Breathtaking, but what is that? Who said that? Of whom does it speak? Is it ancient? Is it contemporary? Is it correct? Is it relevant? What is it doing here in the pages of Open SETI?Let’s begin with the last part of the question.
Open SETI is in some ways the opposite of SETI. SETI is an extraordinarily “narrow-band” search arising from a most denatured strain of modern-day scientific/intellectual thought. Open SETI begins with being… open. And what does one see, when open?
Would you agree that one sees a magnificent planet inhabited by a humanity that is becoming demented, even by its own definition?
This humanity is fragmenting, at war with itself, and each faction looking desperately for salvation from its particular idea of deity.
No small number of humans hope for help from another quarter: contact with extraterrestrial beings. Surely the SETI community derives at least some of its support from this dream.68 It manifests strongly among many “UFO believers” as well.
It will turn out that this dream of salvation has everything to do with our opening passage.
The passage is tight with ideas:
These ideas form at least part of the “paradigm” for this page… which, as usual for this website, has little to do with that of conventional SETI with its focus on detection, astrobiology, habitable planets, etc.Our opening quote is from The Apocryphon of John II, a Nag Hammadi text extensively discussed by author John Lash.
What’s so breathtaking and challenging about it is that deep mind recognizes its antiquity and its possible truth and relevance to present times.
As Lash explains, this passage reflects the view of the Gnostics:
The word “divinity” is key in that passage. It is bound to be misunderstood, and the misunderstanding is itselfa result of the intervention.
For Lash and the Gnostics, the line of Divinity comes through our descent from the Earth – Gaia– and it is this connection that is the object of the intruders’ attack. They cannot actually do anything about it – it simply exists – but they can deceive us into turning our backs on it in favor of their own contrivances… such as several of our major religions.Readers may wish to review the page Technology of the Soul.
Lash is speaking of Pagan Gnostics (not the later Christian Gnostics) whom he describes as powerful shamans, asserting that what they saw with their clear vision is as important to our understanding and our situation today as it was in their time.72
Notice that Lash refers to intrusion, warning, intervention, and self-vision.
Conventional thinking dismisses the thought of “alien takeover”, claiming that if there had been any danger of that, the invasion and takeover would have occurred a long time ago. Indeed. Please integrate that statement with our list of paradigm elements above.
Remember: field of attack is psychological and perceptual. Where then should we look for evidence of this invasion?
On this page we will discuss three dimensions of control:
These dimensions — given that they even exist, which is something that needs to be considered — do not necessarily operate independently of one another. Thus extrinsic control systems may be set up to operate through intrinsic characteristic or embedded parasitic systems (parasites).
This image indicates the scope of the problem. It suggests a pincer attack engendering violently competing world views, and of course this is at only the top level. Each branch roils with conflict and struggle.
One is reminded of the Hegelian Dialectic and its use of Thesis and Antithesis to reach a desired Synthesis. Although often criticised as a philosophical method, it is a time-honored technique of societal control.
How actually does the process work? Continuing with the “science vs. religion” theme of the graphic, consider how the present comfortable stand-off came about. As Paul Von Ward (2004) recounts, scientists in the church-financed universities of the seventeenth century pursued research into the inner meaning of alchemy, numerology, astrology, divination, and spiritual matters. Although this has not been documented, he wonders if the church did not come to fear that increasingly expansive and aggressive science would eventually discover evidence that the church had falsified documents about the life of Jesus and the history of YHVH. Perhaps they worried that science would in time provide natural explanations for the miracles claimed to be interventions from its supernatural god.
Since the church leaders knew this kind of information was potentially available, they engineered a deal between the financiers and the science researchers. “You can have the funds you need for scientific research if you don’t question the church’s basic assumptions.”
This arrangement made it possible for the church to keep the populace passive and fearful, while powering the transition from Renaissance science to the Industrial Revolution.
Kyle Griffith provides another view as to how the arrangement was established and what it means to us today, in his guest article The Copernican Compromise: Origin of the Materialistic Bias in Science.
In War in Heaven (1988), Griffith introduces another layer of controllers, the so-called “Theocracy”, the force behind the religions; and the “Invisible College”, which masterfully employs the Hegelian Dialectic to mold an advanced, space-faring human society. The two groups are in bitter confict; we are the pawns in their game.
In America’s Secret Establishment, Antony Sutton (2004) clearly describes how the Hegelian Dialectic method has been and continues to be employed by secret societies such as the Order of the Skull & Bones to guide our modern society through the sure control of its massive cultural organizations.
Guide to what? The control groups are structured as circles within circles, each receiving instructions from a member at its center, who in turn belongs to a still deeper circle. The ultimate purpose is lost to our view, unless we look at the world itself and understand that whatever its condition, and wherever it is going, this has been guided from the deepest circles.
