust that my _Infinite I_ will feed me, or clothe my family, or keep a roof over our heads and take care of all our needs? Isn't that being just a tad bit 'irresponsible'?"

Well.... Yes, that's what I'm saying; and No, it's not 'irresponsible' at all, which of course would be a judgment and a belief, again probably learned from the parents. After all, who else can create the hologram with the food and clothes you and your family need, and the roof over your heads, other than your _Infinite I_?

But I want to make sure we're putting the emphasis on the right word: "Do I really not _have_ to do anything?" All you _have_ to do is be the Player and experience the holographic universe your _Infinite I_ creates for you. Nothing else.

I don't want to give the impression that all a second half Player does is sit around all day. That would be totally boring (unless it brings you total joy to do so!). In fact, life in the cocoon is fuller and more interesting and more active than ever. But instead of trying to "make something happen," or having goals or agendas or plans or objectives, you simply react and respond moment by moment to the present circumstances created by your _Infinite I_. In the second half, the only way you can live is in "reactive mode," as Robert Scheinfeld calls it.

By the word "reactive," I also don't want to imply that you don't make decisions. You do; sometimes even decisions that involve the future, like scheduling to give a seminar, or agreeing on a date for a child's wedding. When a holographic experience appears in our "reality," we are free to act on it – to take whatever action is appropriate and necessary in that moment. That's a lot different than trying to "make something happen," or believing we must "do something" in order to have a life. An _Infinite I_ probably has a lot of interesting experiences planned for its Player – especially in the second half of the Game – if we would stop trying to create our own lives and trust our _Infinite I_ to bring us a life we could only dream of, and certainly are not capable of creating ourselves.

You're reading this book, I assume, because you aren't totally happy with the way things are going in your life. I also assume _you've_ been trying to be the bus driver. Why not give your _Infinite I_ a shot at it – really trust it, let go and give it a chance?

You can start by experimenting with the three exercises I outlined in Chapter Eighteen, doing only what it brings you joy for twenty-four hours, not trying to make anything happen for twenty-four hours, and just saying Yes to everything that appears in your hologram for twenty-four hours. By the end of those three days, I have full confidence you will have enough direct experience that your _Infinite I_ can be trusted, and you will start exercising that trust more and more.

All trust begins with trusting your own _Infinite I_.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. The Holy Bible, King James Version. The Gospel according to St. Matthew, 6.31-33 __ – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 30

MONEY

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: You must be rich to be having all the experiences you talk about – sailing, traveling around Europe, scuba diving and stuff. How do you make money?

_Answer:_ As I write these words, I have exactly $20 to my name, total assets. I don't think that qualifies for "rich." But I've already said I never worry about money at all, which is one of the reasons I can give this book away for free on the Internet.

It's more than that, really. It's that I have an unlimited supply of money to have whatever holographic experience comes up for me in each moment; and so do you, although you don't realize it yet.

But I don't "make money." No one makes money. We only think we do. That's part of the illusion inside the movie theater.

I realize money is one of the biggest issues for most people. They can't get enough of it; they can't keep what they've got; and they have tried everything to change that situation with very little success.

Worse than that, actually, they have been promised there is a "secret" to "attracting" money; but they follow the steps religiously and it doesn't work. So they blame themselves for not doing the "magic" just right. As one student told me, "I've tried to use _The Secret_ and the 'Law of Attraction' and other self-help techniques to manifest money, but they didn't work. I'm still broke, so there must be something wrong with me, or I must be doing something wrong."

Here's the real secret: The problem is not the person – not you; it's the "magic" that doesn't work most of the time for most people. It's that we have developed this false knowledge about money and where it comes from while inside the movie theater, and it's time to find out how money really works in a holographic universe.

* * *

As I was doing my Holographic Universe workshops in Europe, I started collecting different beliefs the participants had about money. What follows is a list of the major ones. Which ones do you think are true or false for you?

~ I have to earn money

~ I have to work for money

~ I can't afford everything I want

~ There's a limited supply of money available to me

~ Every time I spend money, my supply of money decreases

~ Nothing I really want is free

~ If I want more money, I have to work harder, or smarter, or deliver more value

~ I've got to have a plan to make money, invest it wisely, and build wealth over time

~ If I have money, I have to protect it or I could lose it

~ I have to be "responsible" with my money

~ I must be fully, totally, and truly committed to making money

~ There's never enough money

~ There's something "dirty" about money and those who have a lot of it

~ Money is the root of all evil

~ The rich get richer and the poor get poorer

~ More money is better

~ Money doesn't grow on trees

~ Some have the "gift" of making money and others don't

~ Money doesn't come easy

~ You can't have money and be spiritual

~ Money comes from "out there," and you have to go "out there" to get it and bring it "in here" to you

So, how many of these beliefs did you think were True? All of them? Half of them? A few of them?

My favorite on this list is "money doesn't grow on trees." I used to hear that a lot when I was young; and it always puzzled me, because.... Yes, it _does_ grow on trees. Money is made of paper, and paper is made from trees! So that one is False.

Would it surprise you to know _none_ of the list above is True? Not one – not in a holographic universe. They are all beliefs people have about money, "stories" they make up to explain why they think they don't have enough money, or can't make more money, or in many ways feel like they are a victim of the "money game." Repeat: All of these beliefs are false in a holographic universe, which should be expected since they were all formed while inside the movie theater.

Let's take a closer look at why they're all false....

Remember that **consciousness** creates everything from The Field. Your _Infinite I_ is **consciousness** ; therefore, your _Infinite I_ is creating everything you experience in your holographic universe as the Player, down to the smallest detail.

#

Look at this picture again carefully....

The Player is on the other side of The Field, from which all things are created. All power resides in the _Infinite I_ , and a Player has no power to create anything.

Said the other way, everything we have, everything we see, everything we experience has been created for us by our _Infinite I's_.

This is the first and most important concept to understand, especially about money. But it's also the most difficult for the ego to accept. The ego would like to think the Player could create something, manifest something, make something happen. But it's simply not possible in a holographic universe, since we – the Players – are on the other side of The Field, with and in the hologram. Only an _Infinite I_ can create a hologram, and only an _Infinite I_ can create money in that hologram.

But if an _Infinite I_ chooses certain specific experiences from The Field it wants its Player to have – and the only reason an _Infinite I_ would create a Player is for that Player to have experiences – wouldn't the _Infinite I_ also give its Player all the tools it needs to have those experiences as well? Does it make sense any _Infinite I_ – with infinite resources at its disposal – would want its Player to have a certain experience and then not give it everything it needs to have that experience, including all the money required, especially since the Player has no power to create anything on its own?

So the first thing to understand about money is that it is created by your _Infinite I_ , and if your _Infinite I_ wants you to have any particular holographic experience, it will have to provide all the money you need to have that experience as well.

(The exception to this, of course, is if your _Infinite I_ wants you to experience _not_ having money for some reason; but it's still providing all the money you need for that experience, even though "all the money you need" might mean "not enough" as far as you are concerned.)

* * *

It's true most Players think they "make money," and they have developed all kinds of beliefs about how that money has to be "made" – by working, by selling something, by getting loans or gifts, by inheritance – by many different methods.

The truth is the _Infinite I_ is the one who creates the money for its Player; but it can only "send" that money to its Player in ways that the Player thinks it can receive it. This is where the Player's beliefs come in.

So let's look again at that list of beliefs about money we had above....

~ I have to earn money

~ I have to work for money

~ I can't afford everything I want

~ There's a limited supply of money available to me

~ Every time I spend money, my supply of money decreases

~ Nothing I really want is free

~ If I want more money, I have to work harder, or smarter, or deliver more value

~ I've got to have a plan to make money, invest it wisely, and build wealth over time

~ If I have money, I have to protect it or I could lose it

~ I have to be "responsible" with my money

~ I must be fully, totally, and truly committed to making money

~ There's never enough money

~ There's something "dirty" about money and those who have a lot of it

~ Money is the root of all evil

~ The rich get richer and the poor get poorer

~ More money is better

~ Money doesn't grow on trees

~ Some have the "gift" of making money and others don't

~ Money doesn't come easy

~ You can't have money and be spiritual

~ Money comes from "out there," and you have to go "out there" to get it and bring it "in here" to you

If you happen to have any of these beliefs and think they are true, then that's the only way your _Infinite I_ can "send" you money, since you will only be able to perceive that money based on your beliefs.

An _Infinite I_ could create a million dollars in a Player's bank account "out of thin air," and the Player would think it was "some kind of mistake" if their beliefs say it can't happen that way, or think they can only get money in other ways.

One woman owed her bank $10,000. One day she got a statement saying her balance was $0. She immediately called the bank, which was very quick to agree with her that it was definitely a mistake and sent her a new statement restoring the $10,000 balance. (True story.)

Another woman, who understands how money works in a holographic universe, owed her bank $30,000. When she received a statement that her balance was $0, she simply expressed her deepest appreciation to her _Infinite I_ and went on with her life. (True story.)

I like to call these beliefs we have about money, "stories." A Player needs a "story" to explain how they get money. The _Infinite I_ needs no "story" to explain its creation of money; only the Player, with its limited mind and limited beliefs and limited thinking, needs a "story" to receive it.

This is exactly how it is supposed to be in the first half of the Human Game, because requiring a story creates a lot of limitation. If there are only a few ways you believe you can get money – earning it, winning it, or inheriting it, for example – then there are severe limitations put on how you can get money and how much you can get.

The _Infinite I_ has no such limitations on how much money it can create for its Player; and in the second half of the Human game – when a Player is no longer exploring how limited it can become – it is time to leave behind all the beliefs, all the stories we have made up about money.

Notice I said "leave behind all the beliefs." I didn't say, "change the beliefs;" and this is a very important point.

All these self-help techniques, all these "secrets" someone tries to share with you about manifesting more money and more cars and more... everything, are all based on several skewed premises, which is why they don't work for most people most of the time. For instance...

~ They say you have the power to manifest anything you want. You don't. It's that simple. Despite what your ego wants you to believe, only your _Infinite I_ can manifest something in your holographic experience; not you.

~ They say you can attract money and cars and such into your life by meditating or praying or visualizing them, or repeating certain affirmations. You can't; at least, not on a consistent basis. (We'll talk more in a minute about why this might work occasionally.)

~ They say all you have to do is to _change your beliefs_ , like the "power of positive thinking."

What's wrong with the "power of positive thinking?" Again, nothing "wrong" with it. It's perfect for the first half of the Human Game because it leads into such limitation; first, because it's "thinking," which belongs to the first half while "feeling" belongs to the second half; secondly, because the Player has no "power;" and thirdly, because it simply trades one belief for another.

True, a positive thought might be "better" than a negative thought if you're in the first half of the Human Game. But in the second half, that's a judgment; and as we've seen, judgments keep us limited.

Underneath all beliefs are judgments. If there was no judgment, there would be no need for a belief and it would cease to exist. But if you try to "change your beliefs" without changing the judgment, nothing really changes at all. You're just substituting one belief for another while the judgment remains intact.

If there really were a "secret" to manifesting everything we want, it would work for all the people who use it all the time. The actual result from all this self-help is that when it doesn't work – which means for most people most of the time – the person feels worse about themselves than when they started, thinking there is something wrong with them, that they can't do it "right," that they're deficient or defective somehow. The ironic perfection is that's exactly what every first-half technique or religion or theory is designed to do – make you feel more limited.

So I am not suggesting you "change your beliefs" at all. I'm suggesting you see your beliefs for what they are – limiting filters on your perceptions – and leave them behind altogether. Even in the powerful example Dr. Lipton used in his seminar, where people saw one picture of FEAR with one set of glasses and another picture of LOVE with another set of glasses, it was still trading one filter for another; and neither filter allowed you to see the whole picture.

