Chapter 17:

Satan and Buddha

A. The whole mythology of Satan and the Rebellion of the Angels was the creation of spirits fighting Theocracy long ago, and the original teachings of the Buddha contain similar elements.

 

Q. Why does the Invisible College deliberately use terms like “Satan”? Doesn’t your use of this kind of terminology make it easier for Theocratic propaganda to accuse all of your friends on Earth of being “devil-worshippers”?

A. Somewhere in this book we’re going to have to deal with accusations of this sort, so we might as well do it here. We have good reason to use terms that encourage people to take a closer look at the Biblical myths about Satan, which we’ll describe later in this chapter. For now, we’ll just refute the charge that the Invisible College advocates worship of Satan, because we totally reject the concept of “worship” as the term is usually defined:

“Absolute, unquestioning belief in and obedience to a spiritual being or a body of doctrine.”

Individual sovereignty is the most fundamental postulate of the philosophy of the Invisible College. Each person must assume full responsibility for making value judgments on ethical and political matters. We never advocate absolute obedience to any authority, even our own. We urge people to resist orders from leaders if they disagree with them, and to use laws, customs, and ideologies only as guides for making their own decisions on specific issues. Assuming personal responsibility for running their own lives makes people wiser and stronger, because they are usually rewarded for their successes and punished for their mistakes. Unquestioning obedience to orders or fixed doctrine only makes them increasingly dependent and powerless.

To get back to our discussion of the devil, the concepts that Satan is a “God of Evil” who demands the same kind of worship as Jehovah or other Theocratic conceptions of deity, and that he tempts people to do exactly the reverse of all the individual ethical principles in the Judeo-Christian moral code, are both Theocratic propaganda incorporated into religious doctrine to keep people from understanding our original and constructive purpose in creating the myth about Satan and getting it incorporated in the Bible.

 

Q. This is obvious once you point it out. Satan has a much more favorable image in literature and folk-tradition in all the Judeo-Christian cultures than you’d expect him to have if he was really the archetype of reversed Biblical morality that religious doctrine claims he is.

A. Quite true. Look at all the folk tales in which the Devil simply opposes the puritanical, “bluenose” aspects of Christian morality that say that sex and other sensual pleasures are intrinsically evil. We’ve already pointed out the role these puritanical doctrines play in the religious mind-control process.

The Theocrats want religious believers to feel guilty every time they feel sexual desire or enjoy any “pleasures of the flesh.” The guilt literally addicts them to attending church services that subject them to religious mind control. When the Devil of folk tradition says that sensual pleasure is not immoral in itself, then he is actually advocating an ethical code superior to the Judeo-Christian one.

 

Q. Satan, in other words, often preaches a perfectly valid, humanistic morality, rather than the inversion of Judeo-Christian morality that religious doctrine attributes to him. I’ve certainly seen examples of this in literature from many different countries and eras.

A. In ancient Hebrew, the word “satan” simply meant “adversary” or “enemy.” We communicated the myth about the “temptation of Adam and Eve by the serpent” to some of the prophets who wrote the Old Testament just to ensure that people who read Judeo-Christian scripture would realize that Jehovah has enemies.

 

We are also responsible for other elements in that myth: that disobeying Jehovah by eating the “forbidden fruit” enabled human beings to discern good from evil, and that there was another secret, that of the tree of life” that would give people eternal life without involvement with Jehovah or other Theocrats.

 

Q. Now that you point it out, the whole myth of the “Fall of Man” doesn’t seem to belong with the rest of the creation myth in Genesis.

A. The material in the book of Genesis, even though it pertains to the Creation and the earliest history of the Hebrews and the Jewish religion, was mostly dictated to Jewish prophets after the Exodus. Judaism started to adopt important elements of fourth-stage Theocratic religion during the Egyptian Captivity, not long after Ikhnaton tried to change Egyptian Paganism into a fourth-stage religion and failed.

 

Fourth-stage Theocratic religions all have a creation myth that includes the concept of Original Sin.

 

Q. I had formed the impression that Christianity was a fourth-stage religion from its beginning but that Judaism was still in the third stage at the time it was founded. My understanding is that the practice of animal sacrifice is the primary distinguishing characteristic of a third-stage Theocratic religion. First-century Judaism still practiced animal sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem.

A. No, Judaism was almost entirely into the fourth stage itself when Christianity broke away from it. It started becoming a fourth-stage religion at the time of Moses, though the process was gradual rather than sudden. Survival of limited amounts of animal sacrifice was just an atavism. The core of Jewish doctrine from the time of Moses down to the present has been that Jehovah is both an angry, judgmental deity who condemns people for Original Sin, and a loving god who forgives their sins after various acts of faith and ritual atonement.

 

All the Christians did was assign separate names to these two different aspects of the one deity: Jehovah, or God the Father, to the judgmental aspect, and Jesus, or God the Son, to the forgiving aspect.

 

Q. OK. I understand this part well enough. Please continue explaining the creation myth in Genesis and the origin of the concepts of Satan and the War in Heaven.

A. First of all, a fourth-stage Theocratic religion has no need for a god of evil to tempt people into sin: the concept of Original Sin itself makes any sort of Devil superfluous. However, if such a concept survives as an atavism from an earlier stage of the religion’s development, it does no harm, any more than did the token sacrifices of doves by the Jews at Jerusalem, as described in the New Testament.

 

Judaism had originally been a polytheistic religion. Most of the angels with names ending “iel” had originally been “god of...”; for example, “Barakiel—God of Lightning.” Therefore Judaism already had a concept of “Satan” similar to the “adversary” or “trickster” gods in other third-stage religions. It was quite natural to incorporate Satan into the creation myth to tempt people into Original Sin.

 

Q. Was the Hebrew Pagan deity Satan originally a god in serpentine form like Damballa and some of the other African trickster deities?

A. Possibly. We really don’t know. What we’re telling you here is mostly derived from our knowledge of modern religious and occult works, supplemented to some extent by rumors that have circulated on the astral plane for thousands of years. We have no exact historical details on any of this, just educated guesses. However, the choice of a serpent image for the deity that tempted people into disobeying Jehovah is obvious if you realize that it was enemies of Theocracy who dictated the myth in the form in which we know it.

The serpent was intended as a symbol of reincarnation, because snakes shed their skins, leaving behind a casting that resembles a dead snake to a casual glance, while the animal crawls on about its business with a shiny, new, young-looking skin. The Theocrats who called themselves “Jehovah” did not want people to believe in reincarnation, even though the fourth-stage religious concept of “dwelling in the House of the Lord forever” was probably not known to the Jews at the time the creation myth was first dictated.

 

Q. Many scholars today don’t think the concept of reincarnation was even known to the Jews at that time. Was it?

A. As we said before, we have no exact historical knowledge of the time, just age-old rumor and inference from literature on Earth. However, our best guess is that every human culture throughout history and back into prehistory has had at least rudimentary knowledge of reincarnation. There are references to it in literature from every culture we know about, including those in the ancient Near East contemporary with the people who wrote Genesis, so we assume the concept was known to them.

 

More important, a small number of people in every culture have always possessed enough conscious past-life memories to circulate persistent rumors about reincarnation, even though a Theocratic religion does its best to suppress them.