The condition, of course, is one of monumental distraction from our nurturing planet.
This deals with what we are (genetically) and how we think. The subject of our intrinsic nature and how it reflects intervention(s) will occupy much of the remainder of this page.To understand how intrinsic control or intervention has worked, we need to be able to examine ourselves.
By this I mean that we, in ourselves – either our psychology if you accept Lash’s variety of intervention, or more conventionally our genetics – would embody the results of one or more “invasions”. If there were several phases of invasion, then the results might be layered.
Do we see layering in our psychological makeup and/or our genetics? We most certainly do. I am suggesting a new way of looking at this.
Here is another quote:
That suggestion of intrusion and intervention in human affairs has been advanced on several Open SETI pages. You will also find it expanded on one of the final pages of The End of Enchantment (see A Synthetic Myth), a companion website that is heartily recommended.That page explores the relation of humanity with a mysterious group of controllers. In support of the concept of intervention, the Synthetic Myth page reflects information that has surfaced in many fields, mostly outside the standard paradigm to be sure. You will find it suggested in UFO contact reports, open-minded studies of the literature of ancient civilizations, forward-looking interpretations of human genetics and fossil remains, and occult/metaphysical lore.
The question immediately before us is whether these two statements – the opening Gnostic one and the local one from these pages – can be sufficiently reconciled as to create a single initial position to explore here… or not.
Some group attempted to overpower humanity and The field of attack was psychological and perceptual vs. Groups of advanced beings came here and found the planet inhabited by proto-humans, which they then genetically upgraded to the modern human form.
Gnostics: Attack was psychological and perceptual.
Both: The encounter occurred here between pre-existing races.
This comparison highlights a key position in Lash’s description of Gnosticism: Actual genetic manipulations do not occur; they are simulated through the use of virtual reality technology.
As far as Open SETI is concerned, that is an open question, and an incredibly important one.
Human thinking was superior to theirs. and Something about their pleasure and beauty is off. and We have “divinity”; they lack it; this is why they succeed only via deception. vs. Advanced souls (that’s us) were brought in and allowed themselves to be attached to this new human evolution.
The two positions are completely parallel. Each implies an inherent superiority of human consciousness over the mysterious “they”. The root of this superiority could be “divinity”. Whatever it is, this needs exploration.
In Lash/Gnostics the deed was/is achieved via deception. In Synthetic Myth, human souls “allowed” it. No intrinsic contradiction there.
We have not yet seen whether or not the term “soul” is found in Lash/Gnostics.
From the Wikipedia article about parasites:
In fact there are many strategies, relating to what the parasite requires from its host, and how the parasite is going to get it.An important class of strategies incorporates a modification of the host’s behavior in order to achieve a result beneficial to the parasite and not necessarily beneficial to the host — it could be fatal to it.
Examples seen in nature include that of the parasitic wasp Hymenopimecis sp. that attaches itself to a spider host, inducing it to build a special web that will be used by the pupating wasp after it kills and eats the spider (Parasite’s web of death).
The parasitic Nematomorph hairworm develops inside grasshoppers and crickets. When mature, they “brainwash” their hosts, causing them to plunge into water, enabling the worms to emerge and swim away to find mates. The grasshoppers or crickets are for their troubles left dead or dying (Parasites brainwash grasshoppers into death dive).
Many other examples of parasitism in nature could be provided.
That was from Jonathan Zap, whose complete article Mind Parasites, Energy Parasites and Vampirestakes us over the edge to where we need to be if we hope to understand this particular dimension of human control.The point here is that parasitism could be a form of interaction not only among lifeforms in nature, but between ourselves and other types of entities, whether we call them extraterrestrials or anything else. And this interaction is capable of modifying the desire and intention of humans, enforcing behavior that is quite alien to their previous nature, but is felt to be of their own volition.
Alain Gossens, of the Karmapolis.be website that has become something of a strategic partner of Open SETI, sharing interviews and articles, surveys this field with an emphasis on Gnosticism and the works of Carlos Castaneda, in Possession and Predation — Aliens, Flyers, Clones, and Reptilians: The Enigma of Extraterrestrial Parasites (or see the original French Version).
By including this reference to Gossens’ article here, we are not implying a transitive endorsement of all the material he covers. His is a survey and it is a good and useful one.
But with Gossens’ article, we have opened the issue of attempts to control human activity and destiny by and through parasitic entities.
With a recognition of this possibility, we can begin to look at large-scale human activities for signs of self-destructiveness that could play into the needs and intentions of some other, alien, group.
It would be easy to say that we do not need to look very far, but of course we do not wish to be making up excuses for our own behavior, or shrugging off responsibility for terrible events.
What would be an appropriate approach to this issue?