As Players in the second half of the Human Game, we don't need beliefs; we don't need stories. What we need to do now is to see the whole picture – both FEAR and LOVE – end our judgments of both of them, and – like Triumph and Disaster – start to "treat those two imposters just the same."

* * *

#

We talked in Chapter Twenty-Four about "virtual reality"....

If part of your computer-generated "virtual reality" experience was to look at your bank account and see a million dollars in it, I wonder whether you would say, "This must be a mistake. I didn't earn that money." Most likely you would realize it was created out of thin air by the designer of your "virtual reality" experience and would not need to figure out how it got there. In fact, you would know how it got there.

But according to quantum physics, life itself is a "virtual reality" experience, a holographic universe created for us by our _Infinite I's_. If we, as Players, would stop needing some "story" about how money can come to us, it would take away all the limitations we put on receiving money and make the _Infinite I's_ job so much easier.

* * *

One question I hear a lot from friends, especially peaceworkers.... "How do we get our _Infinite I's_ to create more money for us, since we want to do 'good' things with it?"

The answer may be difficult for some people to take: "The question itself is a lot of the reason you may be having trouble."

Why? First of all, the thought that you "want to do 'good' things with money" is still a judgment. In fact, there's even one group who thinks there is something innately "wrong" with money and that it needs to be "humanized," which they would be happy to do if you just give it to them.

As far as your _Infinite I_ is concerned, there are not "good" things or "bad" things that can be done with money. Money – like everything else – is neutral. Money does not need to be "spiritualized," or "humanized," or "purified" by using it for "all the right reasons." There are no "right ways" or "wrong ways" to use money; that's just another judgment to let go of.

As you recall, in the first half, the game was to see how much limitation a Player could experience on the outside so the _Infinite I_ could have an "inner experience." That means the _Infinite I_ can use money, for example, as a tool to create limitation. For some people, it might mean not having much money, or none at all. That alone can produce a great deal of limitation. For other Players, their _Infinite I_ might choose to give them all the money they can have – even more than they can spend – and experience the limitations that come with wealth, like realizing that peace and joy are not the result of having a lot of money. I'm sure you know people who are wealthy but very unhappy at the same time. In fact, having money can often be more limiting than not having it.

Or maybe an _Infinite I_ gives its Player money, and they lose it and experience limitation that way. Or maybe a Player is very comfortable financially, but something happens to the economy and the Player feels victimized by "powers beyond its control" when the fortune they think they worked so hard to create is suddenly gone. All of these possibilities and more can lead to limiting experiences in the first half of the Game.

The bottom line is that it is the _Infinite I_ who decides how much money you're going to have based on the experiences it wants you to have and the best way it decides it can create those experiences.

That's true in the second half of the Human Game as well.

In the second half the _Infinite I_ wants you to enjoy infinite abundance, and that includes having all the money you want and need. But this isn't going to mean that as soon as you start playing the Second Half your bank account is automatically going to be full to overflowing, because you still have judgments about money that you developed in the first half, and beliefs about how you can get that money that have to be dealt with. Better said, in the first half of the Game you assigned a lot of power "out there" in relationship to money – who creates it, what you have to do "out there" to bring it "in here," and so on; and as we've discussed, the first thing you will be doing in the second half is having experiences that show you where you have assigned this power in order for you to "reclaim" it and recognize the true source of abundance – your _Infinite I_.

* * *

So can we just ask our _Infinite I_ for money, or pray for it? Yes, you can. You can send a message to your _Infinite I_ in any way you feel is appropriate that you would like some money. You should feel free at any time to let your _Infinite I_ know your wishes – which it probably already does, but it doesn't matter. Ask anyway.

By the way, you only need to ask once. Your _Infinite I_ will hear you the first time and doesn't need a reminder! Asking more than once looks a lot like a judgment that something's wrong because you haven't gotten it yet. Remember, your _Infinite I_ may decide _not_ getting what you ask for is the most appropriate experience for you and it, even in the second half; so you cannot have any expectations attached to your request when you ask, no need to have your wish fulfilled. Perhaps your _Infinite I_ has something else in store that might make you even more joyful and more abundant than what you were asking for!

This was certainly true for me. My _Infinite I_ knew how much I loved the ocean, and sailing, and whales and dolphins. I often dreamt of living on a boat, but I had no money to make that happen. Instead of giving me a couple million dollars, my _Infinite I_ created an experience for me sailing around the east Atlantic Ocean on an eighty-foot sailboat with some of my best friends, swimming with the whales and dolphins, playing music, and having the time of my life for a year; and it didn't cost me a penny. I could never have created that on my own, or even thought about that possibility.

So why ask for money in the first place? If you want to ask for something, why not ask instead for what you know you're going to get anyway – whatever experiences your _Infinite I_ wants you to have, along with all the money needed for those experiences; and if you're still in the phase of recognizing where you have assigned power "out there" about money, you really should be asking for experiences when you _don't_ get the money you want so you can clearly see the limiting judgments and beliefs you still have about money.

"But wait a minute," a good friend says to me. "I decided I wanted a motorcycle; so I used _The Secret_ , visualized what I wanted, and I got one!"

Fantastic! I am sincerely happy for you and glad you got what you wanted. But I have to disagree with you about how you got it, since you have no power to create anything, and neither does some secret law of attraction. Only your _Infinite I_ could create a motorcycle for you, and I can think of a lot of other explanations of how and why you got what you wanted.

For example, since I know you, I know what a really good man you are; and if I were your _Infinite I_ , I would give you a motorcycle too, just to reward you for what a great job you're doing as my Player. I can also imagine it happened the other way around – that your _Infinite I_ wanted you to have a motorcycle, and has wanted that for a long time, but your beliefs made it difficult to get one for you until you decided you could "manifest" one using a secret formula. (That, by the way, is the one benefit of _The Secret_ and the "Law of Attraction" – that you expand your beliefs about how things can come into your reality.)

Or maybe your _Infinite I_ wanted you to begin to realize that _it_ was the source of all your experiences, and deepen the connection and communication with you; and the best way it could find to do that was give you a motorcycle, and then later give you this paragraph in this book to let you know where it really came from.

The possibilities are endless. The only possibility that is _not_ possible (what?!) is that _you_ "manifested" the motorcycle, because it simply cannot be something _you_ did independent of a holographic experience created by your _Infinite I_. Recognizing that fact is an important step to take in the cocoon.

Despite what the ego would like us to believe – that we have the power to create a motorcycle, for example, or money, or a house, or anything because of something we, as a Player, did – this is one of those beliefs inside the movie theater that can only lead further into limitation. By design, it's important the Player _mis_ assign the true source of its experiences in the first half or the illusion would be broken and the Game would be up.

As I said, since I know you, I also know you've tried to manifest other things before using this same "secret," and they haven't worked. What's important to understand is that it wasn't you who did anything wrong in those other cases. In fact, you – and all of us – have done everything perfectly as Players, whether we realize it or not. The techniques we have used to try to make our experiences different are what do not work. Yes, they all contain some truth and some workability some of the time for some people; but they are anywhere from slightly skewed to way off target in order to make the first half of the Game possible.

* * *

Now that we're playing in the second half, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth can be revealed; and as Players we will be given new opportunities to experience something very different. For instance, off the top of my head I can think of six general ways in which we blocked the flow of money in the first half of the Human Game that we might have to take a close look at in the second half in order to start behaving in the opposite way:

1. Having judgments and beliefs about money

2. Wanting money because you think something has to be fixed, changed or improved in your experiences or "out there"

3. Thinking you have the power to create money

4. Thinking you have to "do something" to get money

5. Thinking money has to have a "story" of how it comes to you

6. Not trusting the _Infinite I_

We've talked a lot about most of these already, so let me just make a few additional comments....

I know so many people who want money because they want something "out there" to be different. Maybe it's to save the whales, or end poverty or hunger, or create world peace. Noble thoughts, all of them; but still judgments that something's wrong and needs to be fixed, changed or improved. Remember that the whales, poverty, hunger, war and violence are showing up in your holographic experience, created by your _Infinite I_ , for a reason. In the first half of the Game, the reason was to create more limitation. In the second half, it's to show you where you assigned power "out there" and forgot the fact your _Infinite I_ was creating everything in your hologram and none of it was "real." So in the second half it's doubtful your _Infinite I_ – who wants only infinite joy and abundance for you – will financially support the continuation of these first-half judgments.

One of the biggest beliefs to let go of is that we, as Players, not only have the power to create money, but that we have to go out and "do something" in order to get it – in other words, to be "pro-active," especially when it comes to money. But, literally, there is nothing we can do. Our _Infinite I_ is doing it all for us, and our only part is to leave behind our judgments and beliefs and therefore be more able to receive the abundance trying to come our way.

The fact is that we only think we have to do something because we have these made-up stories of how money can get to us. When we let go of those stories, money can start to flow in many different ways we can hardly imagine. Let me offer two examples (based on actual experiences) from a different gender perspective, beginning with "ladies first"....

Your parents are about to celebrate their fiftieth wedding anniversary, and you've been working for months to collect pictures of them since they were very young to make into a movie celebrating their lives together. You found the final picture you wanted last night, and now you're ready to start creating the video.

There is this really cool software program you ran across on the Internet to make videos with music and voice-over and animation and everything, and it costs $119.95. When you paid your credit card bill last time, you knew you only had about $150 in available credit, and you also need some new shoes for work. But you are so excited about this gift for mom and dad that you decide to buy the software anyway and worry about the shoes later.

The video is a total success and your parents are very touched.

When your credit card statement arrives, you still have $150 available credit. This doesn't make sense. You look and see your credit limit had not been raised; and then you notice the charge for the software program is not on the statement, although you had received confirmation of the charge from the company.

Concerned that the company had not actually been paid, and not wanting to do anything unethical, you call them. "Yes, we received payment for your purchase. No problem."

So you decide to wait, expecting the $119.95 charge to be on the next credit card statement. But it's not. Nor is it on the next month's.

You really need those shoes by now, so you purchase them on the same credit card. They don't show up on the next few statements either. In fact, none of the charges you make on this credit card are showing up on any statements, although the merchants and vendors are getting paid.

Finally, as a second half Player, you realize your _Infinite I_ is creating money for you in a new and very inventive way, and you express your deep appreciation.

* * *

And now from a male perspective....

You decide to go out to dinner with some friends, and you look in your wallet and see you've got $10. You get to the restaurant, look at the menu, and your mouth waters when you read about a T-bone steak. Your entire body is filled with joy at the thought of eating this T-bone, and your excitement grows with each passing minute.

Then you see the price of the steak: $14. You remember you only have $10. Next you remember the news story last night that red meat is bad for you, and you decide you really shouldn't eat the steak anyway. Then you look across the table at a woman you have been dying to hook-up with and realize she's a vegetarian who only eats organic food; and since you want to impress her, you don't want the steak after all. With each new thought, your excitement level goes down and down, until you're no longer happy you came to dinner.

Finally you decide on a Caesar salad (with no grilled chicken), which costs $7, so you'll have a little left for a drink and tip and tax. But no beer, because your doctor said you have to lose weight, although now you really want one.

You leave the restaurant an hour later, without the woman of your dreams, sad and lonely and unsatisfied, and $10 poorer. On top of that, the Caesar salad was terrible and the waitress was rude. You regret the whole evening.

Or...

You decide to go out to dinner with some friends, and you look in your wallet and see you've got $10. You get to the restaurant, look at the menu, and your mouth waters when you read about a T-bone steak. Your entire body is filled with joy at the thought of eating this T-bone, and your excitement grows with each passing minute.

Then you see the price of the steak: $14, but you remind yourself your _Infinite I_ wants you to follow your excitement and joy, and will reward you when you do now that you're playing the second half of the Human Game. So you order the steak, and a beer.