 

Q. An aside. I’ve gotten the impression from what you’ve told me so far that the Invisible College has only been in existence for a few centuries, that it started around the end of the Middle Ages or after. If so, who was opposing Theocracy at the time of Moses, or whenever the myth concerning Adam and Eve and the serpent was written?

A. Exact names for the forces opposing Theocracy are actually arbitrary and unimportant. We prefer to reserve the term “Invisible College” to refer to the highly organized opposition to Theocracy that started when large numbers of spirits from advanced extraterrestrial civilizations started coming to Earth voluntarily about six or seven hundred years ago.

 

However, small numbers of such spirits have been accidentally transported to Earth’s astral plane throughout history and far back into prehistoric times, and many of them have tried to fight Theocracy as best they could. One spirit with advanced knowledge could have been responsible for the creation myth we’re describing here.

 

You already understand how the Theocrats dictate “Holy writ” to religious believers, don’t you?

 

Q. Well, I assume from reading about Mohammed and the Koran and similar cases that the process is almost identical to what we’re doing here to produce this book: some form of automatic writing or other mediumistic reception of data from spirits on the astral plane. The only difference is that the spirits involved are Theocrats instead of members of the Invisible College.

A. You’re right. However, it’s extremely difficult for the mediums themselves to tell exactly who in the spirit world is dictating to them at a given time. That’s why we always review everything you receive from us several times and leave you to be the final judge as to whether what you’ve received is really from us or is Theocratic deception.

 

Q. I realize that I have to be responsible for that, to ensure that what I receive is internally consistent and agrees with my own rational judgment based on the evidence available in my memory. I suspect that the Invisible College finds it easier to send anti-Theocratic messages to the prophets of Theocratic religions, who don’t normally question divine revelations, than its for Theocrats to deceive conscious Spiritual Revolutionaries like me.

A. Yes. And this is exactly what happened with the myth about the serpent and the Fall. A spirit hostile to Theocracy managed to dictate the story to one of the Hebrew prophets, and somehow it survived long enough in folk tradition to be written into the Old Testament. And we’re glad it did, because it reveals some important spiritual truths to anyone capable of understanding them.

One is that Jehovah has an enemy who communicates with people and urges them to rebel. Another is that these messages of rebellion are involved with ethics and morality.

 

Jehovah says,

“Right and wrong are only what I tell you they are, and they are absolute values that never vary.” Satan, on the other hand, says, “Use your intellect to determine what is right and wrong in a given situation, because such value judgments are highly dependent on the environment you’re in at a given time.”

Since the latter statement is rational and the former irrational, people are put into conflict with Theocratic religious doctrine every time they use their intellect to make rational value judgments.

 

Q. Most organized religions seem rather proud of the fact that people have to accept their doctrine on faith simply because it isn’t rational.

A. They do, because they have no choice. And this religious myth is one of the reasons why. The Theocrats don’t want people to become consciously aware of the basically illogical nature of absolute moral doctrine, but there is nothing they can do about it. The more highly developed a person’s rational intellect, the less likely he or she is to accept religious doctrine on “blind faith.”

The serpent myth is only a minor detail in Judeo-Christian mythology, but it has been very important over the centuries in the fight against Theocracy. And it’s also obvious why the Judeo-Christian Theocrats countered it with further mythology about Satan as the Father of Lies who goes around telling people it’s good to kill and steal and otherwise do the opposite of the religious moral code.

The Theocrats tried to obscure the information about using the intellect to make ethical decisions on a rational basis. They added many extraneous details to the mythology about Satan. For example, they included the idea that telepathy, mediumship, and other human psychic powers are either “works of God” or “works of the Devil.” This allows them to forbid religious believers to communicate with spirits hostile to Theocracy without revealing various facts about spiritual reality that the Theocrats wish to conceal.

And then there’s all the propaganda about demonic possession. As we discussed earlier, the irony of the whole concept of “possession” is that the Theocrats themselves practice something rather similar to it when they program people into becoming willing slaves through religious mind control.
The important thing to remember whenever possession is mentioned is simply this: no spirit, Theocrat or otherwise, can actually force living people to do things contrary to their conscious will and their customary ideas of right and wrong. Even religious mind control can only reprogram a person’s opinions and beliefs one small step at a time: it’s a slow, gradual process, not a sudden, dramatic takeover. It’s very important for the reader to realize this.

However, we do have to point out that even gradual reprogramming can produce some extremely evil and violent people if it continues over a whole lifetime. There are plenty of people in this country right now who are emotionally and morally capable of “killing a Commie for Christ” or acting on the literal meaning of the Biblical passage, “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.”

 

However, this has nothing to do with the sudden, violent “possession by evil spirits” that Fundamentalist propaganda spreads around so freely, and that many serious occultists also accept. That, fortunately, is a myth.

 

Q. You haven’t covered the Tree of Life yet. What was that supposed to represent?

A. As the serpent myth represents the concept that people have the right to determine good and evil for themselves through the free exercise of the conscious intellect, the Tree of Life represents certain essential details of the breakthrough information – the concepts that people can only achieve immortality through reincarnation and that the “eternal life in heaven” offered by deities is a delusion.

 

However, you must remember that the Tree of Life is mentioned only so the Theocrats can gloat that they prevented people from gaining this knowledge.

 

Q. The myth states that Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and learned to distinguish right from wrong with the rational intellect, but they were expelled from the Garden of Eden before they could “eat also of the fruit of the Tree of Life, that is also in the Garden, and become like unto us.”

 

Many occultists and Biblical scholars have been intrigued by that passage, not just for the tantalizing references to a secret of immortality, but because it s one of the only passages in the whole Bible in which Jehovah uses the first-person plural, “us” instead of “me”.

A. The secret referred to in this passage is not just immortality, but the complete knowledge that Theocratic spirits have about the nature of the soul, reincarnation, psychic powers, etc. Apparently the spirit who dictated these passages tried to communicate the whole breakthrough and failed.

The beginning of Buddhism is a similar case in which enemies of Theocracy tried to help people to make the breakthrough but didn’t quite succeed. After the Buddha achieved enlightenment, he made some statements that seemed self-contradictory, at least on the surface. He attributed his spiritual progress to his own efforts, not to a “gift” from omnipotent deities. He also stated in so many words that ordinary people could achieve enlightenment through practicing the proper psychic development techniques.

 

But at the same time, his statements about reincarnation appeared paradoxical. He said that achieving enlightenment meant that he no longer needed to reincarnate, but he also said that he would continue to do so to help other people achieve enlightenment.

 

Q. This seems to be a major contradiction, because if enlightenment had made him a sort of “super-god,” superior to the Vedantic gods, then he wouldn’t need to incarnate to assist people in spiritual development. He could do it as a disembodied spirit, remaining on the astral plane and using his enormous psychic powers to communicate whatever information people needed.

A. Once people make the breakthrough, it becomes obvious that there is no contradiction in any of these statements about the Buddha. What the Buddha called his enlightenment is actually a version of this breakthrough. He became consciously aware of exactly what the Vedantic gods really are and how they operate, even though the words in which his followers wrote down his knowledge are somewhat confusing.

They understood the most important part of his message quite clearly: the path to enlightenment is the disciplined practice of various psychic development techniques. Notice too that the Buddha himself didn’t limit his followers in which specific techniques they used, because part of his knowledge must have been that different techniques work better for a given individual than others. He was quite vague on this, and Buddhists ever since have practiced a wide variety of techniques drawn from Yoga, Tantra, and other sources within Vedanta.

