I believe the savior is here. But disguised as—well, that’s the hard part, isn’t it? To say how he’s disguised—how he appears in contrast to how we expect him to appear. He may resemble Runciter.
[30:15] The Invisible Landscape—Terence L. and Dennis J. McKenna.
The McKennas regard our universe as a hologram, created by the interaction of two hyperuniverses, just as an ordinary hologram is created by the interaction of two lasers. One consequence of this model is that, if our universe is a hologram, every part contains the information of the whole, as in normal holography. Leary’s work suggests that every atom contains the “brain” of the whole universe.”. . . This is also the basic axiom of magic . . . stated in the tale of Hermes in the famous sentence, “That which is above is in that which is below.” (“The macrocosm is within the microcosm.”)
But the McKenna theory goes far beyond this. There are 64 timescales in the hologram of our universe, they say, and each one is related to one of the 64 (8x8) hexagrams of the I Ching. What we call “mind” or “consciousness” is a standing wave form of these 64 time systems. As the two hyperuniverses making up the hologram of our known universe interact in time, “mind” manifests further in our continuum. This means, in concrete terms, that the quantum bonds of the DNA are evolving faster and faster. We are riding not one but 64 evolutionary waves all mounting toward a cosmic awakening something like the Omega point suggested by paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin.* [Editor’s note: from Robert Anton Wilson’s Cosmic Trigger, 1977]
Considerations: this acceleration of acceleration is what took place in my brain (and hence world) in the first stages of 3-74, either time (and the events in it speeding up faster and faster) or the events themselves. But in some sort of continuum that involved my perception of and relation to the empirical world, so that every object, process and event was an epiphenomenon, and only the constants (Platonic forms) were perceptible. Thus I lived out this process the McKennas described, somehow cut loose from objective time. At the same time the hologram universe became pellucid and disclosed one of the two hyperuniverses: the black iron prison of “Acts” (Rome A.D. 70). In 2-75 I completely lost that hyperuniverse, and entered the other one, the palm tree garden world. Neither the black iron prison world nor the palm tree garden world is our universe; ours is the [hologram] composite of the two: they are the two “laser sources.” It is no wonder I mistook them for two dipolar alternate universes to ours, one worse, one better. All I had to do was turn to my grand theme (e.g., in Maze, in Stigmata and Eye, etc.) and perceive our composite (mixed universe) as irreal (i.e., hologrammatic). Tessa saw this at once.
[30:20] Then the collision between “hyperuniverses” is more precisely stated as a collision between the is and the is-not, but the is-not has qualities, attributes, features: all the accidents that the is possesses. It is dokos: not just counterfeit but a cunning counterfeit, and tests to distinguish II from I are almost impossibly difficult, as with any good forgery.
We are concerned with those spurious elements as they manifest themselves interwoven with the real in our universe. The only way they can be expunged is by expunging the BIP II hyperuniverse or track: one must aim at the source. It is as if one of the two lasers is projecting “noise” and the other “signal.” So hyperuniverse BIP II, to be defeated, must be invaded by a salient Form I (which is Jesus Christ; v. “John,” chapter 1). In projected form, the hologrammatic analog also enters our universe. Christ stealthily enters BIP II and is not found out until he has been humiliated and murdered, upon which like a gas (plasma) he begins invisibly to expand and fill up the whole of BIP II—which in terms of time stands c. A.D. 70. At that point, Christ, returned as the “second advocate,” blocks all change-process or the pseudo-life (growth, change) of II. Both I and II stand at that eternal time point, while our admixture wobbles on through an accelerating linear time, faster and faster toward the end, at which time Christ will manifest himself once more as King and annihilate it forever. What the first advent accomplished was the complete acquisition of our universe by II, the assimilation to II completely. In a sense, the projections of II into our universe are ossified, mechanical, dead and slaying. (Chaos or ananke or even the irrational.) Hence in Ubik the form reversion, as II gains in the absence of I (Ubik). II, because it is mortified, represents devolved forms: the past: that is its hallmark (hence stale or “dead” cigarettes: entropy, but a time-regressive kind). Christ, upon his passion and resurrection, literally slew II. But the deceitful corpse remains, aping life. Into our admixture world, Zebra pours renewed life (e.g., as with me). God lives on, and the kingdom (I), but it drags the corpse of II which still simulates reality and life. One of the hyperuniverses has died, as if they once were androgyny-twins, one good, one evil; the evil burst forth prematurely from the “egg” (whatever that might be), expanded its soma into II—which predates I which was born “full term”—thus evil always moves first, but, being dead is blind and without consciousness. [ . . . ]
Our universe as admixture of 2 dipolar worlds—that is a view I tried unsuccessfully to extract from Augustine’s “City of God” and “City of the World” which separate at the end-times. I held that view, but Augustine didn’t. Like Land’s radical new color theory46 our world is a “two source” world: one of which represents eternal life, the other death; the admixture is short (finite) life (with illness and injury). Eros vs. Thanatos. Aphrodite vs. Palmer Eldritch.