The woman sitting across from you eating her baked potato and broccoli leans over and whispers, "Strange... I really wanted a steak tonight, too. I wish I had ordered that!" After dinner, saying she really enjoys being around you because you're such a free and happy person, she gives you her phone number. The whole night was a total success; the food was prepared perfectly, and the service was impeccable. Best of all, you wake up the next morning having lost a couple pounds.

But wait! How did you pay for the steak? When the bill came, you looked in your wallet and there was $20, not $10. Well, you think, you must have miscounted before you left the house.

Maybe. But just maybe your _Infinite I_ changed your hologram and downloaded $20 into your wallet instead of $10 when it was clear you weren't going to let your judgments and beliefs get in the way of your excitement. After this happens to you a few more times, you finally accept the fact your _Infinite I_ has found another way to create money for you.

Do this a few times – give your _Infinite I_ the opportunity to support your excitement financially – and your life will never be the same. Soon you'll be "finding" money in places you never dreamed of, receiving money in ways you never thought possible, and forgetting to look at your bank balance because you know it's not real anyway and can be changed in the twinkling of an _Infinite I_.

* * *

"Are you serious? Does this really work?"

Yes, it does. At least, it has for me and many other people I know who understand how money works in a holographic universe. I'm not saying I always have a lot of money in my pocket or in my bank account. But I know without a doubt I have access to an unlimited supply of money through my _Infinite I_ , and that I will always have all the money I need to have the experiences my _Infinite I_ wants; and that's a fantastic place to be, because I never have to worry about money again.

It's really pretty simple... if my _Infinite I_ wants me to have an experience, it will give me all the money needed for that experience. If I, as the Player, think I want to have an experience, but my _Infinite I_ disagrees with me, the money won't be available no matter what I might try to make happen. You can't get any simpler than that!

But I don't think that's really the question. Most probably the real question on your mind is, "Will this work for _you_?"

Specifically, in the first half of the Human Game, we believed we had to be "pro-active," believed we had to "do something" to "make something happen." Out of that belief came others related to money, like having to work for it, or go "out there" and get it, or make other people give it to us in one form or another. In fact, the only ways we thought we could get money were totally dependent on other people, to whom we assigned a lot of power. In reality, even in the first half, our _Infinite I_ was creating all the money we were getting as part of the holograms it downloaded to our brains, the amount of money limited of course by our judgments and beliefs about the ways it could come to us. It just _looked_ like we were "making money." It just _looked_ like we were dependent on other people to give it to us.

In the second half, we can leave all that behind with the absolute certainty that all the money we need for any experience will be part of any hologram our _Infinite I_ downloads to us.

But please don't misunderstand. I'm not suggesting that all you do in the second half is sit in your chair and wait for the money to be magically deposited into your bank account, unless that's what brings you the most joy and all you're motivated to do at that moment. I _am_ suggesting that whatever you feel excited to do, whatever brings you joy, is where you should focus all your attention and energy, rather than doing something that doesn't bring you joy because you feel you "have to make money." Maybe the resentment and other discomfort you feel working at a job you don't like simply for the money is your _Infinite I's_ way of saying "Stop it!" and find out what excites you to do the most, regardless of the money.

The only thing stopping most people from doing just that is fear. But who knows? Perhaps what really excites you would bring in more money than whatever job you hate now.

There's only one thing I can guarantee you, based on my own experience and the results of testing and challenging this model: Once you've processed your judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears about money, your _Infinite I_ will have a much easier job getting the money to you to follow your excitement; and you will grow to trust your _Infinite I_ completely that it will provide all the money you need to have the experiences it wants.

* * *

I could give you quite a few examples from my own life when money appeared in my bank account or my wallet for absolutely no reason – exactly the amount I needed to do something, and exactly right on time – with the paperwork to prove it; and I have no idea where the money came from. In fact, now I'm so used to money showing up out of thin air that I'm no longer surprised when it does.

However, an _Infinite I's_ financial support doesn't always take the form of cash or credit card charges that never show up on the statement. Sometimes your _Infinite I_ , in its infinite wisdom and power, has a better way to create an experience for you that you thought was going to take cash. The year I spent on the whale and dolphin research ship is a good example, where it didn't cost me a penny, nor did I have to find a half-million dollars to build the ship.

I will admit, however, there are times I wonder how my _Infinite I_ is going to "pull this one off." For example, it became very obvious recently that my _Infinite I_ wanted me to go back to the United States for a while. I don't yet fully understand why, or for how long; and I was very surprised because I am so happy living in Europe. But it seemed like the flow was in the direction of "home" from reading all the ripples in the Universal ocean, including almost magical "coincidences" of finding the perfect flight at the perfect time for the perfect price. But I still didn't have the money to pay for the ticket.

I wasn't worried about where the money was coming from. In fact, if the money didn't show up, I would simply have understood that I was reading the ripples incorrectly and I wasn't supposed to go back to the States after all. But I did wonder, when the ripples became clear, how my _Infinite I_ was going to come up with a fairly large sum of money this time.

In the past, as I said, it has just "appeared" in my bank account, and I expected something similar in this case. But that's not what happened. Instead, a friend loaned me the money. Normally I don't like borrowing money from people. I used to do that inside the movie theater, but hadn't since I walked out the back door, making it clear to my _Infinite I_ that I wasn't totally comfortable with that method of getting money to me – a judgment of mine about "other people's" money.

However, my _Infinite I_ chose this opportunity for me to let go of this particular belief on how money can come to me, letting me see the judgments and fears and layers of the ego underneath, and reminding me "other people" are in my hologram "to set something in motion to support me." In fact, I could accept this "loan" from my friend because I also knew with certainty it was what his _Infinite I_ wanted to happen for him, although I may never know why.

* * *

Here's the best way I can come up with to explain this in a nutshell....

We're playing a very sophisticated video game, using the "Earth Environment" template, but designed uniquely for each Player by their _Infinite I_. That _Infinite I_ has certain experiences it wants its Player to have – "outer experiences" in order for the _Infinite I_ to have the "inner experiences."

In most good video games, a Player needs certain things to play, stay alive, and make it to the final destination – such as weapons, ammunition, energy packs, special tools or skills, keys, clues, and so on. In our video game, we need a lot of things as well, but mostly we need money so we can buy everything else.

In a video game, the designer creates everything and makes it available during the game so all the player has to do is find it and grab it and add it to their inventory. In our video game, the same thing is true. All the money we need to play, stay alive, and make it to our final destination is created by our _Infinite I_ – since we, as a Player have no power to create anything – and it's all right there for the Player to take.

So it's the job of the _Infinite I_ to create the money we need and make it available. It's the job of the Player to find it and grab it. "Finding it," however, is made difficult when the Player believes the money can only be in certain locations, and they can only get it if they work for it or win it or inherit it or....

When a Player lets go of these belief systems about money, they can begin to see it in many different places and their _Infinite I_ can make it more easily available. But it's still the Player's job to reach out and take the money. That's what's meant about a Player having total free will over their reactions and responses to the experiences created for them. I could have, for instance, _not_ taken the loan from my friend to buy my airline ticket back to the States, choosing instead to hang on to my judgment and belief about "other people's" money. In that case I would not have been able to ride the ripple and follow the flow in the direction my _Infinite I_ was offering.

So there are two basic reasons I can give for this phenomenon I experience with money. First, I have let go of virtually all my judgments and beliefs about money; and secondly, I have taken off almost all the limits on the ways my _Infinite I_ can get that money to me, giving it many more possibilities. I will admit, however, having money just appear in my outstretched hand would still freak me out. Maybe one day....

#

FOOTNOTES

1. The Grace Foundation __ – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 31

THE EGO

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: You've been pretty hard on the ego throughout this book. Isn't that a judgment in itself?

_Answer:_ Excellent point, and I'm glad for the chance to clarify it.

First, let's make sure we agree on what we mean by the "ego," since that word has been used a lot and means different things to different people.

In this book I have used "ego" to mean the personality construct we create while playing the Human Game. It is composed of many layers of false identities we assume as we encounter the limiting and restricting holographic experiences in the first half.

In fact, the ego is what allows us to play the first half of the Game; otherwise we could not form our judgments, beliefs, and opinions and fulfill our purpose for the _Infinite I_.

All of our fears, for example – with the fear of non-existence as the most basic – are the result of some threat to one or more layers of the ego, which fights back for its very existence.

In that sense, we can express great appreciation to the ego for the role it has performed so well while in the movie theater. It, too, was as perfect as everything else in our holographic experience.

The process inside the cocoon, as I have described it, is becoming aware of all these layers of the ego – the false identities we have assumed – and letting go of them. It's a process of finding out who we are _not_ , and then ultimately finding the true answer to who we are.

But we have assigned the ego a lot of power during the first half of the Human Game, and we have rewarded it time and time again for the good job it has done, to the point that it seems to have taken on a life of its own.

In his _Enlightenment Trilogy_ , Jed McKenna actually personifies the ego, making it female and calling it "Maya"....

"the goddess Maya, architect of this magnificent palace of delusion..."

"Maya – goddess of confusion and misdirection..."

"Maya, Lord of the Prison of Duality..."

Jed speaks a lot in terms of fighting a battle with Maya on the road to becoming a butterfly...

"Maya, goddess of delusion, has been doing her job with supreme mastery since the first spark of self-awareness flickered in some monkey's brainbox..."

"This is Maya's house. She controls everything. She has every advantage. We are patients in Maya's asylum...."

"Thumb through any magazine, flip through the channels of the TV, go wherever there are people, and you'll see nothing but a morbidly juvenile, fear-infected, stunted, runtish race over which Maya reigns supreme and unchallenged...."

...and Jed seems to think Maya will win a lot of the time...

"You think you're on top of something, but the only thing to be on top of is Maya, and she's on top of you like a house on a mouse...."

"This is the one true war of which all others are but shadows, and for which all other conflict is but a metaphor. In the short term, Maya almost always crushes the rebellion. By my estimate, her win/loss ratio is better than 100,000,000:1."

It should not surprise anyone that when you begin to dismantle the ego in the cocoon, the ego will fight back. It knows it is literally fighting for its life, because if you follow through with the Process and spiritual autolysis, the end result is its virtual annihilation. (We will never eliminate the ego completely as long as we have a body and play the Human Game.)

But we should not make the mistake of judging or blaming the ego, or view the transformation into a butterfly as an all-out war with the ego. After all, the ego is simply another piece of the hologram that isn't real, but only looks and feels real; and it has played its part perfectly in our holographic experiences just like anything and anyone else we have encountered while playing the Human Game. Any other approach will continue to assign power to the ego it does not possess on its own.

"Fear of truth is the foundation upon which Maya's Palace of Delusion is erected. She has no power but that we give her."

"Viewed this way, the idea that Maya is evil, that delusion is negative, that the dreamstate is a prison, or that the dualistic universe is anything other than the grandest and most wonderful of all blessings is laughably absurd. Why hate Maya? Where would you be without her?"

* * *

If you planned a walking tour from Maine to Florida, starting in January, the first thing you'd do would be to put on some warm clothes. As you walked, and the temperature went down even more, you'd keep adding layers of clothes to keep you warm. But by the time you got to South Carolina in April, you'd start taking off those layers, one by one, since you no longer need them to protect you from the weather. Once you hit Florida, you would have discarded almost every piece of clothing you had.

I doubt you'd curse those clothes or consider them to have been "wrong." More likely you would appreciate the warmth they provided you, be grateful to have had them, and thank each piece as you threw it away for the role it had played on your successful trip.

* * *

In Chapter Sixteen I mentioned a good friend who had been in his cocoon for about a year and a half, making some real progress, when his ego – Maya – began fighting back with a vengeance. As we all do, he was experiencing holograms that brought back to life the more difficult judgments, beliefs, opinions and fears he had formed inside the movie theater during his first-half years; and when the going got tough, he didn't seem to like how he was feeling. Apparently he thought he had done enough work by then and should only be experiencing holograms of the second-half variety, so he began blaming his _Infinite I_ for "f$#king him over, as usual." He stopped running the Process or doing spiritual autolysis and started to justify his judgments, maintain his beliefs, and strengthen his opinions.