However, the basic teachings of Buddha are anti-deistic whereas those of Vedanta were highly deistic. Many modern Buddhists believe that if they personally achieve enlightenment, their souls will merge with the soul of Buddha into Nirvana, a “state of blissful nothingness.” Vedantic doctrine in the time of the Buddha already taught that enlightened souls would merge with Brahma or some other god.

 

This doctrine was grafted onto the Buddha’s teachings after his death, when Buddhism was taken over by the Vedantic Theocrats.

 

Q. You’re saying that Buddhism was originally founded to fight Theocracy?

A. Yes. So were Gnosticism and some forms of early Christianity. But to get back to Buddhism, the Buddha implied by his own example that the enlightened were capable of transcending reincarnation but deliberately chose not to do so in order to be of service to the human race. The Buddha realized he could become a Theocrat and remain on the astral plane indefinitely, but he refused to do so for ethical reasons. This interpretation of the early Buddhist teaching is possible for people who have already made the breakthrough from some other source, but it is not stated clearly enough in the writings themselves to make finding and understanding it very easy.

Even though he founded a major religion, the enlightenment the Buddha achieved was still only a partial breakthrough. Much of what he learned from the Invisible College was on a subconscious level; it is reflected indirectly in his various teachings and practices as described by his followers after his death when they wrote the early literature, but much of it never came out in so many words in his actual teachings.

 

Q. In other words, he didn’t actually say that the Vedantic gods are evil beings who eat souls, or that enlightened souls need to reincarnate for their own good as well as that of living people.

A. This vital information is implied, but never directly stated. For example, the Buddha did teach that animal sacrifices and “austere practices” – by which he meant self-torture, starvation, etc. – are not mandatory for onto achieve enlightenment; but he didn’t antagonize the Vedantic majority around him, or their gods, by saying that “The gods are evil.” However, after his death, the legends portrayed the Vedantic gods as “worshipping” the enlightened Buddha, implying at the least that they had no power over him.

It is also important to remember that the Buddha was preaching to an audience with far different religious beliefs from those of modern Westerners, or of modern Buddhists, for that matter. The Vedanta of his time was a third-stage Pagan religion based on large-scale animal sacrifice and orgiastic rituals, but its doctrine also included many atavistic myths surviving from the first stage.

 

As well as being the priests of third-stage Vedanta, the Brahmins also functioned as first-stage shamans who insured that various spiritual beings were “fed” to keep them from eating human souls after death. Direct references to the gods as “Eaters of Souls” occur in Vedantic hymns used in the Soma ritual.

 

Q. I’ve also noticed another seeming incongruity about the teachings of Buddha. He stresses that enlightenment is achieved only through psychic development practices, but most of his actual sermons or lectures seemed to be on ethics. Buddhist ethics are very similar to the traditional Vedantic ethics of the culture he lived in. He stressed certain elements more than others – for example, total non-violence against both people and animals – but these were already present in the Vedantic doctrines, which contained many inconsistencies.

A. Yes, he preached a version of the Vedantic ethical code and religious customs stripped of some of the worst self-contradictions, like the concept of non-violence co-existing with animal sacrifice and with various forms of violence against oneself in the name of religious practice. However, it is easy to misunderstand what he was actually doing, which was to separate ethics from the process of achieving enlightenment.

 

Q. In other words, he said living ethically was important, but not directly related to the psychic development that causes enlightenment. Again, this interpretation is possible from reading the Buddhist literature, but the point is not made clearly enough for most people to understand it. Certainly most modern Buddhists don’t.

A. Modern Buddhism, except for a few occult groups associated with it, is a Theocratic religion. Buddhists feel that their ethical conduct as well as their psychic development practices will earn them enlightenment by pleasing various incarnations of the Buddha, all of which are imagined to co-exist as gods similar to the Vedantic gods.

 

This is not what Buddha taught at all.

 

Q. Certain Zen masters, whom I class with the occult minority within Buddhism, have said things like, “There are no gods; there are no Buddhas.”

A. When they do this, they are fighting against the tendency of the majority of Buddhists to worship the Buddha as a god, instead of seeking enlightenment through their own efforts and practicing ethical conduct for humanistic reasons – to serve their own interests and that of other people – instead of to earn divine favor. Zen masters have even told students who were drifting into deism, “Contemplate the Buddha as a piece of dried shit.”

 

Q. Before I made the breakthrough, I put a pantheistic interpretation on passages like this: “The Buddha is everywhere, including in the desiccated turd.” Now I see that this is an attempt to answer the Theocratic tendencies in Buddhism by trying to extinguish the believer’s tendencies to fall into deism.

A. This anti-deistic, anti-Theocratic teaching is even more evident in the doctrines of some of the Eastern occult secret societies involved with the martial arts. These secret societies have often worked under the direction of the Invisible College to fight against the control of both religion and politics in China and Japan by the Theocrats.

 

That’s why they sometimes tell initiates, “we are devils,” because they are literally fighting against the “gods,” in the sense of fighting deism and defending the idea that people can achieve enlightenment through their own efforts. However, you have to be careful when you read about secret societies of this type, because many of them have fought for the Theocrats at one time and against them at other times, depending on the personalities and beliefs of the members.

At this point, we’ll leave the adversaries of Theocracy within religion and go back to discussing the work of the Invisible College in building modern Western civilization.

Back to Contents

 

Chapter 18:

The Age of Reason

Q. When you refer to the Age of Reason, are you describing what went on in the old Masonic and Rosicrucian lodges several hundred years ago, when these organizations had so much influence over the development of modern civilization?

A. Yes. We wanted initiates on the lower levels to be reprogrammed to accept what’s now called the “Philosophy of the Age of Enlightenment. This included the form of political liberalism sketched out in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, support of capitalism and industrial technology, a progressive attitude towards innovation in science and the arts, reliance on rational pragmatic decision-making over dependence on tradition, and a general attitude toward life that was constructive, optimistic, and tolerant. We realized it wasn’t possible to turn most of these people into high-level psychics or magicians or to teach them much about the true nature of Theocracy; we just wanted to turn them into “good average citizens” as that term is defined in the United States today.

You’ve already figured out some of the things we did to accomplish this, and we will now explain the whole subject more clearly. Two types of consciousness-raising programs were used within the lodges: one trained initiates in the lower degrees to become rational atheists and political liberals; the other, more advanced, program, taught high-level occult knowledge and conscious control over the psychic powers.

The first of these programs always had many more members than the second. Initiates who learned to accept the Masonic philosophy often became immune to falling into a religious trance during the rituals. This is an example of the difference between the way we reprogram people’s minds and the way the Theocrats do.

 

We keep planting information in the subconscious that says,

“Think for yourself. Don’t accept anything without evidence. Do what you feel is best under the circumstances rather then just accepting what someone tells you. You can become a better person if you only learn how to do so. Judge yourself realistically: you are neither a self-righteous saint nor a miserable sinner, but simply an ordinary human being with free will and control over your own destiny.”

Q. This is almost the opposite of what the Theocrats program in during Fundamentalist Christian services. They want worshippers to say “Thy will be done,” and submit completely to the telepathic influences they receive, as well as to obey religious doctrine to the letter. It’s easy to see how your method tends eventually to liberate initiates from the influence of religious mind control: the more that people are affected by the reprogramming process, the less motivation they have to enter the religious trance, which involves voluntarily allowing the conscious will to lose control.