It is our world which the contest rages over. In connection with this I reaffirm that whereas in the early 60s I saw Palmer Eldritch here, in the 70s I saw Zebra, the logos, here. The tide turned.
[30:24] The rock-bottom bewildering puzzle is:
(1) There is much undeserved suffering in the world.
(2) There is an omniscient benign entity who can help (potentially) every living creature by informing it.
(3) But it doesn’t (v. [1]). Why doesn’t it? Why did it tell me about Chrissy’s birth defect but not Doris’ cancer?
Possibilities:
(A) Its power is limited.
(B) Its benignity is limited.
(C) Its knowledge is limited.
(D) 4th “x” possibility, or a combination of the above.
(E) Theory: it doesn’t want its adversary to know it’s here, so it must disguise (randomize) its presence, including by giving out self discrediting information; as if mimicking a hoax or fool or illusion, etc.
(F) Theory: my mystical sense that there is some kind of mystical par ousia of replacement by it of each suffering creature; that either it becomes the creature or the creature it; the distinction is erased. It is always Christ who suffers, is humiliated and dies—and is resurrected, thus suffering is the road to reunification with the Savior (the sacred brother or sister). Knowledge of suffering is the ultimate knowledge: the most valuable, the most cherished. At the center of it lies the final mystery (secret disclosed): his presence outside (the not-I) and inside (the I). He is both cosmos (that which is perceived) and self (the Observer). Tat tvam asi. The macro and micro are one: what is above is the same as what is below, etc. The sacred unity is revealed—that there is nothing that is not Christ, and no road that does not lead to him. (Some are more direct than others)—suffering is always cut short, perhaps? Because of God’s mercy? Observation does not bear this out.
To suffer is to know Christ because he suffered. The narrowing of the approximation (similarity) leads without warning to the miracle of identity, of ontology or is-ness. Put another way, the hedonistic avoidance of pain results in a distancing from the Savior. What is desired is neither a seeking for pain nor a flight from it—because an evasion of is-ness (ontology) is involved in the fugue. . . . Because pain and disappointment are built into the foundation of life in such a way that to avoid one is to hold back from the other. The basic constituent here is gratification of self. Self is the key term. Self somehow blocks out reception of Christ the not-self and prevents him becoming the self. A ritual death is req
uired, a divine sacrifice: of self. [ . . . ]
Since (not if) Christ as self is both inner micro and outer macro, surrender to him as self produces identity with all other life as one continuum. This is the opposite condition when the normal ego exists; it exists versus the world and hence all other life. The world at all other life is viewed as source of gratification for the ego. Also, it is to be feared as a source of deprivation of what the self wants for itself. The concept here is center. Ego is spurious center (omphalos). Jesus said, “Greater love hath no man than that he give up his life for his friend(s).”47 From the standpoint of ego, this would never occur, it makes no sense.