Every Player has free will to decide how they want to react and respond to the holographic experiences they encounter, and this was his choice – to let Maya win this one, at least for the time being, even though he didn't recognize that's what he was doing. He wasn't "wrong" for making that decision, because that has to be perfect, too. But my friend – who in so many ways has been such great support to me in writing this book – helped me to see just how clever Maya can be and gave me the opportunity to emphasize another important point....

In the Preface to Part Two, I talked about presenting you with models, not belief systems, and that "a model is designed to be tested and challenged to see how well it performs." In this case Maya convinced my friend he was making a legitimate test or challenge to the model rather than escaping the discomfort and leaving her alone to survive in peace, by prompting him to ask questions about the _theory_ of the model – questions that began with "Why" and "What if," and "I'm not sure I agree that...."

However, the only valid and legitimate test or challenge to a model is to see how well it performs _in application_ , not in theory. In my friend's particular situation, the model was clearly working perfectly, producing exactly the kind of results it was supposed to. He just didn't like the way it felt at the time. But no one said it was going to feel good all the way through the cocoon, especially if you hit a "dark night of the soul." So if there's still discomfort, keep running the Process. It's only the ego talking when there's the thought to get out of what you're feeling and go back into your head; and Maya speaks in very sophisticated, inviting, and clever ways.

So know this about the ego: you shouldn't underestimate it, you won't outsmart it, and you can't resist it.

* * *

There's an old story about how you cook a frog. You don't boil a pot of water on the stove and drop the frog in, because it will just jump back out to get away from the heat. Instead you put the frog into the pot while the water is cool and slowly turn up the heat while the frog sits there until it's boiled.

You also don't take a big bite out of an onion or it will overpower you. You eat an onion one slice at a time until it's all gone.

Annihilating the ego is a similar process – one layer at a time as your _Infinite I_ provides the appropriate holographic experiences. As I said about death, you must meet the ego eye-to-eye, understand it, accept it, embrace it, appreciate it for what it is and the service it has provided for you, and then quietly and systematically dismantle it one layer at a time until there's nothing left – expecting each new layer to be more difficult than the last, and not quitting until you're done.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 32

COMPASSION

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: This whole model seems to me a very selfish way to live. Where's your heart? Where's your compassion for the pain and suffering of others?

_Answer:_ I have no interest in justifying or defending "selfishness." I will leave that up to people like Robert Ringer (Looking Out for #1), Ayn Rand (The Virtue of Selfishness), Bud Harris (Sacred Selfishness: A Guide to Living a Life of Substance), David Seabury (The Art of Selfishness), the Hellers (Healthy Selfishness: Getting the Life You Deserve Without the Guilt _)_ , and Mahatma Gandhi (" _Be the change you wish to see in the world._ ")

As for my heart, it is as open as it has ever been. As you drop all judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears, your heart can't do anything except open wider and wider and be filled with love and appreciation for the perfection of everything, and especially love for your own _Infinite I_.

But _compassion_ is a very different story.

It's true _compassion_ is the new spiritual buzzword, perhaps helped a lot by the Dalai Lama. Like "judgment," _compassion_ has been made to seem "right" and proper and a "good" thing to have. In fact, being compassionate has become the hallmark of enlightenment and the most important trait a "good" person _must_ have, in the same way "judgment" has become a symbol of intelligence and reason.

But let's find out what _compassion_ really means....

" _Deep awareness of the suffering of another coupled with the wish to relieve it_."

" _Sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it_."

It should be clear by those definitions that _compassion_ belongs in the first half of the Human Game, inside the movie theater, and not in the second half.

Why? What's "wrong" with _compassion_? Nothing is "wrong." That would be a judgment. But _compassion_ as it is defined (and practiced) automatically leads a Player to judge the experiences of someone else as "bad" or "wrong," to think they have the power to change that person's reality, and to entertain the wish to do so; and none of that is possible or appropriate in the second half of the Human Game. It also inevitably leads the Player who's trying to be compassionate into frustration, sadness, and sometimes even despair; or, in other words, it leads further into limitation and restriction.

Therefore, by its very nature, _compassion_ is not part of infinite joy. It also doesn't feel like joy; it actually feels "bad" to identify with someone else's pain and suffering. In fact, we're _supposed_ to feel "bad" for someone else if we're compassionate ("I feel bad for them"). The synonyms given in the dictionary for _compassion_ are "pity" and "sympathy." I doubt anyone would suggest "pity" and "sympathy" feel joyful.

In a meeting of the intentional community in Tamera, a young man from Israel stood up and announced his recent revelation that his only job in life was to be happy. Everyone cheered, and a feeling of joy and excitement and enthusiasm filled the room. Then a young woman stood up, the daughter of the guru, and admonished everyone not to forget all the pain and suffering of others. The bubble in the room quickly burst.

Try to recall right now what it feels like to be compassionate. Does it feel like joy to you?

You can do the same thing with jealousy, for example. Does it make you feel loving to feel jealous? Does it make you feel expansive and powerful? Does it make you feel all warm and fuzzy like love does? In the same way that jealousy cannot be part of infinite love, _compassion_ cannot be part of infinite joy. It's as simple as that.

The only way _compassion_ could make you feel "good" is because you think by being compassionate, you're being a "good" person.

* * *

But there's more to talk about. Let's really dissect this thing called _compassion_ , since it's become such a big button in the first half of the Human Game.

Remember that the holographic experiences you perceive are not "real," and that your _Infinite I_ is creating your own reality. Remember also that the people you see in your holograms – the "other people" – are actors playing a role for you and reading a script word-for-word written by your _Infinite I_. Think again about the analogy of our holographic universe to a total immersion movie, created as an "outer experience" to give you and your _Infinite I_ an "inner experience."

Whatever you perceive, then, in your "reality" is being played out for _you_ – for _your_ experience, for _your_ benefit – by actors, like a movie or a play. If you went to a play at your local theater, there might be an emotional scene where some character you cared about was killed, or maimed, or raped, or tortured, or starved, or displaced, or abused. If it's a good play with professional actors, a convincing script and perfect scenery, you should "feel" what the writer of the play wanted you to feel – anger, frustration, sympathy, sadness, pain, regret, grief, sorrow, or a whole host of other emotions, none of which come close to joy. But that's what the play was designed to do.

Then after the play, you go next door to the bar for a drink; and there, by chance, are the very same actors you just watched. But they're very much alive, healthy, happy, unscathed, enjoying a beer and joking around with the rest of the troupe. When you see them there in the bar, would you feel the same emotions for them you did during the play? Obviously not. You would probably feel a little silly expressing compassion for the actor you had just watched starving that is now sitting in front of you eating peanuts and popcorn. You might even go over and thank them for what a great job they did and for the experience they gave you, telling them how deeply you felt for them during the play, and then joining in their celebration.

The "reality" you see "out there" as the physical universe is a movie – a fantastic 3-D total immersion movie in which you play a part. But nothing else is different from the play or movie you just watched. Everyone you see in your "reality" is part of a hologram and is playing a role your _Infinite I_ has asked them to play and which they've agreed to perform at a professional level. When that role is over, they get up from the battlefield, or the hospital bed, or the slums, and revel in the good job they did to convince you the characters they played were real. They gave you a gift of a powerful experience, which your _Infinite I_ wanted and created. But don't confuse things and start to think the scenes they acted out were anything more than actors playing temporary roles at your _Infinite I's_ invitation.

Another big problem with _compassion_ is the part that makes you want to "relieve" or "alleviate" someone else's suffering. Frankly, although it's cloaked in a very acceptable social veneer, it is the height of arrogance to think we know better than their own _Infinite I_ what experiences another person should be having. Even Mahatma Gandhi said, "Be the change you wish to see in the world." He didn't say, "Go out and change the world into the way you wish to see it," or "Go out and change other people's experiences into the way you think they should be."

In the same way you trust your own _Infinite I_ to create the most appropriate experiences for you, we can trust the other person's _Infinite I_ to create the most appropriate experiences for them, regardless of how those experiences look to you or me on the surface.

In fact, there is no other Player who appears in your holographic reality whose situation is your responsibility to change. Nor do you have the power or authority to change it. Their experiences have been as carefully chosen for them by their _Infinite I_ as yours have been for you. It's time we respect that, and respect and trust the choices of other _Infinite I's_ as well as our own, and not think we know better what they should be experiencing.

Besides, this desire to "relieve" or "alleviate" someone else's suffering cannot do anything but produce frustration and anger and depression, since you have no power to do anything about it. All you will do is try, and most times fail and feel worse in the end. This is why _compassion_ is such a limiting concept that belongs strictly to the first half of the Human Game.

* * *

" _You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."_

\- R. Buckminster Fuller

The concept of c _ompassion_ , by its very nature, tends to make us ignore this wisdom and fight against what we see happening in the world. Many peaceworkers, for example, take up the slogan, "Say No to War and Violence." But the mere act of thinking or acting against war and violence because of _compassion_ is, indeed, fighting the existing reality.

"But wait a minute!" you protest. "Are you saying I should do nothing when I see another's pain and suffering in my hologram? Are you suggesting I sit back and simply watch while a child gets beaten, or a woman raped, or people die from starvation or disease?"

Absolutely not. That's not what I'm saying at all. But rather than _compassion_ in the first half that can only lead to more limitation, empathy (rather than sympathy) and ethics and excitement will determine your reaction in the second half of the Human Game. Here's what I mean....

Once you have run the Process on those holographic experiences you encounter as you start the second half – any time you have felt discomfort with someone or a particular situation – you will view those incidents of pain and suffering that might come into your hologram very differently. But there is something extremely important to remember: as long as you feel discomfort – and that includes the discomfort of _compassion_ – you are still assigning power "out there" and there is still judgment. Only when you can see someone else's pain and suffering without the judgment it is "bad" or "wrong" or "needs to be changed," can you cleanly take any action. Then you are free to follow your excitement and joy in any specific circumstance.

For example, I'm often asked what I would do if a hologram popped up where a child was being beaten in front of me. I honestly cannot give you a generalized answer, because so much of it depends on the situation. But my own ethics might lead me to want to do something about it, since I am the caretaker of the holographic experiences my _Infinite I_ has created for me.

Maybe I would step in between the adult and the child, and inform the adult I do not judge what s/he is doing, but I request s/he beat me instead of the child, and I would not resist. However, that's just one possibility. Under no circumstances would I judge what was going on as "right" or "wrong," or "good" or "bad," nor judge the actors playing their parts, nor think I _must_ or _should_ change the action itself. But right now I can imagine my personal feeling of excitement and joy would be to prefer to be beaten myself than to watch the child being beaten. I would also never strike back or try to defend myself. Neither would Mahatma Gandhi, as he proved time and again.

Okay. That's a particular individual situation. What about the millions of people starving in the world, those getting killed and maimed every day in countless wars and other violence, those who are homeless and hungry and sick – which is a fair number of the Earth's population if we watch and believe the TV news? What about them?

"Be the change you wish to see in the world," Gandhi said. So here's another tough concept....

In spite of all the pain and suffering we are shown "out there," our only job as a Player in the second half of the Human Game is to "reclaim" the power we assigned "out there" in the first half, and take the rollercoaster ride back to infinite joy, infinite power, infinite wisdom, infinite abundance, and infinite love. It is solely our responsibility to live our own reality.

In fact, when our holograms include pictures of pain and suffering "out there," it is primarily because our _Infinite I_ is trying to show us where we assigned power in the first half and give us the opportunity to "reclaim" it. These holographic images of pain and suffering are _not_ for us to do something about _them_ , but about _us_ as individual Players to do something about _us_. Put simply, someone else's pain and suffering that finds its way into our holograms is an opportunity to leave judgment and _compassion_ behind and explore a new way of feeling and acting.

