Appendix Two

 

ELUCIDATION OF BEING

June 21, 1990

 

Your presence is crucial, and not for the reasons you've been led to think matter.  You have been told that your actions make a difference, from the viewpoint that you&you&you&you collectively make some political difference.  You have been told that your words are important, because of some vague notion that everything somehow gets heard (by whom?), at least by our "subconsciouses", whatever those might be.  And that your thoughts must be focused so that you may be "pure".

 

But it is you yourself, the individual who reads this or hears my words, that is the only one in the Universe who can and does make all the difference in the world!  Who is it that sees what you see through your eyes, hears with your ears, feels the pounding of your heart?

 

Haven't you ever said to yourself, "I'm too small for God to take notice of me," and then, of course, said and done things that depended upon your being to small to be noticed by a higher authority!  Now take a microscope and find something too small for God to be in it (you are welcome to use your new Scanning Tunneling Microscope, the one you use for counting the beads on your DNA necklace); now, how do I know that God is in such miniscule particles?  Because we are now ready for the definition of God (remember being told in Sunday School that you can't define God, maybe even sacrilege to try?)

 

God is the means and the medium, the only one, through which anything can exist at all!  Notice that this definition does not actually limit God; it merely limits reality (and everything in it) to being within God.  This is a mathematical type of definition: it sets up a template or model, and then describes a "universe" (possibly only abstract) in terms of that model.

 

So I am saying, let's try out this model in which nothing is too small to be noticed by God because everything is God.  Now I'm waiting for all the faithful to chime in with, "But we already knew that," and all the atheists to grumble, "I'm not giving up my logical, reasonable universe."

 

To the former I say, "No, you didn't know anything of the kind, because these are only words to you, and you still limit God by thinking of some old man with a long beard sitting up on a cloud, with powerful enemies from Hell bucking him, and frequently outwitting him" (lower-case "him" because I am referring to your silly children's Sunday-school-book picture, not to the unique I Am Self).  How could that old man notice everything I'm doing?  Why would he care, anyway?  And if I did do something he'd take notice of, this "god-of-love" would be likely to smash me against the wall, have my wives raped, and sell my children into slavery!

 

To the atheists I say, "We're in perfect agreement--the universe is logical and reasonable, once we decide upon some particular point of departure."  And with you it is easier to discuss this subject: we don't have to muddle around with theology.  Let us hypothesize a reality with only you in it.  Who/what are you?  Are you consciousness--what is that?  Now how do you experience yourself, or even cognate at all?  After all, we still have no framework, nor rules, nor substance, nor movement.

 

So now we are waiting for you to decide what senses you would like to have: sight? sound? touch? fazzing? x-ray vision? future? past? empathy? compassion? sex? intuition?  Choose one from column A and one from column B.  Select your preference of ordering your experience: 1) time sequence, 2) random events, 3) All-at-Once.  Now select which direction of time you would like entropy to progress in: "past" to "future" or vice versa?  (Let us define past to be the more "fixed" cells of experience, and future to be either moveable or entirely unknown.)

Good.  Now, for a nominal additional charge, would you like some actual experiences within that framework?  People and events are extra, of course.  Would you like to feel some emotions toward or about them? That’s extra too.  What about everything coming out with a happy ending, or at least some discernible meaning?  That’s optional.  Ok, how about your actors coming up with their own ideas about everything? Would it be more interesting if they fought with you instead of agreeing with everything you say?  Shall they demonstrate autonomy and do things entirely unpredictable to you?

 

Now here is where it can get interesting, this world we are concocting together: Would you like to be able to forget that this whole thing was just a passing invention of yours, so you can fully immerse yourself in experiences of novelty and even poignancy?  But then, would you like to leave yourself a secret key for getting yourself back out, so you aren’t stuck in some fantasy for eternity?  What might that key look like? Would it be something you’d discover with some “science” that you invented along the way, like in “2001” or “Contact”? Or maybe some combination of “science” and “religion” as in “The Fifth Element” or “The Last Crusade”?

 

You could invent some mythologies or religions full of impossible stories, and in flat contradiction to each other except in certain crucial respects, namely the steps to recovering your original memory, self-authority, will and the power with which you originated this fantasy in the first place and then kept it going.  You might include in them some practices which would awaken some secret messages that you store in your body positions, in your “DNA” or in your brain structure, or you could concoct some potions which are known to primitive tribespeople, and which, when you drink them, reveal to you first the madness with which you have ended up dreaming out this fantasy, and then start unraveling the “ball of string” which leads you back to starting position, although appearing to be impossible visions, revelations or miracles.

 

And what if, by some amazing and unlikely chance, this turns out to be exactly what you have done?