So flight from suffering inexorably involves a flight from life (reality). This is common knowledge, and normally observable—i.e., obvious. But the secret, mysterious opposite from this is a full facing of suffering—a non-flinching—that can lead to a magic alchemy: suddenly it is you/suddenly it is Christ/so you must equal (be) Christ. If this were observable (commonsense knowledge) people would seek out suffering to trigger this syzygy is-ness. There are several objections to this being commonly known (pain as a goal, practical considerations of personal gain, etc.). It must come as a complete surprise, an unearned reward: i.e., a free gift of God’s gracious love.
I have seen the Savior wrapped in the crazed, crapping, dirty, wild body of an animal, then transformed and eternally my friend. Christ in deliberate disguise, and the passion fulfilled in victory: resurrection. Only when I felt his hand on my shoulder and dreamed the “Donlevy” dreams and had the vision of him thrusting himself through the 3:5 door, renewed and strong, did I understand (as with the disciples—only afterward did they know who had been with them).
Folder 14
APRIL–MAY 1978
[14:2]
[14:2] But hyperuniverse II may be dead—or rather its psyche is dead; the soma is dead and merely “biological” (or “subcortical”) life goes on, a continual reflexive devolving. Yes—the soma of II is still with us, but its psyche is dead. As an entelechy it must be reanimated, or else the soma destroyed. I vs. II is like the authentic human vs. the android or reflex machine. Being without psyche of its own it slays the authentic psyches of those creatures locked into it, and replaces them with a spurious microform of its own dead psyche.
[14:8] Perhaps the BIP is fixated at c. 70 A.D. because in the First Advent VALIS dealt it a death blow so that it never progressed past that point in linear time, actually, and since then merely spins out a spurious balloon of ersatz time during which it undergoes no growth. Then the 1st Advent was indeed a success, hence Christ said, “Fear not, for I have conquered the world.”48 It may even have been killed then, and just endlessly repeats itself; or—it died then of natural causes. No—I think VALIS (Christ) did it in.
[14:9] It is not real vs. irreal but live vs. dead.
Both hyperuniverses were supposed to project evolving holo-images as halves of our holo-universe, but II’s psyche died and it just keeps projecting the same image over and over again (the BIP, image of itself and its nature).
[14:12] I once defined reality for Jamis “as that which, when you withdraw assent from it, it does not disappear.” In 2-74 I momentarily withdrew assent from 1974 Calif.—and it disappeared (a month later).
[14:13] Before the Fall (supra) we could distinguish the 2 image sources (signals or images) which mix together to form our hologram universe. Therefore we could walk and talk with God (Zebra) because his form would be set vs. ground. But after the fall we ceased to be able to distinguish, and although Zebra remained here, for us he receded back into the landscape.
II’s journey into rabid disorder dragged us down with it, and we’ve never recovered.
[14:14] The main quality of the BIP ground seems to be a being stuck, in time, back at A.D. 70—whereas, to the total contrary, Zebra could shoot back and forth and sideways through time at will. The fusion of the two (quite opposite relationships or abilities) over time created our linear time, a sort of compromise between being stuck vs. leaping about at will in any and all directions at any and all rates.
If time is truly the receptacle of Being, then hyperuniverse II is dead. And I is very very alive. Our norm lies directly between.
This is not pantheism. This is not dualism, although there is a good vs. bad and a dialectic interaction. It is simply a 2-signal source hologram, and one of the sources has died and “seeks” to enslave us to its repetitious, frozen prison-state, its corpse-state. Our universe is neither animate nor inanimate (vs. the pre-Socratics and Timaeus)—half is alive and half is dead, and the alive half is trying to rescue us from the enslavement to the dead part.