Remember what we said about "other people" in Chapter Twenty-Four....

"Other people" serve three main purposes in your holographic experience:

1. To reflect something you think or feel about yourself

2. To give you the gift of information or insight

3. To set something in motion to support you

This includes all the "other people" who you are now judging to be in pain and suffering; and nowhere on that list does it say "other people" serve the purpose of having you "save" them from their experiences.

Along the way, however, we will start to feel excitement inside – excitement that is prompting us to do something. So if I see someone else in pain and suffering in my hologram, and I do not judge it or fall into the trap of wanting to change it, I might find it totally joyful and exciting to take some action anyway.

What if someone in my hologram asks me for help? I give it gladly, as long as it brings me total joy to do so – without judgment or discomfort – and as long as I have no expectations of the outcome.

Please don't get me wrong. I am often touched on a very deep level when I see someone in my hologram in pain or suffering, and I will give my help if asked if I can do it without the intention to fix, change, or improve things. But I also know it is impossible for them to be a victim, just as it is impossible for me to be a victim, of anyone or anything "out there;" so I offer my support in any way I can while they have such a difficult and limiting experience, because I know they are playing in the first half of the Human Game. This is really no different than giving encouragement to someone on the first hill of the rollercoaster, supporting them in any way possible to "Hang in there!"

This may be a crude example, but it's the best I can think of at the moment. Someone calls out to me from the rollercoaster going up the hill. They say they're getting sick and need help. I will do everything in my power to get to them, bring them a barf bag, hold their hair back while they get sick, offer them some encouraging words, or give them whatever assistance I can at the time. What I _won't_ do is judge their experience as "wrong," or that it should be different and needs to be changed, or sympathize with them, or pity them, or try to get them off the rollercoaster. I've been there; it doesn't feel good, and I know it. I also know the experience they're having has been carefully chosen for them by their own _Infinite I_ , and it is perfect for them at that moment. After all, they can't ride the rollercoaster without going up the first hill.

* * *

There's an old saying in the recovery business that an alcoholic will not quit until they've had enough to drink. _A Course in Miracles_ says, "if your brothers ask you for something, do it, because it doesn't matter." So if your alcoholic "brother" asks you for a drink, exactly what is the "compassionate" thing to do? According to recovery principles and _A Course in Miracles_ , maybe it would be to give them the drink they ask for, rather than judging and trying to change the experience they're having because you know what's best for them.

There is, of course, a natural desire that all the Players we meet in our holograms experience the same joy and power and abundance and love we have; and when we see someone else in our hologram _not_ in that condition, we can easily wish something different for them, and want them to join us in the joy and power and abundance and love of the second half. But what we can _not_ do is to judge their situation to be "bad" or "wrong," or even that our situation is "better" than theirs, and then try to do something to change their circumstances.

Many years ago I gave up the idea of trying to "save the world" or even end war on this planet when I realized war had been a very valuable experience in my own life (if nothing else, to show me who I was _not_ and how I did _not_ want to behave); and "who was I to try to limit other people's experiences who might benefit from the same opportunities." Today I am excited about finding out how to download other frequencies from The Field (as will be explained in Chapter Thirty-Six) that create a peaceful and harmonious life on Planet Earth, but without any judgment that all people should live that way, or that the way other people are living now is somehow "wrong."

* * *

The point the young Israeli man was making in Tamera was that rather than becoming bogged down in someone else's pain and suffering, and feeling that pain and suffering himself, he decided his only job was to "be happy" – to provide others with the hope and the inspiration and the model of how their lives could be different.

I seriously doubt those in pain and suffering want us to join them in their misery. I don't think they want us to "pity" them or "feel their pain." I think, instead, they would prefer for us to "be happy," so they know it is possible for them as well.

Therefore, rather than _compassion_ in the second half of the Human Game, we follow our excitement and our joy and our _passion_ , and take whatever actions we feel moved to take in relationship to our holographic experiences, as long as there is no judgment or discomfort involved.

After all, the world doesn't need to be saved. It's perfect exactly as it is, down to the smallest detail.

Saving the world, as wonderful as it may sound on the surface, is not only the height of arrogance in thinking you know how the world should be, but also one of the most clever temptations the ego – Maya – has come up with to maintain her power and existence.

I realize there is a lot of social pressure to be compassionate these days; but, in fact, this whole _compassion_ thing is one of the greatest lies that keeps people inside the movie theater, for the simple reason that focusing on _compassion_ for others keeps Players from looking at themselves. As long as your time and attention is tied up trying to alleviate the pain and suffering of others, you will never have what it takes to process your own judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears. Instead you will hang on for dear life to this layer of the ego – this identity you are _not_ – called "compassionate."

(If you jumped here from Chapter Sixteen, "Judgment," you can go back to where you were reading by clicking here.)

#

FOOTNOTES

1. American Heritage Dictionary – compassion – Back to reading

2. Merriam-Webster Dictionary – compassion – Back to reading

3. Scheinfeld, Robert. Journey to the Infinite home transformational system – Back to reading

4 _._A Course in Miracles, p. 206 – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 33

ROBERT SCHEINFELD

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: You mention Robert Scheinfeld a lot, but you don't quote him very much; and it's not clear exactly what you think about his work.

_Answer:_ I cannot tell you how much I appreciate Robert Scheinfeld and the role he played in my transformation.

It was Robert – through his _Busting Loose from the Money Game_ DVD home study course (which is no longer available) – who ushered me through the back door of the movie theater and into my cocoon.

It was Robert who introduced me to the concept of the Human Game, and especially the two separate and opposite halves, which explained so much about me and my own life.

It was Robert who provided the basic Process which I used with success for the first year in my cocoon, letting go of the judgments and beliefs and opinions about what was "out there" and reclaiming the power I had assigned to make my holograms real.

It was Robert who introduced me to Jed McKenna's _Enlightenment Trilogy_ , which was the next step I needed in my transformation in the cocoon.

Fortunately, I had the opportunity to meet and talk with Robert and express that appreciation. I attended one of Robert's live workshops and went through three of his "home transformational systems," along with following him on Facebook and listening to his "Phase 2 Players' discourses."

I consider Robert to be a fellow "scout." But after the first year in my cocoon, I met Robert on the road, and I killed him.

Not literally, of course. If you don't recognize the reference...

_"Zen Master Lin Chi spoke thus,_ 'If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha. If you meet a Patriarch, kill the Patriarch.' _Lin Chi isn't condoning murder, he is using a metaphor to explain the nature of Buddhism. Don't believe what someone says, no matter how holy they are, just because they say it. Listen to their words and then explore them yourself...."_

(Based on this, Sheldon Kopp then wrote a best-selling book called, _If You Meet The Buddha on the Road, Kill Him_.)

It was clear to me when I met Robert on the road that he had stopped along his path as a scout and had gotten totally immersed in writing his books and creating his "home transformational systems" and offering his workshops.

But because he stopped, he didn't get far enough to see that his work contained some vital errors which I'm sure he would have realized if he had gone further. (Robert has announced he is leaving the "scout" game now to focus on other things. I'm hoping part of those "other things" will include going further in his cocoon and correcting his mistakes – for his own sake.)

It's strange, too, because the biggest errors have to do with his wording, and one of the "tools" Robert suggests using in the second half of the Human Game is "transformational vocabulary." In other words, he quite clearly sees the importance of the language we use; so I have to assume he just didn't get the concept to begin with.

For example, what I have called the _Infinite I_ , the **consciousness** on the other side of The Field, Robert calls the "Expanded Self." Without belaboring the point, "expanded" is a judgment just like "better" or "higher," and expanding the "self" is going in the exact opposite direction we want to go in the cocoon – toward the "no-self."

Robert also talks about "taking back your power" as part of his Process. But we, as Players, never had any power to begin with, so how could we "take it back?"

But perhaps the most important mistake was a phrase that sounds really catchy and cool, and very much appeals to the new-age crowd: "The sun of who you really are." Robert uses this in his "cloud metaphor," explaining that what we are doing in the cocoon is drilling holes in the cloud cover so the "sun of who we really are" can come shining through.

People love this, because it feeds the ego so well. Everyone likes to think they are something more than just a Player, that they are really their infinite **consciousness** who is running the show.

Now... it's true the whole point of the cocoon is the discovery of "who I am _not_ " on the way to finding out "who I am." But to suggest the end result is letting "the sun of who we really are" shine through the cloud cover simply continues the illusion we are anything more than a Player representing our _Infinite I_ in the Human Game. It perpetuates the false knowledge and layers of the ego that say we really _are_ our _Infinite I_ after all.

Lastly, as I mentioned before, Robert's Process is excellent in addressing the judgments, beliefs, and fears we have created while in the first half of the Human Game, as long as you're dealing with what you think is "out there." But it is simply not designed, or very workable, in finding the fears that lie underneath or detaching from the layers of false identities that make up the ego.

* * *

I would love to be able to recommend Robert's work, since it meant so much to me; and you could read and watch it with a discriminating eye, on the lookout for the errors, and it might be something helpful to you as well. You can start at RobertScheinfeld.com.

But I have known too many people who have followed Robert and call themselves "Phase 2 Players" who don't have a clue about the deep fears and layers of the ego Robert's work doesn't address, and who go around talking about the reality _they_ are creating, and the joy of reconnecting with "the sun of who they really are."

That being said, I want to acknowledge that Robert has done a wonderful job of making this information available in the back of the movie theater, and presenting it in such a way that many more Human Adults are entering their cocoons. He is a marketing genius, no doubt; and, of course, even his "errors" are perfect.

I also want to point out, like Robert, I stopped while in the cocoon to write this book (and maybe others; we'll see). I went farther than Robert, but I still stopped. My only hope is that I have not made the kind of major mistakes Robert did.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Dae Kwang. Kill the Buddha – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 34

JED McKENNA

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: You seem to use a lot of quotations from Jed McKenna, who isn't a real person – or at least that's not his real name. Do you think he's actually for real?

_Answer:_ I said Robert Scheinfeld stopped along his path as a scout. I think Jed McKenna also stopped at a certain point to write his _Enlightenment Trilogy_. He claims to have emerged from the cocoon as a butterfly...

_"All that scorched-earth wandering wasn't the end, it was just the beginning. I still had my own personal deconstruction to do, which is how I spent almost the next two years, until I got to a place called Done.... My reality now is the awakened, untruth-unrealized state... I spent the next ten years trying to make sense of this new world; a non-world in which a non-I nevertheless seemed to reside."_

...but I don't know whether that's true, for a couple of reasons. One, I don't believe it's possible for Jed to write his three books without stopping in the cocoon and delaying the final transformation into a butterfly. Maybe in the years after he finished his last book, he went on to become a butterfly. That's entirely possible, since we've never heard from him again.

Reason Two... well, I'll get to that. First I'll answer your question.

When I read _The Enlightenment Trilogy_ by Jed McKenna the first time through, I knew immediately this man – whoever he really was – was totally authentic. He had to have actually experienced what he was writing about or he couldn't use those words and describe his condition so perfectly. I knew here was a man – another scout – who stood in full view of the Pacific Ocean; and he was expressing the very same thoughts and feelings I have come to know can only be thought and felt when one has reached this point along the journey.

For example....

"I am here, live, on the scene, and I have chosen to describe it as I see it. I don't defer. I don't rely. If what I describe conflicts with the ten-thousand other reports – no matter how revered those reports and those who filed them may be – then to me those reports are nothing more than fable and folklore and should be consigned to the dustheap of history. The simple fact is that I am here and 'here' doesn't look all that much like anyone says it does and I'm not going to waste my time or anyone else's pretending otherwise. It should be noted that 'here' isn't mist-enshrouded or poorly lit. It's neither mysterious nor mystical. My knowledge is unflawed and my vision is unobstructed. This is a tricky point to make, but a critical one. I am not interpreting. I am not translating. I am not handing something down that was handed down to me. I'm here, now, telling you what I see in the most straightforward possible terms."

