************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ Hi to all. Yes, the work of Ken, has a parallel with Trom. In the scale-tone missing conservatism. my little one oversight: Where Dennis lists the scale? Thanks Pete. Nic.
>----Messaggio originale---- >Da: [email protected] >Data: 5-set-2014 19.22 >A: "TROM"<[email protected]> >Ogg: [TROM1] Ken Ogger's Cosmic History > >************* >The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] >************ > >The Pilot Ken Ogger's wrote down his view of cosmic history which is presented below. It dovetails nicely with TROM. > >Sincerely >Pete > > >SUPER SCIO #2 > >COSMIC HISTORY > >1. INTRODUCTION > >We have come down through a long series of universes. All of the more >advanced sources seem to be aware of this, most notably the Tibetan >scriptures and L. Ron Hubbard's investigations of 1952. However, no >one has ever provided a detailed description of the sequence or >characteristics of these universes. If we have indeed fallen from a >godlike state, then the universes themselves must follow some sort of >a dwindling progression and the mechanics of that decay must reflect, >on the whole, how we have come to be in the state that we are in. > >This document will attempt to sketch out the broad outlines and >provide a context which will hopefully support further research. I >cannot guarantee that all the information given here is exactly >correct. The best I can do is to say that I think it comes reasonably >close. But of one thing I am certain, the picture can be no less >complex than that presented here. If I have erred, it is on the side >of missing things rather than putting too much there. Nothing less >would serve to explain the degree to which we have fallen. > >Before embarking on an actual discussion of the history, it is >important to define my usage of the word "universe" because it is >used in many sloppy ways in the field of metaphysics. > >By universe, I mean a complete system of space and time. And for this >discussion, I mean specifically those large agreed upon universes in >which we all have lived. > >There is not a one to one mapping between the points in space within >one universe and those in another. A universe can have more than one >3 dimensional plane and can also have other 3 dimensional spaces >(bubbles or pockets) tied to it. These are all considered to be part >of the same universe because there is a mapping of points and there >is a correspondence of time and there is a carry over of physical >laws. But truly separate universes do not tie together in a direct >manner and do not have identical laws. Note that you can setup >transfer points between separate universes, but these are arbitrary >points linked together without any correlation. > >The current universe is one of very strict physical laws and is best >characterized as a highly mechanical MEST (Matter/ Energy/ Space/ >Time) oriented creation. The immediately preceding universe was one >of Magic where physical laws were not quite as solid. Just as the >literature of science fiction hints at the flavor of our life in this >universe, the literature of fantasy hints at the nature of the Magic >universe. But even the magic universe was quite physical and highly >structured in its own context. As we work backwards from this >universe, we see that each preceding universe was slightly less solid >and more conducive to thought until we reach the earliest ones where >the Thetan (Spirit / that which thinks) is senior and the physical >aspects are trivial things that can be modified by the merest whim. > >Let us now go all the way back and set the stage for the entire >procession of universes. > >2. IN THE BEGINNING > >Before anything exists, there can only be nothing, But the >preternatural nothingness must have a potential, and that potential >must be infinite because an infinity of creations has descended from >it. If there had been no potential, then we would not exist, and if >the potential had been limited, we would have ground to a halt long ago. > >The nothingness exists before all space and time, therefore it is >unchanging and may be described as static. > >Matter and energy and any other possible forms can only exist within >space and time and therefore are second order creations. Counting and >the quantification of things are dependent on the existence of things >which can be counted, therefore all mathematics and the very concept >of quantification is a second order creation. And so the nothingness >is above the concept of quantification and is neither few nor many, >neither zero nor infinite, it is literally beyond counting. > >The nothingness has the potential for thought, but there is nothing >to think about until something is created, therefore, the first >thought and the first creation must be one and the same, for >something must be conceived of to exist. Therefore, the process of >thought in its ultimate form, is the process of creation. > >Of the four basic components of this universe, namely Matter, Energy, >Space, and Time, only Space can be conceived of without reference to >any of the other factors. Therefore, the first creation must be space >rather than matter, energy, or time. > >IN THE BEGINNING, THE ZERO-INFINITE LIFE STATIC CONCEIVED OF SPACE. >AND IN THE CONCEPT OF SPACE, IS THE CONCEPT OF SEPARATION. AND THE >ONLY THING THERE WAS WHICH COULD BE SEPARATED WAS THE LIFE STATIC ITSELF. > >[At this point the first creation has occurred which Dennis labels "Be Known" and this necessitates "Know" since the being