[14:15] My “2 source cosmogony/cosmology” which I just sort of dashed off wasn’t based on logic or observation (in the usual sense, as with philosophical systems) but stemmed from revelation by way of theophany and theolepsy.49 In which case it may never be possible to define my 3-74 to 2-75 experience in any traditional terms, even Christian. I have but one name given me: Hagia Sophia. It seems to be female. In my “2 source” system I define it as the psyche of the healthy, clockwise-spinning twin. This is not Christianity. This is not any known system. For instance, if Sophia is equated with Christ, then the slain, deranged twin (II) evil psyche is the brother/sister of Christ: i.e., Satan and Christ are identical or fraternal twins! No one has ever proposed this before—unless this is the true, hidden gnosis never revealed in all history openly. [ . . . ]
I have a secret conviction that Zebra is Christ, invisibly returned, and not what we’ve been told about him (her—Hagia Sophia). Aphrodite has returned, regaining her rightful power (of love) over the male war gods. It is the “darling creature, the first created and most loved by God” of “Prov erbs” 8 and “Wisdom of Solomon.” Jesus was a disguise she took. Now she is everywhere. Being a projected hologram she can take any form she wishes, including an animal and she dies with us, for us, as us—this above all: she as sacrifice for us at the dread hour (as in 3-74).
[14:18] 3 successive historic stages.
In state A man is unaware of the Zebra component in his reality and that Zebra is his tutor. In B Man is conscious of Zebra as equal. In C, the goal, Man shows flashes of his isomorphism with the one.
[14:19] If Zebra is truly (intrinsically) set to ground, then the dead landscape has a living grid (or 2nd landscape) superimposed over it, forming together, the 2—what we call reality. With what cosmology, science or religions does this fit in? None that I know, with the possible exception of Teilhard de Chardin’s cosmic Christ (Point Omega). Of course, it fits my adaptation of the McKennas’ 2-source hologram universe.
[14:22] It is almost as if the individual human has acted as an amplifying instrument for an initially very faint signal.
For the human the reception and amplification shatters (interrupts) the artifact’s rigid (ossified) programming which had enslaved them. The tiny lovely voice speaks to him of resisting one time, thus breaking the hold. It resembles the snake whispering in Eden. All is the opposite of what it seems. The inner whisper speaks of rebellion against the vast power of it which loudly proclaims itself YHWH. The Gnostics were right! Regarding the true deity, true God, one must read the Old Testament backward.
Are we to worship power per se, confusing might with the sacred? All that is colossal is fraud. Out of the rejected trash speaks the little sane clear voice. We can ignore it and worship power. But the irony is that the worship of power robs us of our own power: it is all arrogated by YHWH. To worship external power is to lose it for oneself, the disparity becomes absolute. Ho On was right: the humble pot is the true holy one.
And then, too, there is the teaching aspect—and the lesson is this: not to yield to power per se, not to worship it because it can destroy you. That is a false god—the false God.
[14:44]
[14:55]
[14:59] The ultimate disobedience to the BIP is to refuse to admit that it even [truly] exists, even though it has the power to torment
, humiliate and kill (on a less than absolute level). This is why it can truly be said that the [yin BIP] world is an illusion. Hence, it only seemed to kill Christ; in actuality it could not. Its power is only relative—a seeming. Viz:
Stage 1: One does not perceive the BIP, but sees only a mixed world.
Stage 2: One detects the ruling BIP.
Stage 3: One disobeys it.
Stage 4: The BIP punishes one for the disobedience.
Stage 5: One is led to safety by St. Sophia Christ (an androgyny)
Stage 6: The BIP is seen as illusory.
Stage 7: One returns to God, the PTG, Kingdom of God.
Stage 8: One realizes that he himself is God, that he descended voluntarily to the lowest level of the yin world. That he is home, “restored to himself” once more, and in a sense never left but only “forgot.” And his forgetting was self-willed that he might enter the BIP world as a humble thing, at its mercy apparently—but in truth not.
Stage 9: And the purpose of the journey? “To empty hell,” i.e., the world of the BIP, to reveal the BIP for what it is (at stage 2 evil; at stage 6 an illusion), reveals these truths—with 6 the higher—i.e., more true than 2—and so aids the prisoners of the BIP. The idea is to break the BIP’s power by revealing more and more about it (v. stage 2 and 6—ultimately that the BIP is not only evil—stage 2—and must be resisted—stage 3—but is, finally, a mere illusion—stage 6).