"It's very simple.... Enlightenment is truth-realization. Not only is truth simple, it's that which cannot be simpler; cannot be further reduced."

"Enlightenment isn't when you go there, it's when there comes here. It's not a place you visit and then remember wistfully and try to return to. It's not a visit to the truth, it's the awakening of truth within you. It's not a fleeting state of consciousness, it's permanent truth-realization. It's not a place you visit from here, this is a place you visit from there."

"The enlightened view life as a dream, so how could they possibly differentiate between right and wrong or good and evil? How can one turn of events be better or worse than another? Of what real importance is anything in a dream? You wake up and the dream is gone as if it never was. All the characters and events that seemed so real have simply vanished. The enlightened may walk and talk in the dreamworld, but they don't mistake the dream for reality."

"The truth, though, is that nothing is really wrong. Nothing is ever wrong and nothing can be wrong. It's not even wrong to believe that something is wrong. Wrong is simply not possible.... If something isn't wrong, then nothing needs to be made right, which would mean that nothing needs to be done."

"The enlightened have awakened from the dream and no longer mistake it for reality. Naturally, they are no longer able to attach importance to anything. To the awakened mind the end of the world is no more or less momentous than the snapping of a twig. 'The wise see the same in all,' says the Gita. 'The wise are impartial,' says the Tao. The enlightened cannot conceive of anything as being wrong, so they don't struggle to make things right. Nothing is better or worse, so why try to adjust things?"

"Once you get past the notion that duality (by any name) is 'bad' and unity (by any name) is 'good,' you also get past any need to 'help' or 'save' anyone. I, for instance, don't do what I do because I think it needs doing. I am moved by no ethical or altruistic motive. I don't think something is wrong and that I have to make it right. I don't do it to ease suffering or to liberate beings. I do it simply because I'm so inclined."

"I heard that Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was very happy with his reclusive life in the foothills of the Himalayas and may never have rejoined society, but that he began hearing the name of an Indian city in his head. It simply appeared unbidden in his thoughts. When he finally mentioned it to someone, they advised that the only way to get the name of the town out of his head was to go there. He did, got swept into a speaking engagement, and the whole Transcendental Meditation movement grew out of it. That makes sense to me. You observe events and you allow the flow of things to do the steering and you go where you go."

"Fear, regardless of what face it wears, is the engine that drives humans as individuals and humanity as a species. Simply put, humans are fear-based creatures. It may be tempting to say that we are equal parts rational and emotional, balanced between left and right brain, but it's not true. We are primarily emotional and our ruling emotion is fear.... Fear of the hollow core. Fear of the black hole within. Fear of non-being. Fear of no-self. The fear of no-self is the mother of all fears, the one upon which all others are based. No fear is so small or petty that the fear of no-self isn't at its heart. All fear is ultimately fear of no-self."

"This trajectory I'm on will take me as close to non-existence as anyone can get and still have a body. In other words, I will continue to channel progressively less and less energy into my dreamstate being, my teaching will reduce down to its most refined and least tolerant form, my interest will withdraw from the world, and I will become as minimal as a person can be."

"I had spent years as a closet butterfly moping around with caterpillars and dreaming highly fictionalized dreams of becoming a butterfly. I knew that I was distinctly different from the caterpillars. I knew that an uncrossable chasm separated us, that I wasn't one of them anymore, that they weren't like me nor I like they. I knew I was able to communicate with them only in the most superficial sense based on my rapidly fading memories of their language and habits. What it took me a while to understand, though, was that the reason I wasn't one of them anymore was because I was something else, and that the difference was absolute. I had earned admission to a whole new reality but I hadn't yet passed into it because no one explained to me that this new order of being I had become was what caterpillars meant when they said 'butterfly.'"

"And then, one day, there it is. Nothing. No more enemies, no more battles. The sword that seems welded to your hand can now be dropped, once your fingers can be pried from it. There's nothing left to contend against and nothing left that must be done, and there will never be anything that must be done ever again."

"Enlightenment isn't like graduating high school only to start college, or even finishing college to enter the 'real' world. It's the final graduation. No more hunt, no more chase, no more battle. Now you can go out in the world and do whatever you want; learn guitar, jump out of airplanes, write books, tend grapes, whatever."

* * *

These quotes are from just the first few pages of Book One, _Spiritual Enlightenment: The Damnedest Thing_ , and there are three books in all – definitely worth the read.

That being said, it is also clear to me Jed and I took different routes to get to the same place, which results in a disagreement on several key points. I want to discuss those in some detail, mainly to let you know different scouts will have different ways of expressing the path, and that Jed and I are not 100% in agreement except about the end result.

For example, his underlying tone when discussing Human Children is one of judgment and criticism for being asleep within the dreamstate.

"Human Childhood is petty and fearful and grating.... it's a hideous affliction."

Jed obviously does not share the concept of the movie theater being intentionally designed to create limitation and restriction. If he did, he couldn't judge the state of being a Human Child, but would instead see it as a perfect part of the Game.

Or, for example, Jed's constant reference to Maya as the "goddess of delusion," and as the personification of the ego, can easily lead one to believe there is some force "out there," some entity, some power that is intentionally trying to keep people from joy and abundance and truth.

"Maya might best be understood as the intelligence of fear. She is the keeper of the kept, the warden of the Dreamstate. It is Maya who bestows upon us the miraculous and life-giving power to see what's not and to not see what is. It is Maya who makes the Dreamstate possible and escape from it nearly impossible. She enables the Dreamstate to exist, and if you wish to awaken from it, then it's her you must destroy, layer by layer."

Which brings me to my third question about Jed – his warlike vocabulary and his attitude that there is an "enemy" to be fought and destroyed....

"Real spirituality is a savage insurrection, the oppressed rising up in a do-or-die bid for freedom. It's not something people do to improve themselves or earn merit or impress friends or to find greater joy and meaning in life. It's a suicidal assault on a foe of unimaginable superiority."

"People who take this stuff seriously have no need of me or anyone else, only of finding the next question, of taking the next step, of finding the next enemy and fighting the next battle. People who don't take this stuff seriously are invariably looking for ways to occupy and distract themselves so they don't have to take any real steps or fight any real battles."

His third book is even entitled _Spiritual Warfare_.

So I have to assume the route Jed took across the Rocky Mountains required a lot of fighting to get through; a lot of battles with the elements, the Indians, the wild animals; a lot of machete work to cut through the trees. Whereas the route I took had very little of that. In fact, one of the key steps inside the cocoon is the realization there is no "enemy," no "out there" out there, no duality of "it" or "them" versus "me."

Jed also makes no mention of quantum physics, or of any real scientific understanding that "it isn't real; it's just a game." Instead, the general tone of his books is to take all this very seriously....

"Personal revolution is fueled by emotional energy of the purest intensity. That intensity comes from focus and that kind of focused emotional energy doesn't look like love or tranquility or compassion. It looks like seething rage or ugly business, but that's how it works. Suicidal discontent; that's how revolutions are won and that's why they so seldom are. Rockets aren't launched into space on chanting and prayers, and escaping the ego's gravity requires an equivalent amount of explosive force. We have to take all the emotional energy we normally blast out in a thousand directions to keep our dreamstate characters animated and focus it on a single point. It's all or nothing."

But, in fact, it's all just a game – a wonderfully complex, exciting, challenging treasure hunt for the truth.

Finally, Jed uses his first book, _Spiritual Enlightenment: The Damnedest Thing_ , to describe his process and transformation inside the cocoon. He speaks of the state of freedom from the movie theater in glowing terms, and the reader should come away from that book wanting to be where Jed is.

Then Jed spends half of Book Two, _Spiritually Incorrect Enlightenment_ , describing how difficult it is to get where he is, giving excellent examples from one of his "students," Julie, of her own spiritual autolysis process – a realistic look at the time everyone will spend inside the cocoon. (The other half of the book is Jed patting himself on the back for being the first ever to figure out Melville's _Moby Dick_.)

In the third book, _Spiritual Warfare_ , Jed bends over backwards to try to convince the reader they _don't_ want to go where he is, but to stay inside the movie theater as a Human Adult instead....

"The most important distinction to be made between these two states is that Human Adulthood makes sense and Enlightenment doesn't. The main benefit most spiritually inclined people can derive from having a clear understanding of what it really means to be truth-realized is not so they can achieve it, but so they can dispense with it and reset their spiritual sights on something worthier than enlightenment, which is, literally, the biggest nothing of all time."

* * *

I could mention other smaller areas where I disagree with Jed, but I'm not trying to be picky. I simply want to point out that Jed's viewpoint is biased by the route he took across the Rocky Mountains; and although his description of the Pacific Ocean is extremely accurate, his way of getting there is not the only way, and not everyone has to go through what he went through. Nor will everyone feel the same way Jed does when he arrives. I don't, for example.

I also want to emphasize that you will find isolated sentences or two throughout Jed's books that contradict the general tone of his writing, like...

"It's all just consciousness, you are just consciousness. There is nothing else."

"Maya, it should be remembered, is not an actual arch-deity thwarting us from on high. Maya is inside us, a part of us... she's not a she and she's not external to you. She's inside you and those layers are the stuff of which your ego is made."

"Instead of adopting a warlike posture, we must, counter-intuitively, lower our shields and defenses. This seems confusing until we understand that we are both the protagonist and the antagonist in this conflict, both attacker and defender. This is the paradoxical nature of the struggle. We can't win by fighting. The very thing that fights, that resists, is the thing we seek to overthrow."

And Jed does, occasionally, express his appreciation for all the things he seems to judge and criticize so frequently, even Maya....

"I can't think of anything more fascinating or lovely or worthy of appreciation than Maya; the architect of delusion."

"The idea that... the dualistic universe is anything other than the grandest and most wonderful of all blessings is laughably absurd."

So if you read Jed's books with a discriminating eye, overlook the general tone and be watchful for the key sentences, you are in for a real treat. In my opinion, the _Enlightenment Trilogy_ is required reading for anyone who wants to become a butterfly.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. All quotes in this chapter are from McKenna, Jed. The Enlightenment Trilogy – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 35

U.G. KRISHNAMURTI

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: A lot of things you have said sound like stuff I have read by U.G. Krishnamurti....

_Answer:_ I've read a lot of things from U.G. – no relationship to J. Krishnamurti – that I like, too. There are other things I've read where he seems to contradict himself a lot, things I disagree with, or maybe things I don't totally understand. But here's a sample from this "anti-guru" of what I like....

"People call me an 'enlightened man' – I detest that term – they can't find any other word to describe the way I am functioning. At the same time, I point out that there is no such thing as enlightenment at all. I say that because all my life I've searched and wanted to be an enlightened man, and I discovered that there is no such thing as enlightenment at all, and so the question whether a particular person is enlightened or not doesn't arise. I don't give a hoot for a sixth-century-BC Buddha, let alone all the other claimants we have in our midst. They are a bunch of exploiters, thriving on the gullibility of the people."

"The holy men are all phonies – they are telling me only what is there in the books. That I can read – 'Do the same again and again' – that I don't want. Experiences I don't want. They are trying to share an experience with me. I'm not interested in experience. As far as experience goes, for me there is no difference between the religious experience and the sex experience or any other experience; the religious experience is like any other experience. I am not interested in experiencing Brahman; I am not interested in experiencing reality; I am not interested in experiencing truth. They might help others; but they cannot help me. I'm not interested in doing more of the same; what I have done is enough."

"I had arrived at a point where I said to myself 'Buddha deluded himself and deluded others. All those teachers and saviors of mankind were damned fools – they fooled themselves – so I'm not interested in this kind of thing anymore,' so it went out of my system completely."