A. This is correct. The more people become accustomed to making decisions rationally and forming an accurate appraisal of their self-worth, the less likely they are to fall into a religious trance during rituals.

 

When individuals in one of the old lodges reached this stage of being in a normal state of consciousness during the rituals most of the time, they automatically progressed to one of the “higher” degrees and assumed one of the numerous positions of subordinate leadership. Initiates on this level were expected to study the lodge’s traditions, mythology, and doctrine intensely on a strictly intellectual level. This wasn’t done at rituals that employed the religious trance, but through ordinary reading and tutorial study, exactly as if the initiates were learning history or mathematics.

This is the level that tried to replace Christian faith with “worship of the Goddess of Reason,” and then went into a philosophy that would be called “scientific materialism” and “rational humanism” today. This middle level of initiation was intended to produce a personality-type similar to one very common in American society today – the millions of people who are not very interested in spiritual matters of any kind, but are chiefly concerned with their personal survival and happiness here on Earth. Some of them call themselves atheists or agnostics, but just as many profess nominal belief in Christianity or some other religious or occult system. However, regardless of what they say they believe, spirituality has very little emotional impact on their daily life. People like this are still either a slight majority or a very large minority in American society.

When we started this process several centuries ago, the influence of Theocratic religion was still so strong that it was easier to turn people into atheists or agnostics than to teach them directly about spiritual reality. We taught people to relate positively to the material world, and to the advanced civilization that was beginning to develop around them, as more than just “a vale of tears to pass through on the way to Heaven.” We wanted the relationship between people and their earthly environment to become more important than their relationship with “God” and religion.

 

We had to proceed step by step and use the methods of behavioral psychology, which are based on knowledge of how the human mind is actually programmed. States of consciousness and environmental reinforcement are the most important factors to consider here.

 

Q. Can you clarify this? When you say “states of consciousness,” are you talking about the religious trance?

A. Yes. We had to proceed step by step. First, we took people who had been raised within Theocratic religion and had been entering the religious trance during church services all their lives, and we manipulated them into attending the rituals of the Masonic and Rosicrucian lodges. These rituals also employed the religious trance and, on the lower levels of initiation, taught a doctrine that was not so alien to the average lodge member’s existing Christian beliefs that it broke the trance.

During these rituals, members were gradually reprogrammed to become more rational in their thinking and more materialistic in their emotional goals for their lives. The social environment of the lodge increased their self-esteem, so they no longer thought of themselves as “miserable sinners in need of salvation” but as “free men under God,” and eventually as “free members of a brotherhood of equals.

Lodge members received positive reinforcement through religious mind control during lodge rituals. This made the members feel good while they learned various philosophical principles quite different from those at the core of Fundamentalist Christianity even though phrased in many of the same terms. One very important thing to realize here is that the basic ethical philosophy of the eighteenth-century Freemasons was very, very similar to the moral codes of the various Theocratic Christian sects of the day.

 

At least ninety-five percent of the individual precepts were the same.

 

Q. That’s hard to accept.

A. Nevertheless, if you think about it without bias, you’ll realize it’s true. In fact, there is only one fundamental difference between the two codes of conduct, which affects a small number of separate ethical precepts.

Christian doctrine says,

"Your first duty is to obey the will of God as you perceive it during church services and in private prayer and meditation; your second is to obey religious doctrine and tradition as you learn it on the intellectual level; and your third is to follow the dictates of your conscience and intellectual will.”

By contrast, the philosophy of the Age of Enlightenment says,

“Your first duty is to follow the dictates of reason as applied to the knowledge you learn from your environment; your second is to work for your own survival and happiness as long as you don’t harm other individuals or society in general by so doing; and your third is to work for ‘the greatest good for the greatest number,’ which sometimes involves greater or lesser degrees of self-sacrifice.”

These statements are diametrically opposed in theory, but in the routine circumstances of life in a reasonably stable society, they produce behavior that is almost identical. In other words, both the Christian and the Freemason valued a work ethic, tried to avoid harmful excesses of all kinds, etc. The difference is not in what people did in the way of detailed, routine ethical behavior, but in the long-term effects that the two radically different philosophical codes had on total personality development.

The Christian code took people deeper into bondage to the Theocrats; the Masonic code liberated them from that bondage without substituting any other master for “God.” What’s most important here is that the Masonic initiates were taught to receive increasing amounts of positive reinforcement from their material and social environment, and decreasing amounts from religious mind control.

Now you can understand what we mean by “states of consciousness” and “environmental reinforcement” in this context. We were using the significant increase in the quality of individual life resulting from technological advances to extinguish the influence of religious mind control over people’s emotional life and personality development.

Eventually, a great many members of the lodges became immune to religious mind control and remained in a normal state of waking consciousness during the rituals. More important, they taught these same principles to their children of both genders, so the all-male lodges eventually changed the average personality structure of the whole society.

 

Q. Is this one of the reasons why Fundamentalist propaganda claims that, “Secular Humanism is a religion”?

A. Yes. From the Theocrats’ point of view, religion is just a tool for programming the minds of living people. By this same definition, all humanistic institutions are technically religions, because they also program the human mind – whether they do it directly through religious mind control, or indirectly through operant conditioning from the social and physical environment. Over the last five centuries, we have improved the quality of earthly life for so many people that the “vale of tears” concept has lost much of its appeal.

The idea that people can significantly improve the quality of life on Earth by their own efforts is one of the most important strategies that the Invisible College uses in fighting Theocracy. Its strongest point is that we don’t need to use subconscious emotional manipulation or intellectual persuasion to get people to accept it. Just living and working within a modern technological society proves the basic validity of a humanistic philosophy by direct environmental conditioning.

 

On the conscious level, people may think about the problems modern society has not yet solved and yearn for “the good old days”; but on a deeper level, they know they are as well off, on the average, as human beings on this planet have ever been. Theocratic propaganda and religious mind control have great difficulty extinguishing this intuitive feeling, because its cause is environmental conditioning rooted in physical reality.

 

Q. I speculated in Part One that the lodges you’re talking about were controlled by a small, secret conspiracy of advanced occultists who had at least a rough conscious idea of what they were doing. Is this true?

A. Not really. We actually had to do most of the work ourselves. In fact, the chain of cause-and-effect was almost exactly the opposite of what you speculated about in Part One. We, meaning disembodied spirits in the Invisible College, telepathically manipulated the subconscious minds of leaders in the Masonic and Rosicrucian lodges to design their rituals and doctrines in certain ways. Many of the individual elements of these rituals and doctrines were drawn from the writings and practices of previous occult groups, including some that you would consider quite advanced in both spiritual knowledge and psychic training techniques.

However, the vast majority of the men who actually incorporated these elements into Freemasonry and Rosicrucianism in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries had only a vague idea of what they were doing. They read various occult works, talked to members of many different occult organizations, and incorporated those ideas that “felt right” into the lodges they were founding or re-organizing. Of course, it was our subconscious telepathic influence that guided this process.

 

Q. Are you saying that the pre-existing knowledge gathered by advanced occultists over many centuries was useful to you in founding lodges and manipulating them into the form you desired, but that there was no conscious human conspiracy involved?