must perceive that it has created something. Also the junior universe "to Create" comes into existence. Pete] > >But the basic life static which is the unchanging nothingness is >senior to space time and therefore cannot be affected by this >separation. It is not made less by it, and therefore it may again >separate. And from the view of the basic nothingness, the separations >cannot be before or after each other because it is indeed timeless, >but from the lesser view of that which is separated, the separated >almost statics can conceive that one separated before another and >therefore we have time. > >And the lesser near-statics are also nothingness with the potential >for infinite creation, but they have the experience of time and >therefore the experience of what they have created. > >Once those who can conceive are separated from the basic nothingness, >they then proceed to apply further separations to bring about the >creation of existence. A positive and a negative can be pulled out of >nothing and the net equation remains the same. 1 - 1 = 0 = 2 - 2 = 0 >= 256 - 256 etc. The only difference between these is consideration >and consideration is the product of thought. Infinite matter and >energy may therefore be generated by thought alone. > >SPACE IS THE SEPARATION OF PARTICLES TIME IS THE SEPARATION OF EVENTS >IDENTITY IS THE SEPARATION OF THOUGHT > >The interposition of distance is necessary for viewing or perceiving anything. > >The interposition of time is necessary for emotion. There is no loss >without time, nor is there feeling. > >[Dennis says that emotion is more related to separation in space with pain occurring in too close contact followed by sexual sensation at close distance followed by apathy, grief, fear, anger, antagonism, boredom, enthusiasm as distance increases. And moving on to esthetics or beauty. Pete] > >The interposition of identity is necessary for consideration. Without >identity, all thought is one which is a passive condition of cosmic >allness. Therefore, to think about or consider thought, it is >necessary to introduce at least a slight separation from all thought >and therefor it is necessary to be an individual to some slight >degree. Therefore, identity is necessary for self awareness. >Furthermore, the Zero-Infinite Life Static is not a self aware unit, >instead it is the sum total of all awareness that is or that might be >(or might have been). Therefore, it does not judge or intervene, it just IS. > >[The mere fact of separation from source means that the created being has a different point from which to view, considers itself to not be the created, has a beginning point in time and therefor has a different personality from the creator. Pete] > >MATTER IS THE CONSIDERATION THAT SOMETHING IS THERE. ENERGY IS THE >POTENTIAL FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN. > >Since the basic nothingness is beyond all limitations of time and >space, it may be considered as infinite and eternal from our >time/space limited perspective. By its very nature, it will always >exceed the highest orders of infinite creation that have been >achieved and therefore will always demand the creation of even >further infinities of somethingness to balance the nothingness. >Therefore, the scope of creation is limitless and eternal. Since the >nothingness is always with us, we do not lack for it. Our only lack >is for the somethingnesses (those things which are not nothing) which >will always fall short of completely balancing the nothingness. > >The self aware near-statics which we will call Thetans (thought >units) fulfill themselves by an ongoing process of creation. Only >when this creative process is blocked or stifled do they become miserable. > >[Thus Repair of Importance is a valuable exercise to the beings abilities. Pete] > >Furthermore, the separation itself is only a matter of consideration. >The thought beings are still part of the original static and >therefore have no need to rejoin it since they never really left it >in the first place. > >[So timebreaking is the means whereby individuals can undo any current state and return to any former state. Pete] > >The ultimate state of these beings is to be an >operating manifestation of the ultimate static and project an >infinity of creation to balance the nothingness. All lesser states >are therefore at least slightly unpleasant but are maintained in the >hope of future creation. > >3. THE DANCE OF CREATION > >At the highest levels, the self-aware life statics participate in a >dance of infinite creation. Here, everything that can be conceived of >is created, exchanged, and experienced. Here we have an infinity of >universes in constant flux, varying even in the number of dimensions >used by each universe. At this level, the individual is himself near >infinite, creating and experiencing multiple universes simultaneously >and projecting an infinity of personalities, and yet the individual >is still individual and separate and distinct from the other >individuals who also participate in the dance of creation. And the >flux between these individuals is the dance and is the infinity of creation. > >This level is the co-existence of static and here each individual is, >to all intents and purposes, God. And the only compelling purpose of >it all is to continue to add to the richness of creation. And this >might well be termed divine and infinite bliss. It is a nirvana, but >a nirvana of infinite somethingness rather than nothingness. > >But given an infinity of infinities to fill, it becomes