"You hope that you will be able to resolve the problem of desire through thinking, because of that model of a saint who you think has controlled or eliminated desire. If that man has no desire as you imagine, he is a corpse. Don't believe that man at all! Such a man builds some organization, and lives in luxury, which you pay for. You are maintaining him. He is doing it for his livelihood. There is always a fool in the world who falls for him."

* * *

"They are all liars, fops, fakes and cheaters in the world, who claim they have searched for and told the truth! Alright, you want to find out for yourself what this truth is. Can you find out? Can you capture the truth and hold it and say 'This is truth?' Whether you accept or reject, it's the same: it depends on your personal prejudices and predilections. So if you want to discover the truth for yourself, whatever it is, you are not in a position to either accept or reject. You assume that there is such a thing as truth, you assume that there is such a thing as reality (ultimate or otherwise) – it is that assumption that is creating the problem, the suffering, for you. Look here, I want to experience God, truth, reality or what you will, so I must understand the nature of the experiencing structure inside of me before I deal with all that. I must look at the instrument I am using. You are trying to capture something that cannot be captured in terms of your experiencing structure, so this experiencing structure must not be there in order that the other thing may come in. What that is, you will never know. You will never know the truth, because it's a movement. It's a movement! You cannot capture it, you cannot contain it, you cannot express it. It's not a logically ascertained premise that we are interested in. So, it has to be your discovery. What good is my experience? We have thousands and thousands of experiences recorded – they haven't helped you. It's the hope that keeps you going – 'If I follow this for another ten years, fifteen years, maybe one of these days I will....' because hope is the structure."

"I discovered for myself and by myself that there is no self to realize – that's the realization I am talking about. It comes as a shattering blow. It hits you like a thunderbolt. You have invested everything in one basket, self-realization, and, in the end, suddenly you discover that there is no self to discover, no self to realize – and you say to yourself 'What the hell have I been doing all my life?!' That blasts you."

"Nothing. That's the discovery. So-called self-realization is the discovery for yourself and by yourself that there is no self to discover. That will be a very shocking thing – 'Why the hell have I wasted all my life?' It's a shocking thing because it's going to destroy every nerve, every cell, even the cells in the marrow of your bones. I tell you, it's not going to be an easy thing, it's not going to be handed over to you on a gold platter. You have to become completely disillusioned, then the truth begins to express itself in its own way. I have discovered that it is useless to try to discover the truth. The search for truth is, I have discovered, absurd, because it's a thing which you cannot capture, contain, or give expression to."

* * *

"You see, my difficulty with the people who come to see me is this: they don't seem to be able to understand the way I am functioning, and I don't seem to be able to understand the way they are functioning. How can we carry on a dialogue? Both of us have to stop. How can there be a dialogue between us both?"

"I am not trying to sell anything here. It is impossible for you to simulate this. This is a thing that has happened outside the field, the area, in which I expected, dreamed and wanted change, so I don't call this a 'change'. I really don't know what has happened to me. What I am telling you is the way I am functioning. There seems to be some difference between the way you are functioning and the way I am functioning, but basically there can't be any difference. How can there be any difference between you and me? There can't be; but from the way we are trying to express ourselves, there seems to be. I have the feeling that there is some difference, and what that difference is is all that I am trying to understand. So, this is the way I am functioning."

"Put it simply. I can't follow a very complex structure – I have that difficulty, you see. Probably I'm a low-grade moron or something, I don't know – I can't follow conceptual thinking. You can put it in very simple words. What exactly is the question? Because the answer is there; I don't have to give the answer. What I usually do is restructure the question, rephrase it in such a way that the question appears senseless to you."

"If somebody asks me a question suddenly, I try to answer, emphasizing and pointing out that there is no answer to that question. So, I merely rephrase, restructure and throw the same question back at you. It's not game playing, because I'm not interested in winning you over to my point of view. It's not a question of offering opinions – of course I do have my opinions on everything from disease to divinity, but they're as worthless as anybody else's."

"It is the questioner that creates the answer; and the questioner comes into being from the answer, otherwise there is no questioner. I am not trying to play with words. You know the answer, and you want a confirmation from me, or you want some kind of light to be thrown on your problem, or you're curious – if for any of these reasons you want to carry on a dialogue with me, you are just wasting your time; you'll have to go to a scholar, a pundit, a learned man – they can throw a lot of light on such questions. That's all that I am interested in this kind of a dialogue: to help you to formulate your own question. Try and formulate a question which you can call your own."

* * *

"Your natural state has no relationship whatsoever with the religious states of bliss, beatitude and ecstasy; they lie within the field of experience. Those who have led man on his search for religiousness throughout the centuries have perhaps experienced those religious states. So can you. They are thought-induced states of being, and as they come, so do they go. Krishna Consciousness, Buddha Consciousness, Christ Consciousness, or what have you, are all trips in the wrong direction: they are all within the field of time. The timeless can never be experienced, can never be grasped, contained, much less given expression to, by any man. That beaten track will lead you nowhere. There is no oasis situated yonder; you are stuck with the mirage."

"You see, people usually imagine that so-called enlightenment, self-realization, God-realization or what you will (I don't like to use these words) is something ecstatic, that you will be permanently happy, in a blissful state all the time – these are the images they have of those people.... There's no relationship at all between the image you have of that, and what actually is the situation.... That's why I very often tell people 'If I could give you some glimpse of what this is all about, you wouldn't touch this with a barge pole, a ten foot pole.' You would run away from this because this is not what you want. What you want does not exist, you see."

"We don't want to be free from fear. All that we want to do is to play games with it and talk about freeing ourselves from fear."

"You see, the search takes you away from yourself – it is in the opposite direction – it has absolutely no relation."

"The search is always in the wrong direction, so all that you consider very profound, all that you consider sacred, is a contamination in that consciousness. You may not like the word 'contamination', but all that you consider sacred, holy and profound is a contamination."

"Understanding is a state of being where the question isn't there any more; there is nothing there that says 'now I understand!' – that's the basic difficulty between us. By understanding what I am saying, you are not going to get anywhere."

"This consciousness which is functioning in me, in you, in the garden slug and earthworm outside, is the same. In me it has no frontiers; in you there are frontiers – you are enclosed in that. Probably this unlimited consciousness pushes you, I don't know. Not me; I have nothing to do with it. It is like the water finding its own level, that's all – that is its nature. That is what is happening in you: life is trying to destroy the enclosing thing, that dead structure of thought and experience, which is not of its nature. It's trying to come out, to break open. You don't want that. As soon as you see some cracks there, you bring some plaster and fill them in and block it again. It doesn't have to be a so-called self-realized man or spiritual man or God-realized man that pushes you; anything, that leaf there, teaches you just the same if only you let it do what it can."

* * *

"We have very strange ideas in the religious field – torture this body, sleep on nails, control, deny things – all kinds of funny things. What for? Why deny certain things? I don't know. What is the difference between a man going to a bar for a glass of beer, and a man going to a temple and repeating the name of Rama? I don't see any basic difference.... I am not against escapes, but whether you escape through this avenue or that avenue, an escape is an escape. You are escaping from yourself.... What you do or do not do does not matter at all. Your practice of holiness, your practice of virtue – that is socially valuable for the society, but that has nothing to do with this."

"By conserving sex energy, you are not going to improve yourself in any way. It is too silly and too absurd. Why have they laid so much stress on that? Abstinence, continence, celibacy, is not going to help to put you in this state, in this situation."

"You don't know what is good; you know only what is good for you. That's all you are interested in, that's a fact. Everything centers around that. All your art and reason centers around that. I am not being cynical. That's a fact. Nothing wrong with it. I'm not saying anything against it. The situations change, but it is that which is guiding you through all situations. I'm not saying it is wrong you see. If it is not so, something must be wrong with you. As long as you are operating in the field of what they call the 'pair of opposites', good and bad, you will always be choosy, in every situation, that is all – you cannot help doing that."

"A 'moral man' is a 'chicken'. A 'moral man' is a frightened man, a chicken-hearted man – that is why he practices morality and sits in judgment over others. And his righteous indignation! A moral man (if there is one) will never, never talk of morality or sit in judgment on the morals of others. Never!"

"Questioning my actions before and after is over for me. The moral question – 'I should have acted this way; I should not have acted that way. I should not have said this' – none of that is there for me. I have no regrets, no apologies; whatever I am doing is automatic. In a given situation I am not capable of acting in any other way. I don't have to rationalize, think logically – nothing – that is the one and only action in that particular situation."

* * *

"You are asking me 'Has anything any purpose?' Look here, a lot of meanings and purposes have been given to you. Why are you still looking for the meaning of life, the purpose of life? Everybody has talked of the meaning of life and the purpose of life – everybody. Answers have been given by the saviours, saints and sages of mankind – you have thousands of them in India – and yet today you are still asking the same question, 'Has life any purpose or meaning?' Either you are not satisfied or you are not really interested in finding out for yourself. I submit that you are not really interested, because it's a frightening thing. It's a very frightening thing. Is there any such thing as truth? Have you ever asked that question for yourself? Has anybody told the truth?"

"In a way, the whole of life is like a great big dream. I am looking at you, but I really don't know anything about you – this is a dream, a dream world – there is no reality to it at all. When the experiencing structure is not manipulating consciousness (or whatever you want to call it), then the whole of life is a great big dream, from the experiential point of view – not from this point of view here; but from your point of view. You see, you give reality to things – not only to objects, but also to feelings and experiences – and think that they are real. When you don't translate them in terms of your accumulated knowledge, they are not things; you really don't know what they are."

"Courage is to brush aside everything that man has experienced and felt before you. You are the only one, greater than all those things. Everything is finished, the whole tradition is finished, however sacred and holy it may be – then only can you be yourself – that is individuality. For the first time you become an individual. As long as you depend upon somebody, some authority, you are not an individual. Individual uniqueness cannot express itself as long as there is dependence."

"My life story goes up to a point, and then it stops – there is no more biography after that. Desirelessness, non-greed, non-anger – those things have no meaning to me; they are false, and they are not only false, they are falsifying me. I'm finished with the whole business."

* * *

I said at the beginning of this chapter "there are other things I've read where he seems to contradict himself a lot, things I disagree with, or maybe things I don't totally understand." Apparently U.G. agrees....

_"I am always negating what I am saying. I make a statement, but that statement is not expressing all that is being said, so I negate it. You say I am contradicting myself. I am not contradictory at all. I negate the first statement, the second statement, and all the other statements – that is why sometimes it sounds very contradictory. I am negating it all the time, not with the idea of arriving at any point; just negating. There is no purpose in my talking."_

#

FOOTNOTES

1. The Essential UG \- "My teaching, if that is the word you want to use, has no copyright. You are free to reproduce, distribute, interpret, misinterpret, distort, garble, do what you like, even claim authorship, without my consent or the permission of anybody." – Back to reading

# CHAPTER 36

THE FUTURE

Back to the Table of Contents

Question: I thought I just read in Chapter Twenty-Seven that time doesn't exist. What are you doing calling the last chapter in this book "The Future?"

_Answer:_ You're right. But I also said in Chapter Twenty that "I can still dream;" and that's what I'd like to do – dream a little about the future – as long as I don't get attached to the fulfillment of those dreams.

Actually, toward the end of your time in the cocoon, you begin to see ripples in the Universal ocean, movement in the "Earth Environment" template; and sometimes it's fun to speculate – in a general sort of way – where those ripples might be heading. I'm seeing a couple ripples I want to focus on for a few minutes before I end this book, simply because I find some of this stuff fascinating.

The first ripple I see is that the drama and conflict and pain and suffering and war and violence and hardship in the "Earth Environment" template are actually _increasing_ across the world, despite – or perhaps, as explained in Chapter Eighteen, in part as a result of – the resistance of more and more "peaceworkers." Some of the "developed" countries haven't been so hard hit yet, but they will be as the global economic system becomes more chaotic.