A. This is not true either. There were many different conscious conspiracies of advanced occultists, in the seventeenth century and later, which realized that various lodges of the Freemason and Rosicrucians were beginning to have a major influence on the progress of Western society and tried to manipulate their activities in ways that would produce what we now call “Modern Western Civilization.”

Practically every advanced occultist in Europe joined one or more of these lodges at this time. And once they’d joined, they tried to teach their particular school of knowledge to their lodge-brothers and to influence the development of the lodge’s doctrines and rituals to conform to their particular preconceptions. These occultists included Cabalists, Gnostics, Alchemists, Hermetics; and influences from all these spiritual systems are still visible today in the Masonic and Rosicrucian doctrines.

There are spiritual knowledge and psychic-training techniques brought from China and India by the Islamic Sufi sect and taught to the medieval Knights Templar. There’s knowledge inherited from the ancient Egyptians, Hebrews, and Babylonians, taught to the Masons and Rosicrucians by Cabalists, Gnostics, and Astrologers.

 

One very important source of psychic training techniques came from the ancient Greeks by way of the medieval Alchemists: a system of homosexual sex magic. This is one reason why so many high-level occult lodges were exclusively male for so long – they knew homosexual sex magic techniques but not heterosexual ones. There has always been some heterosexual sex magic in the Western occult tradition as well, from both Middle Eastern and European Pagan sources; but it’s only been in the last century or so, after direct contact was established with the Orient, that the two began to become equally common.

The important thing to remember about all this is that the individual elements of advanced occult knowledge and the people who brought them into the Masonic and Rosicrucian lodges of the Age of Enlightenment were not the “secret, conscious, guiding conspiracy” that you speculated they were in Part One.

 

Q. This is obvious now. You were the conscious guiding force, and the advanced occultists were actually being subconsciously manipulated along with the rest of the people involved.

A. Well, many of the occultists had some conscious knowledge of what we were doing, and were actively co-operating. Unfortunately, some of them actively opposed us by trying to turn their lodge into a Theocratic Cult. Possessing advanced occult knowledge doesn’t automatically make a person morally virtuous. Even today, some of the advanced occult lodges derived from the Masonic-Rosicrucian tradition are “Black Lodges” (lodges under the control of the Theocrats).

It’s extremely important for your readers to realize that Theocratic enslavement and psychic vampirism are not things that happen only to disembodied spirits after death. Living people can do virtually the same things to other living people. Black magicians can’t literally devour other people’s souls the way the disembodied Theocrats do to other spirits, but they can still deprive people of all free will and self-esteem, and eventually drive them into insanity or suicide.

This can be done in a Christian context, as Jim Jones did with the People’s Temple, or in the context of almost any other religious or occult group. Many of the modern cults are also examples of this Theocracy on Earth. the Moonies, the Rajneesh Cult, etc. However, such groups aren’t always openly identified as religious or occult organizations. The Symbionese Liberation Army was such a group, and so was the Manson Family. So are many terrorist groups, especially those in the service of Islamic Fundamentalists.

A number of present-day rock groups are actually bands of living Theocrats, enslaving their fans and draining energy from them at concerts. This last type of living Theocrat is especially dangerous right now, because such people can influence a large number of people who listen to their music on records or over the radio, using electronic mind control techniques that we will describe later.

 

One of the worst things about this movement is that some of these people have made the breakthrough. They know what they are doing, and they still do it.

 

Q. In other words, a person can find out the truth about Theocracy and say, “Fine. I’m going to found a cult based on religious mind control while I’m alive; then, after I die, I’m going to control it from the astral plane and become a Theocrat.”

A. Yes, and this attitude is becoming more and more common as more people make the breakthrough and become consciously aware of the existence of Theocracy. This is another main reason why we are having you write this book: to warn potential victims of this new type of mind control and teach them how to avoid it. We’ll tell more about this fifth stage of Theocracy later.

It is important to remember that people have been making the breakthrough for centuries, in the sense of realizing that the ”gods” behind many religious groups are simply the spirits of ordinary deceased human beings playing politics and trying to remain in positions of power on the astral plane for long periods of time. However, this knowledge, in itself, doesn’t automatically make people hostile to Theocracy.

Where so many advanced occultists have made a fatal error is in not realizing that Theocracy is what you might call a disease or abnormal state. Remaining on the astral plane for long periods of time and absorbing vital energy from other spirits is not a natural or healthy condition for a human spirit. All Theocrats eventually become degenerate and insane. Now, we’ve always told this to anyone capable of holding conscious telepathic conversations with us, but we haven’t always been believed. The illusion of achieving immortality for the ego is a very powerful corrupting influence. You can see why many occultists wouldn’t want to listen.

The quality and completeness of a person’s breakthrough knowledge are very important. Until very recently, communicating many of the individual details that constitute the breakthrough has been extremely difficult. Notice that when you write about it, you employ many terms and concepts from recent scientific discoveries: computer science, behavioral psychology, modern physics, etc.

 

Think how much harder it would be to understand Theocracy without this background.

 

Q. I understand. Please amplify what you said about the Masonic and Rosicrucian lodges being a cause more than an effect of advanced occult conspiracies during the last three or four centuries.

A. It’s very simple, really. The presence of the lodges in Western society increased the number of advanced occultists enormously, because they served as a visible training ground for people who otherwise might never have had access to psychic training and spiritual knowledge outside organized religion. The rituals and jargon of the lodges were secret, but everyone knew approximately what went on inside them – or at least, anyone with the potential to become an advanced occultist could guess.

 

This meant that fewer people who had possessed occult training in a past life would spend a “wasted” incarnation in which they had no access to formal training.

 

Q. This makes sense, and also seems relevant to the basic theme of this whole book, the War in Heaven. You’re describing what the struggle between the Theocrats and the Invisible College is really like. It resembles an ordinary political conflict on Earth: fights to recruit new members, to build institutions that serve the ideological cause, etc.

A. Correct. It’s not a war between “God and Satan” at all, in the sense of a conflict between absolutes of good and evil. It is completely a matter of politics, and neither side is completely good or bad. Of course, we are convinced that the side of the Invisible College is better than the side of the Theocrats by any reasonable ethical standard.

To sum up what we’ve said in this chapter, the Age of Reason was a major step in the progress of Western civilization and a significant victory for the Invisible College over the Theocrats in the War in Heaven. During the period from about 1700 to the 1960’s, there was just as much improvement in the average level of individual human consciousness as there was in physical technology, scientific knowledge, and the design of social and political institutions.

 

Our goal was to break the hold of religious mind-control over the majority of people in the First World, and we accomplished it reasonably well. Large numbers of people are still enslaved to Theocratic religion, of course, but such belief-systems no longer dominate the collective consciousness of the society to the extent they once did.

Today, even the majority of people in the advanced Western countries who consider themselves devout religious believers actually put reason above faith, and humanistic concerns before blind obedience to traditional doctrine. Do you see why we used the quasi-religious rituals of the Masonic and Rosicrucian lodges to accomplish this?

 

Q. Well, it looks as if you used a form of religious mind control to raise the consciousness of the majority of people you worked with, because they had started out as religious believers and were used to such techniques. However, you taught more advanced psychic training techniques such as sex magic to the minority who were ready for it.

A. The important thing to recognize here is that even the most advanced magical lodges based on the Masonic/Rosicrucian tradition still train their members with rituals that employ the religious trance.