Perhaps a good beginning would be to look for our own, unassailable, and immutable essence. This takes inner work.
And thus we open the dynamic for this page’s discussion. It is to explore the inner nature of humanity’s encounters with something other, and to try to understand as a human, what this has caused humans to be, and what, if anything, it has caused us to do.
We also will reflect this dynamic against a recent cosmological theory presented in Open SETI Physics 101.
What is an archon? The term is mentioned many times in the Nag Hammadi texts. According to John Lash, archons are a species of “predatory inorganic beings”.As a momentary aside, does that last phrase sound familiar to you? It would if you were a fan of the writings of Carlos Castaneda, who frequently used that very term.
Lash’s ideas on the subject of archons can be encapsulated in the following key points derived from an interview he gave to Art Bell on Coast to Coast AM, March 19, 2005:
Expanding on that last point, Lash writes:
Concerning the Sumerian cuneiform record, “accepted as true by Zecharia Sitchin and many other sincere investigators”, John Lash points out that the Gnostics did not accept that record so easily. They knew these were recorded by scribes and pointed out that scribes were not historians, after all. They were skilled artisans, laboring in service to ruling families, officials, and high priests. What they wrote had been dictated to them by their superiors in that theocratic society. And to Lash and the Pagan Gnostics, “theocracy” is a red flag.Putting it bluntly, to the Gnostics, the creation of humanity via Annunaki intervention, along with other ancient creation myths, was a delusion transmitted by Archons through their channels.
Now, the Gnostics had and have their own creation myth, derived not through channels and prophets but through observation by skilled shamans who are also scholars and historians. Lash says that he is attempting to recreate the Gnostic creation myth in which the Aeon Sophia becomes embodied in the Earth. The Earth is her body. This is connected with the Gaia idea, he says, and the two myths are going to converge.
…and Open SETI has from its beginning advocated the seeking of knowledge through mythology.Speaking of encounters and abductions, Malou Zeitlin notes that since the perpetrators, whoever or whatever they are, seem to be involved in people’s lives from their earliest days, they may be making use of the process well-known to naturalists as imprinting. She explains the concept in an excerpt from a private letter.
She also reminds us of “stories of visits to young children…the little friends, the little doctors, so-called imaginary playmates, etc.”
These are so widespread that they have come to be considered just a part of childhood development. Perhaps they are a part of all childhood development. That is just the point, isn’t it? Readers who are familiar with the “UFO phenomenon” are aware of how often these stories blend into the encounters of later years. The “little doctors” remain “doctors” of a sort. Still little, but more problematic.
Imprinting can be used to insert what computer hackers call a back door – a means of entry that remains, unnoticed, for future use. If widespread in our society, this can allow any desired ideas or choices to be inserted into the group mind, dynamically, as needed.
If Lash can demonstrate that ETs of our contemporary experience are the very Archons of the gnostic seers, a powerful support for the objective reality of these beings will have been established. Moreover, the deep philosophical insight of the gnostics then becomes a resource for understanding who the beings are and what they are doing or trying to do here with us.
Malou Zeitlin brings us an excellent and very timely example of how this mechanism was used to implant the “Global Warming” meme into our social milieu through the agency of Whitley Strieber and the nationwide radio program Coast-to-Coast AM. See Implanting the Global Warming Meme.
Recently (January 2010), John Lash has introduced “telestics,” a spoken channelof his metahistory.org, to consist eventually of a series of mp3 files containing “20- to 40-minute talks on current topics such as globalist schemes of eugenics and governance (‘New World Order’), the carbon tax scam, the global warming scam, the perversion of Gaia theory and the Goddess Mystique, MK Ultra mind control, Satanism, the Antichrist, the artificial apocalypse, and other devious matters, including critical talks on the exposure of these deceptions, explaining how some exposÃ©s (of the so-called Illuminati and the NWO, for instance) contribute to the deception and offer no solution, no alternative.”We need to make it clear here that while the discussion of a particular matter in one of Lash’s talks would not necessarily imply a position of Open SETI on that subject, it in fact could do so, where it bears on questions of origins and propagation of life, intelligence, consciousness, and religions. In fact it is expected that there will be such impacts; that is why we are including this work of Lash’s in the first place.
It’s important to point out that Lash is providing more than his opinion on a variety of subjects; telestics is a practice through which he aims to offer “corrective, healing, and inspirational insight into human insanity.”
Lash in applying his method typically begins with a social problem, such as the 911 event or the JFK assassination, looks closely at the reaction / interpretation, and then “decons” the reaction / interpretation in three explicit questioning procedures or probes.
We think his work is of prime importance to the developing human, because it shows the way to disengage from authority structures and to take personal responsibility for one’s own information base. We can’t emphasize this too strongly.