It seems like every day the news is full of more deaths from war and violence, and from natural disasters as well. More people are out of work around the world, more barely living from hand to mouth, more losing their homes, more with no idea how they or their families will survive. More economies are failing, more governments are collapsing or being challenged, and more theories of everything are falling by the wayside.

For me, however, this is not a "bad" thing at all. It may actually be signaling the beginning of a mass exodus out of the movie theater with large numbers of Players gathering around the garden ready to eat from the Tree of Life. In other words, the screws may be tightening, the rubber band may be stretching to its limits, the situation deteriorating until more and more Human Children are willing to stand up in their seats and yell, " _We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more_ " – and more Human Adults realize what's in the back of the movie theater isn't working either and head for the door. Sometimes things have to get pretty "bad" for that to happen.

But I've been overly optimistic before, so I can't be sure. As Alan Shore said in one of his closing arguments in an episode of _Boston Legal_...

"When the weapons of mass destruction thing turned out not to be true, I expected the American people to rise up. They didn't. Then, when the Abu Ghraib torture thing surfaced, and it was revealed that our government participated in rendition – a practice where we kidnap people and turn them over to regimes who specialize in torture – I was sure then the American people would be heard from. We stood mute.

"Then came the news that we jailed thousands of so-called 'terrorist' suspects, locked them up without the right to a trial, or even the right to confront their accusers. Certainly we would never stand for that. We did.

"And now it's been discovered the Executive Branch has been conducting massive illegal domestic surveillance on its own citizens – you and me; and I at least consoled myself that finally – finally – the American people will have had enough. Evidently we haven't.

_"In fact, if the people of this country have spoken, the message is, 'We're okay with it all – torture, warrantless search and seizures, illegal wiretappings, prison without a fair trail, or any trial, war on false pretenses. We as a citizenry are apparently not offended. There are no demonstrations on college campuses; in fact there's no clear indication that young people even seem to notice."_

Maybe it's an encouraging sign that "young people" aren't demonstrating on college campuses, or otherwise protesting in general. Perhaps it means they are beginning to realize that "changing things" isn't working, but they also see the futility in resistance, the purposelessness in joining groups in the back of the movie theater, the rampant contradictions and inconsistencies in all judgmental belief systems.

Maybe "young people" are simply numb, fed up with the whole thing, but with no clue of what to do, no concept yet of a viable alternative to the outdated and inaccurate models of life found inside the movie theater. Perhaps they're ready for this Human Game model.

As I asked in Chapter Twenty-One, "How much more pain and suffering and limitation and restriction is required before millions of Players surrender, understand it is their own judgments and resistance causing that pain and suffering, and are willing to begin processing the false knowledge and layers of the ego that are part of life inside the movie theater?"

So Ripple #1 appears to me headed in the direction of more pain and suffering, and says to me the rollercoaster is nearing the top of the first hill, when things get really tough and the going gets really rough for those inside.

* * *

Ripple #2, going in the opposite direction, is that there are also signs more and more Players are waking up from their dreamstate, or at least waking up _within_ their dreamstate.

You recall I talked about a "template" (or matrix) for the "Earth Environment" in Chapter Twenty-Four. Let's speculate a little on how that template might change from time to time....

Remember The Field?

" _A field of all possibility_."

" _The foundation of the universe is a single universal field of intelligence... the fountainhead of all the laws of nature; all the fundamental forces, all the fundamental particles, all the laws governing life at every level of the universe_."

" _We can't explain what we do see as matter...unless we picture that these matter particles somehow come out from or emerge from these thought-wave patterns."_

#

An _Infinite I_ goes to this Field and chooses certain specific wave frequencies to create the holographic experiences it wants for its Player.

But rather than having to re-create the car and the buildings and the briefcase – and the galaxies and the solar system and this planet – each time, it uses a template in The Field I have called the "Earth Environment" for its basic "total immersion movie set," and adds whatever unique aspects it wants for its individual Player. Then it downloads that hologram to its Player's brain.

I also talked about the human brain receiving these holographic wave frequencies from The Field and translating them into our "physical reality," like a radio that receives sound wave frequencies and translates them into music and words we can hear; and this is where the Player comes in. Let me explain....

A radio has a certain range of frequencies it can receive and translate into sound. The AM range is 535-1605 KHz, and the FM range is usually 88 - 108 MHz, although this can vary slightly from country to country. Obviously, there are sounds to be heard outside of those frequencies, but a radio receiver doesn't pick them up.

This is also true for humans, who can hear only a limited range of sounds as well. Dogs, dolphins and other creatures can hear different frequencies than we do, for example.

There is some scientific evidence our brains are receiving a much wider range of frequencies than we are able to perceive. Michael Weliky from the University of Rochester conducted a study which led him to conclude that perhaps as much as 80% of the frequencies we receive are "locked in our heads," unable to be perceived.

Regardless of how wide a range of frequencies the human brain might be able to receive from The Field, it's clear there is a limited range of frequencies we can actually perceive. What exactly is determining this range of frequencies? The judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears we form in the first half of the Human Game. So at any given moment, the "Earth Environment" template in The Field available to an _Infinite I_ to create a hologram for its Player is limited to a certain range of frequencies the Player can perceive based on their judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears.

I want to say that a third time because it's so important: _Our judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears limit the range of frequencies our Infinite I can use from The Field to download a holographic experience we can perceive._ This is demonstrated so well by Dr. Bruce Lipton in his exercise with the two sets of colored glasses and the pictures of FEAR and LOVE.

With that in mind, I want to take a look at the frequency range of our current template of the "Earth Environment," but this is going to be a little tricky because of the wording and the analogy to a radio. I want to emphasize before we start that no frequency is "better" or "worse" than any other frequency; and when I use certain numbers to represent frequencies, it does _not_ mean one number is "better" or "worse" just because it's a "higher" or "lower" number. For example, the music at 91.3 on a radio dial is no "better" than the music at 104.7. It's just a different frequency with different content. You may prefer to listen to one kind of music over another, but that doesn't make it "better."

To help remove all judgments about the numbers, I have intentionally reversed the following graphics from what we would normally expect to see. In fact, doing it this way is more in keeping with our rollercoaster analogy, where the "higher" you go on the first hill, the more limitation you experience.

#

Okay. Let's arbitrarily say the total frequency range in The Field available to our _Infinite I_ to create a holographic experience goes from 0 to 2000, somewhat like this....

#

However, most Players today can only perceive part of that frequency range (500-1800) because of their judgments, beliefs, opinions and fears, somewhat like this....

#

If we were to graph the Players on Earth and the frequency ranges they could perceive, it might look like a Bell Curve....

...with very few whose experiences consist mainly of total joy and abundance (approaching no limitations); also very few experiencing catastrophic disasters and plagues (complete limitation); and the vast majority with an "Earth Environment" template ranging from beauty, sunsets, happiness, and love to war, violence, abuse, and fear.

At any given time, it's interesting for me to look at the template for the "Earth Environment" that appears in my own hologram, to see the frequency range and how it is changing. As I said, it seems to me more and more Players are experiencing more war, violence, abuse, and fear. The sheer numbers of people who are in pain and suffering have seemingly increased dramatically in the last fifty years compared to previous templates. What this tells me is more and more Players are nearing the pinnacle of limitation in the first half of the Human Game, and more and more _Infinite I's_ might be ready for their Players to enter the second half.

Did I make that clear? Rather than judging the increasing deaths occurring so frequently now from natural catastrophes, or the crash of the world financial system, or the melting of the glaciers as "bad," they may simply be an indication the amount of limitation appearing in the "Earth Environment" template is reaching its maximum threshold and could result in more Players moving into the second half of the Human Game – as I said, like a rubber band being stretched to its limits before it breaks.

* * *

#

So how can we start perceiving a different range of frequencies in the "Earth Environment" template? By letting go of our judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears on an individual Player level. We have the free will and the ability to do that; and in the process we will shift the frequency range of the "Earth Environment" template we can perceive, and therefore the frequency range our _Infinite I_ can use to create our holograms, from this...

#

...to this....

You'll notice that war and violence and abuse and fear are no longer perceivable in this new range. They still exist, as all frequencies do, but we simply do not experience them any more as individual Players.

This is what happens as a Player moves further in their cocoon as they run Robert's Process and do their spiritual autolysis, letting go of their judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears, and especially stripping away layers of the ego; they simply stop having the limiting experiences they had inside the movie theater appear in their holograms.

On the other end of the spectrum, we begin to experience more than just beauty, sunsets, happiness and love as we move toward unlimited joy and abundance.

I want to emphasize it's not necessary to "send new information to The Field" to create these new frequencies as some teachers have suggested, because The Field, by definition, already contains all information and all possibilities, and because we as Players cannot create anything anyway. It is also not necessary to change the number of DNA strands, or achieve a certain level of "enlightenment," or eat only organic food, or meditate, or anything else in order to begin to perceive this new range of frequencies. All that is required is to let go of the judgments, beliefs, opinions and fears that determined the frequency range for the first half of the Human Game.

Now the interesting question is: What if a large number of Players were to leave the movie theater; make their way through their cocoon; let go of their judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears; and were able to perceive this new frequency range? What effect would that have on the "Earth Environment" template in The Field – the one the _Infinite I's_ use when creating holographic experiences for their Players?

#

In other words, what might be the effect, if any, if a large number of Players begin the process of transforming into butterflies? Would the bell curve then look like this?

* * *

A British biologist, Rupert Sheldrake, has a theory he calls "morphic resonance," or "morphic field theory."

Basically the theory says when enough members of a species have adopted the same behavior, a critical number is reached, called a "critical mass," and this new behavior is automatically and rapidly transferred by "morphic resonance" to the entire species.

" _The term [morphic fields] is more general in its meaning than morphogenetic fields, and includes other kinds of organizing fields in addition to those of morphogenesis; the organizing fields of animal and human behaviour, of social and cultural systems, and of mental activity can all be regarded as morphic fields which contain an inherent memory_."

Sheldrake's theories have been heavily criticized by mainstream biologists for many years. However, some quantum physicists have supported Sheldrake's hypothesis, and even David Bohm suggested it was in keeping with his own ideas of what he called the "implicate" and "explicate" order.

I know from my direct experiences of testing and challenging this model that an individual Player can significantly change the range of frequencies its _Infinite I_ can use to create its holographic experiences by letting go of judgments, beliefs, opinions, and fears, and stripping away the layers of ego.

So I wonder....

If more and more Players were to enter their cocoons, would the transformational process become faster and easier for each new generation?

Would a critical mass eventually be reached where all the Players on Earth automatically walk out of the movie theater and into their cocoons?

Would the Earth, as a Player itself, no longer need a movie theater and begin an entirely new game?

That's Ripple #2.

I'd like to stay around long enough to see where it goes.

#

FOOTNOTES

1. Shore, Alan. In closing arguments on _Boston Legal_ , Season Two, Episode 19. Stick It \- first broadcast March 14, 2006 – Back to reading

2. McTaggert, Lynne. The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe – Back to reading

3. Hagelin, John. What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole – Back to reading

4. Wolf, Fred Alan. Ibid. – Back to reading

5. Schirber, Michael. Only Using Part of Your Brain? Think Again – Back to reading

6. Lipton, Bruce. Biology of Perception – Back to reading

7. Sheldrake, Rupert. A New Science of Life: the hypothesis of formative causation and The Presence of the Past: morphic resonance and the habits of nature  – Back to reading

8. Sheldrake, Rupert. The Presence of the Past: morphic resonance and the habits of nature, p. 112 – Back to reading

9. Lemley, Brad. Heresy – Back to reading

#

You are invited to write a book review, or offer comments, or download the free audio book version of this ebook by visiting:

ButterfliesFree.com

####