 

Q. I’ve noticed that most advanced traditional occult organizations still practice such rituals: for example, they teach people to enter a true psychic trance by first entering a religious trance. Now that I’ve made the breakthrough, I realize that is why I’ve also felt uncomfortable trying to participate in the magical workings of such lodges: I know how to assume a psychic trance directly, and feel an instinctive revulsion during rituals that attempt to put me into a religious trance.

A. This is correct, and it’s the main reason why we’ve been spreading the word telepathically that the Age of Reason is ending and a new age is beginning. Its starting point is another major revolution in consciousness, as we will discuss in the next chapter.

Back to Contents

 

Chapter 19:

A Revolution in Consciousness

Q. The term “revolution in consciousness” is usually associated with the Sixties psychedelics movement. Can you answer some of the questions I’ve had about drugs that I’ve never been able to figure out on my own?

A. There’s much more to the revolution in consciousness that’s now going on than just the widespread use of consciousness-altering drugs, but it’s a good starting point. Especially, the drug issue illustrates that there’s a War in Heaven going on: we try to teach people how to use drugs for their own good, and the Theocrats work to create the “drug problem” in an effort to sabotage our attempts to take human consciousness on this planet another major step forward.

The modern struggle between the Theocrats and the Invisible College over the recreational and other uses of psychoactive drugs started long before the Sixties; and the drug then involved was alcohol. The real reason that the Prohibition Amendment passed after World War I is that we suddenly stopped opposing the anti-alcohol movement that Theocratic Fundamentalists had been leading for decades.

In other words, we decided,

“Let the Christian Temperance Union and the other prohibitionist organizations have their way; maybe total prohibition of alcoholic beverages will fail so miserably that it will convince the majority of Americans that puritanical laws regulating intimate details of the personal lives of individuals are a bad idea.”

And our plan worked.

Government policy and general opinion in this society are now treating alcoholism more as a medical and psychiatric problem than as a moral or criminal problem. This is actually a significant step forward for the whole civilization: learning how to deal with a social problem to minimize the total harm it does to the society.

 

Q. I’ve always found it inexplicable that Western society can deal with the alcohol problem in a reasonably sensible and sophisticated manner, but not with problems caused by drugs other than alcohol.

A. This is happening because the drug controversy is now one of the two or three most important battlegrounds between the Theocrats and the Invisible College. The key to understanding why involves certain side effects of LSD and various psychedelic drugs closely related to it: mescaline, psilocybin, etc., in both their pure and their botanical forms.

 

Q. I was right at the heart of the Psychedelics Movement in the Sixties and Seventies, but I never really figured out what was going on. Obviously, the Invisible College was urging large numbers of people to take these drugs, seemingly indiscriminately; but I never found out why. In fact, I often got angry with you for trying to “turn on the world” to LSD, seemingly with little regard for the consequences.

0ccultists have used powerful psychedelic drugs of this family for centuries as aids to psychic development, but always with a great deal of caution and respect. Only occultists at a reasonable level of advancement were supposed to take them; their use was denied to the really immature and unstable. Also, occultists have always taught that psychedelics use was should be combined with other psychic training techniques, to maximize the benefits and minimize the dangers.

However, when I tried to teach these methods of psychedelics use in the context of the Sixties counterculture, I found that very few members of the movement had the patience for such a conservative approach.

 

Practically everybody just said,

“I’m going to keep on dropping acid until I get rid of my hangups and expand my mind, and then I’ll worry about all this stuff about meditation and psychic exercises.”

And I was aware why so many people felt this way: at this stage of my psychic development, I was beginning to become consciously aware of your telepathic messages advocating indiscriminate use of LSD and similar drugs. Quite frankly, I disapproved of this policy, because I saw so many people hurt themselves with irresponsible drug-use.

A. You are aware by now, aren’t you, that most of the people who experienced “acid freakouts” during the Sixties didn’t suffer significant permanent damage?

 

Q. This seems to be true on the average, yes. Also, I’m now mature enough to realize that a lot of the drug-users in the Sixties Movement who killed themselves, committed serious crimes, or became insane enough to be institutionalized, would probably have done something similar sooner or later anyway, even if they’d never used drugs.

A. True. This was a significant factor in our decision to take the risk of starting the Psychedelics Movement. We still have to admit that there were casualties, though, and we’re sorry about it. However, we have to point out once again that a war is being fought and it’s your freedom, that of the entire human race, that’s at stake.

 

Q. I understand all this by now, though I’m not sure how many of my readers will. Well, there’s nothing I can do about this except tell as much as I can of the facts and let people make up their own minds about who’s right and wrong. What I’d most like to know about the whole drug question is simply what the Sixties Psychedelic Movement was for. What, exactly, were you trying to accomplish, and did it succeed?

A. The answer to your second question is, “Yes, fairly well. Better than our expectations.” The answer to the first is technical and almost impossible to describe in English, but we’ll try. Since you, and probably a significant number of your readers, are familiar with electronic computers, we will use computer terminology for our explanation.

First, you have to realize that a normal state of consciousness is comparable to a computer program that’s already running in an input or output mode instead of a command mode. In an input mode, you can enter data into the files of the computer to be stored or processed. In an output mode, you can retrieve information that’s already been processed, and print it out or make some other use of it. On most modern computers, you can switch between these two modes very easily, and this analogy seems to apply to the mind as well.

The input mode of normal consciousness consists of receiving information through the senses and entering it into the memory, where it is processed in various ways and is available for later retrieval. The output mode consists of making use of data that the mind has already processed to feel emotions, think, speak, listen, move the body, and perform a wide variety of other activities. The whole thing is much more complex and sophisticated than anything conceivable for electronic computers, even in theory, but the analogy should be clear.

However, you can’t modify the program that’s running on an electronic computer set to an input or output mode. In order to do that, you’d have to enter some kind of command mode.

 

Q. As an example, before I typed this paragraph, I entered the command mode of this word processing program and changed the margins for this one paragraph. But now I’m back in the input mode to write this.

A. When this analogy is applied to states of consciousness in the human mind, you have to realize that the situation is very complex. On one level, you feel that you have a great deal of free will, a large measure of control over what you think and do and even over how you react emotionally. This is simply because you are aware of a large number of different alternative courses of action open to you at any given time.

You are much less aware of those alternatives that are not open to you. For example, large areas of your total memory are not available to conscious access at any particular time. Like many electronic computers, the human mind arranges memories in banks, and you normally have access to only a few of these at any one time.

 

You can change banks by an act of conscious will, but this often loses you access to information you could recall easily before, from the other memory bank. In addition, there’s the subconscious, which contains memories that are very rarely available for conscious access.

 

Q. It also appears to me that normal consciousness includes at least limited command functions: for example, deliberately “putting yourself in a mood” to do a particular thing that you couldn’t do without advance concentration and preparation. This may be analogous to certain capabilities on this word processing program: for example, I don’t have to leave the input mode to PRINT IN ALL CAPS or to underline.

A. Yes, but you can’t change the line-length except by going into a command mode, as you did above. Now the point we’re trying to make here is that LSD and related psychedelic drugs create a state of consciousness that is similar to putting a computer into a command mode and making changes in the program that is being run.

 

Q. This brings us back to my original objections to your advocacy of indiscriminate use of powerful psychedelics during the Sixties. Going into a command mode on a computer is useless, and usually detrimental to finishing the job at hand, unless you know exactly what you’re doing. For example, the command mode I entered to change the margins could also have been used to delete the whole file I’m working on, and that could have been done by pushing only two keys.