mandatory to >leave no stone unturned in the search for yet more new and varied >creations. In pursuit of this, there is the idea that a new being, >freshly separated from the zero-infinite life static, might conceive >of new systems of creation, different from those which are already in >existence. And so new beings were indeed separated out and did add >greatly to the richness of creation. > >But the most original creations would stem from beings who were >isolated from the existing order and were not tainted by exposure to >what the older beings had created. And so there is the concept of >isolating a new crowd of individuals within a sort of womb where they >can develop on their own. > >We are now in such a womb, and the entire series of universes that we >have built and inhabited are in this womb. When we have finished our >development, we will exit the womb and carry our new systems of >creation with us into the dance and begin an infinitely interesting >exchange of mockups with the older beings. And someday, eons hence, >when we have milked dry every variation of our own systems, and the >systems of the older beings, and the endless variations of >intermixing the systems, then we will eagerly await the birth of yet >another crop of new beings who will bring forth their own set of wonders. > >No matter how miserable you might be today, the duration of the >misery is short in comparison with eternal bliss. When you have >achieved the ultimate godlike state, you will consider the pains of >birth a small price to have paid for it. > >[Here Ken is not offering any way to change current conditions or relieve any upsets. A curious position to take for an Auditor. Pete ] > >4. THE WOMB > >How is it possible to enclose a group of godlike beings and prevent >them from experiencing the vast and interesting body of existing >creations? How can you control someone whose merest whim has the >power to create and destroy universes? > >Initially, since you are dealing with innocent new beings, you can >distract them with an interesting object and channel their attention >in the direction that you desire. But this does not work for very >long, and soon they will begin to look around and be attracted by the >fascinating works of the older beings. And with that, the freshness >of new unbiased creation would be lost. So something further is needed. > >But a god can only trap or limit himself, and at most, he can be >aided by the deception and trickery of others. But even in this, the >older beings must not be directly involved or they will eventually >contaminate the new crowd. > >And so the new group of beings must be tricked into conflict among >themselves and into building traps for each other. And each one is >trapped, not so much by the traps that others laid for him, but by >the traps that he laid for others for sooner or later, he will forget >one of his own traps and fall into it by mistake. > >The general plan is that the new beings will dig themselves into a >trap of their own devising. And will sink deeper and deeper into it >and eventually will become the effect of their own creation and even >forget who they are and how they built the trap in the first place. >But in so doing, they will evolve a new system of creation which will >be the anatomy of the trap. And eventually, they will begin to dig >themselves out, which will require regaining control over the >entirety of their creations. > >[Ahh. Now we are back to TROM and regaining control of our minds. Pete] > >We lie now at the bottom of such a trap, and it might seem that we >could never create even a single atom of the physical universe around >us. But these abilities will return as we dig ourselves out. And when >we exit the womb, each of us will not only have all of the rich and >interesting details of Earth at our fingertips, but we will also have >the details of the Star Wars like physical universe and the Magic >universe, and the numerous universes that came before. We will bring >all of this out into the greater society of beings and our rewards >will be great. It has been a hard road and will continue to be rough >for awhile, but it has worked before and it is the only way to >develop in true isolation. > >[I cringe at the idea of needing "rewards" from others. I can create anything I want. Pete] > >And the older beings will not and cannot intervene. We must dig >ourselves out, for it is this which will give us the power over these >creations of ours. If the older beings were to step in and rescue us, >so to speak, by pulling us out of this trap, they would be stealing >from us our richly deserved reward. These are our creations and it is >for us to take command over them. > >We have been totally isolated for a long time. There was only one >external intervention at the very beginning. This was the absolute >minimum possible and there have been no others although we have >frequently pretended to each other that we were older or higher >beings and have even sometimes imitated the actual intervention with >the intent of bedeviling and tricking each other. > >This one and only bit of external interference consisted of >presenting us with a single ultra-complex object which would >prejudice us towards conflict and entrapment. This object was the >Jewel of Knowledge. > > >Ken goes on to describe the Jewel of Knowledge from here. > >Sincerely >Pete >_______________________________________________ >Trom mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > _______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