A. Fortunately, the very complexity of the human mind makes it much less vulnerable than that. What actually happened when the average person in the Sixties Psychedelics Movement took LSD wasn’t the same as the limited work with entering a “command mode” and doing deliberate mental reprogramming that Western occultists have traditionally done when they used psychedelics.

 

It operated on a level unknown to the occultists.

In other words, you yourself, and all the people you considered serious occultists, underwent the same involuntary mental changes as the “street hippies” did because of taking LSD. You accomplished your limited psychic training goals, while they did nothing but “sit and groove”; but the drug itself was doing something much more fundamental to every one of you, every time you took it.

 

Q. I’d already guessed most of this, but it’s still a little disturbing to see it put into words. Exactly what changes are you talking about, and how do they relate to the analogy about command modes?

A. Well, the computer you are using to write this book has several different levels of command modes, doesn’t it?

 

Q. Yes. For example, the lowest level is the one I used to change the margins. Beyond that is another level at which I could enter another application entirely, such as creating and sorting data in an address file. Beyond that, I could write a program in Basic or Assembly Language and create a word-processing file similar to this one, but with whatever modifications we desired. And beyond that, I could write or install a Machine Language program that would change the computer’s capabilities for writing new programs, including teaching it an entirely different computer language.

A. OK. By this analogy, the traditional use of psychedelics by occultists is on the level of writing a Basic program. That’s how people learn to use telepathy and other psychic powers: they actually write a new program, but to do so, they use capabilities already present in their mind all along, as your computer has the Basic programming language among its files.

 

Q. This explains why psychedelics are not essential to psychic training. They can speed up the process under the right circumstances, but they don’t seem to be able to give a specific psychic talent to just anybody. There are large numbers of otherwise intelligent and creative people who simply can’t learn to become telepaths or mediums, for example, with or without taking drugs.

 

On the other hand, a lot of experienced occult teachers who dislike drugs assert that they can accomplish exactly the same degree of psychic training for a given person without using drugs as could be accomplished with them; it would just take longer. I tend to agree with them in general, though I still fall into the “pro” rather than the “anti” camp of occultists when it comes to psychedelic drugs as a psychic training aid.

A. The real reason we advocated widespread use of LSD in the Sixties had nothing to do with the short-term effects of the drug, or with conscious use of those effects for psychic training. To get back to the computer-language analogy we’ve been using, the “mind-expansion through LSD” that we were advocating involved a Machine Language program, not merely a Basic program.

Repeated use of LSD over several years makes fundamental changes in people’s mental programming, and we used LSD plus direct telepathic conditioning techniques to significantly reprogram the minds of several million Americans. We also used environmental conditioning through the general emotional climate of the Sixties counterculture itself, as expressed in its art, music, slogans, etc.

 

Q. To tell the truth, I found all that stuff about “Peace and Love and Flower Children and Dropping Out and Everything Should Be Free” to be naive and impractical at best, and at worst to be self-destructive.

A. You felt this way because you already had high ideals and were concerned mostly with trying to put them into practice. We created the emotional atmosphere you find naive and self-destructive simply to teach a certain amount of idealism to young people who had been raised in average Fifties American homes that almost completely lacked it.

 

Throughout their childhoods, they had been taught to value various shallow forms of material success more than anything else. We were trying to push them in the right direction, and advocating widespread use of the powerful psychedelics was our principal means of doing so.

 

Q. How did the reprogramming that you carried out through the Sixties counterculture and psychedelics movement compare in effectiveness with that accomplished through religious mind control by Theocratic religious groups?

A. There is a tremendous difference, roughly that between doing something using a high level of technology and doing it by human muscle power, with the psychedelic drug being analogous to the machinery. We did more reprogramming in a few years on more people than the traditional religious Theocrats do in the same number of decades. Unfortunately, the Fifth-stage Theocrats now have access to mental reprogramming techniques just as effective as those we used in the Sixties; but this is a subject we’ll discuss later.

 

Q. Well then, why did you stop? Why didn’t you let the Sixties Movement continue indefinitely? I realize that you would have had to make the material you were using to reprogram people much more complex, but wouldn’t this have happened naturally as they matured and gained in knowledge and experience?

A. No, it doesn’t work that way, unfortunately. It was extremely difficult just to program large numbers of LSD users with a set of vague idealistic principles that would make their opinion-forming and decision-making processes more tolerant and flexible. It was totally impossible to start teaching a detailed, sophisticated ideology.

The major reason for this is that we were working almost entirely through people’s subconscious minds, so that they were absorbing short strings of data at random places in their mental files. As long as these messages were simple, clear, and positive – and it’s this that made you call them “naive” – then they did more good than harm. If we’d tried using more complex material, it would have merely confused the recipients, probably to the point of interfering with ordinary mental functions.

 

In fact, most people in the Sixties counterculture suffered temporarily from a significant degree of this kind of confusion and impairment anyway.

 

Q. OK. I’m pretty sure I understand now. You were only trying to reprogram as many Americans as possible with some vague principles that would make them more socially and politically liberal, on a very fundamental level. Even before I made the breakthrough, I was aware that something like this had happened.

A. At this point, let us end the discussion of drugs and go on to other aspects of the War in Heaven that mark the beginning of a new age of human civilization on Earth.

Back to Contents

Chapter 20:

The Aquarian Age

Q. I’ve never believed in astrology, so I’ve always felt a little uncomfortable using terms like “Aquarian Age.” Why did you let it get started in the first place?

A. We had nothing to do with putting this term into common use. However, once large numbers of people started using it entirely on their own, we invented our own mythology around the rudiments of the Aquarian Age story and have been transmitting it telepathically into the subconscious minds of many different people. It now appears in messages channeled to the New Agers, in popular song lyrics, and many different places in fiction and poetry.

First, here’s the basic astrological myth about the Aquarian Age. The Age just ending was called the Piscean Age, after the constellation of Pisces, the Fishes. It’s an appropriate name, because this was the Age of Christianity, which has the fish as one of its symbols because in the Greek that the early Christians spoke, the word for “fish” is also an acronym for the phrase “Jesus, the Anointed One, God’s Son, the Savior.”

 

And the Age just beginning is called the Aquarian Age after the constellation of Aquarius, which represents a human being pouring water out of a jar.

Now, here’s our supplemental mythology about the Aquarian Age, which centers on the concept of “water.” In this context, Water symbolizes spiritual power. During the Piscean Age, the human race on Earth resembled an enormous school of fish: they were utterly dependent on the water, and had very little control over it. They simply lived in it and hoped to survive.

The New Age symbol is the human being taking control of the water, which also represents spiritual power. However, if you take a closer look at the astronomical mythology represented by the constellations, you’ll see that the water poured out by the Water Carrier is the source of the great celestial river, the constellation Eridanus which runs from the celestial equator far down in the southern sky.

 

This huge outpouring of spiritual power represents several things we’ll cover in Part Three: the apocalyptic events that will free the human race on this planet from Theocracy, and the birth of new gods.

 

Q. It’s details like this that I need for the book, even if they’re not directly connected to the point being discussed: they prove that there’s an external creative intelligence behind many of the intuitive flashes that inspire people to create modern mythologies.

A. Another example concerns several modern UFO researchers who received telepathic communications containing words in an unknown language from sources that identified themselves as “space people.” Occultists later identified the words as belonging to the “Enochian” language. Over three hundred years ago, the English occultist John Dee received a long series of channeled messages in this language, and occultists still study it today.

The reason we telepathically transmitted Enochian words like “affa” – meaning, very appropriately, “nothing” – to the Ufologists was to steer their thinking in certain direction. We knew that if they published these words or repeated them very much, someone with occult knowledge would tell them where they came from. It was just another way of supplying evidence that there is a connection between what modern Ufologists call telepathic contact with space people, and the mediumistic communication with spirits that occultists have been practicing throughout history.

Even with evidence like this to guide them, most of the Ufologists remain materialists. We keep telling them, ”The Invisible College is composed of disembodied spirits. We’re dead people, not living beings from other planets. Some of us are extraterrestrials, yes, but we’re extraterrestrial spirits, not living people.” We keep telling them this whenever we are in telepathic contact, and they keep right on theorizing about interstellar space travel and other dimensions.

Next, let us tell you about the so-called “Sirius Connection,” which you mentioned in Part One without ever quite figuring out what we were doing. This was a complicated ploy of exactly the same type as the one we just mentioned. We started sending telepathic messages like “Sirius is very important” when we found out that news of the explicit astronomical knowledge about the invisible companion of Sirius in the Sudanese Dogon Tribe’s mythology was about to surface.

In the early Seventies, when we started sending such messages, the same information that later appeared in The Sirius Mystery was already known to certain anthropologists and members of the occult and UFO communities, especially French speaking ones. This information is extremely impressive, because it contains the period of revolution of the companion around the larger star and the fact that this companion star is composed of super-dense matter.

 

The information contains enough detail to make coincidence unlikely, and there is evidence that the Dogon possessed it before Western scientists did.

 

Q. When I first read The Sirius Mystery, I tended to dismiss the whole thing as a hoax by the Dogon. I speculated that some of them had heard the astronomical information about Sirius from some passing trader only a few years before they told it to the anthropologists. A lot of the traders in that area were Arabs, and amateur astronomy has always been popular hobby in the Arab culture.

A. No, the Dogon got the information centuries ago. They may or may not have gotten it second-hand from the ancient Egyptians, but they could have. This and many other pieces of advanced astronomical and astrophysical information have been in circulation among free spirits for thousands of years.

 

Q. I begin to get the point. You sent out telepathic messages about Sirius to get the materialists like Wilson, Leary, and various Ufologists to listen to you, knowing they’d encounter the information quite soon. I assume you knew in advance that The Sirius Mystery was being written.

A. It’s more complicated than that. If we hadn’t started the telepathic communications, several of these people would have accepted the information about Sirius and the Dogon as hard proof of physical visitations to Earth by Ancient Astronauts. As it was, we complicated the issue in their minds, and may have kept them from seriously misleading the significant number of people who regard their opinions as authoritative.

 

Q. When you say, “complicated the issue,” are you talking about R.A. Wilson’s making a connection between the modern Sirius Mystery and the “Great Star” legends of the Masons, Rosicrucians, and various occult groups?

A. Yes, the “Great Star” is also the “Great Secret”: a version of the truth about Theocracy. This same symbolism is also being used by a number of different factions of spirits and living people involved in the psychic warfare to be described in Part Three. For example, some of then call themselves “cats” or “lions” and refer to certain other types of spirits as “dogs” or “Sirians.”

 

These terms refer to different details of the physiology of the astral soul, and there are spirits of each type in the service of both the Theocrats and the Invisible College.

 

Q. I also see another possible tie-in here. Ever since R.A. Wilson wrote the Illuminatus! books, he’s had a following composed mostly of counterculture people who publish underground magazines devoted to discussing his work, and to similar material by Leary, Burroughs, etc.

 

Some of these people were part of the Sixties LSD movement at the time when the media were full of anti-drug propaganda claiming that LSD damaged the chromosomes, and that the children of everyone who used it would be born deformed or mutated. My own opinion at the time was not to take these claims seriously, because they were supported by insufficient evidence – and history seems to have proven me right.
 

The assertion that LSD causes physical mutations seems to be entirely false. But this didn’t stop certain members of the Sixties counterculture from taking this “mutation” propaganda and turning it completely around. In other words, they admitted that LSD causes mutations, and not in the descendants of the people who take the drug, but in the users themselves. And of course they claimed that these mutations were extremely beneficial, turning acidheads into supermen.

Now, I had enough scientific knowledge and plain common sense to dismiss these claims as obvious nonsense, typical of the alternating delusions of persecution and grandeur so common in the counterculture at the time. And, on the purely physical level, nothing has happened since to convince me that my snap judgment was wrong. However, the belief that acidheads are mutants in a literal, physical sense and therefore superior to ordinary people has never died out within the counterculture. It seems commoner in the counter-culture today than it was in the Sixties.

 

Is the Invisible College responsible for this?

A. Yes. Some of the people who are going to read this book and other explicit writings about the War in Heaven, and who are going to make the breakthrough and join the movement to teach others the truth about the nature of spiritual reality, are going to describe themselves as “mutants” of this type.

 

Q. Personally, I feel more like an alien than a mutant. I have past-life memories set on other worlds, and I really don’t feel comfortable in any cultural group on this planet.

A. This is because you’re here to help in the building of an entirely new and more advanced civilization on Earth. And a large number of the people who call themselves mutants are also of extra-terrestrial origin. That’s another thing you’ll want to concentrate on in your future writings’ helping these people realize who they are, and what they’re on this planet to do.

 

Q. Here’s a question I asked before and didn’t get answered. I’ll try to ask it again, because it pertains directly to the subject of mutants. During the Sixties, Timothy Leary often said that LSD helps people unlock cosmic secrets that are encoded in our DNA; and at the time, I found this concept completely incomprehensible. But he’s still saying the same thing today.

 

For example, he said in Neurologic just a few years ago that,

“Most of the characteristics formerly attributed to the soul now describe the functions of DNA, whose complex messages originate from higher intelligences in other solar systems... The mission of DNA is to evolve nervous systems able to escape from the doomed planet and contact manifestations of the same amino-acid seeding that have evolved in other solar systems.”

What is the relationship between the concept in this quotation, the acid mutants, and the cosmology that you’ve already given?

A. First of all, there was never a physical seeding of amino acids to start organic life. What actually happened was that disembodied spirits went to planets that were ready for life to develop, and created the amino acids by telekinetic manipulation of existing organic molecules. They assembled these amino acids into physical DNA using their own astral DNA molecules as templates.

When Leary and other scientists theorize that the physical DNA contains an evolutionary program that automatically causes new species to develop, they are slightly misinterpreting messages that we put in their subconscious minds. What we are actually trying to tell them is that evolution is guided by the psychic manipulations of disembodied spirits, but most such scientists are still too materialistic to accept such an explanation.

 

Their conscious minds are unwilling to admit the literal existence of the soul and other spiritual phenomena, so they try to stretch theories from physical science to fit the evidence they discover. This sometimes causes non-scientists who read their works to engage in speculations about evolution and mutation that stray very far from reality.

What we’re really telling all these people is simply, ”Try to develop conscious control over your psychic powers during your present lifetime, so you’ll have a better chance of surviv