Return Home
It is currently Mon Jul 22, 2024 2:28 pm

All times are UTC-06:00

Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Dec 01, 2013 11:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Tom Campbell: Life Between Lives as Consciousness 9/29/12 Interview by Donna Aveni, Technical production by Keith Warner

Published on Oct 14, 2012

"Afterlife" interview of 9/28/12 continues with additional comments and new material:

Tom talks about how beings that have enough experience here can plan their next life, and how the the avatar is connected (video game analogy for our virtual reality) with Consciousness.

We are a different being as Consciousness than we are as our body and role here in this reality. This is an important and encouraging point to remember when you contemplate the "you" in this life experience. You are most likely doing your best, yet you have more choices and potential than you think you have.

Hitler takes a few more hits in this discussion of intent at the root of choice that determines the evolution or de-evolution of a being. Is he fundamentally different from others who make evil choices but are unknown and have much less impact on humanity?

Tom delivers hard-hitting comments to scientists who claim they already know everything (we can't really know the "other" Fredkin refers to?), and anything different to what they believe must be wrong.

Comments on Bruce Lipton's work on cells and Consciousness take the conversation to higher levels of existence.

Do beings from other reality frames (Tom has been to dozens) deal with the same struggles and challenges that we deal with here? What are their goals?

Do beliefs and dogma really help us on the path of evolution?

PostPosted: Sun Dec 01, 2013 11:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Donna: One of the questions submitted to you from one of the forum members, (Arthur in the UK,) was, “How does consciousness connect to the body?” You gave a really good answer. Would you like to elaborate on that answer?

Tom: Yes, there is one metaphor that I think might help. It was a good answer in the sense that consciousness doesn't really connect to the body. The body isn’t really a body. It's not really physical. You’re thinking about it in the wrong way. One thinks, here you have this spiritual realm where the consciousness lives, and here we have his physical realm where we live. How does that non-physical consciousness attach to my physical body?

That's just the wrong question. There is no physical body. You have to look at it in terms of this is all just data and information. It's a virtual reality that is created through information. We can take that a little further. I’ve had other people ask me that same question since then. And I came up with a metaphor that seemed to be a little more suitable for helping them to understand it. We can look at video games as an analogy. I use that a lot, but it actually is a pretty good analogy. The big difference is that video games are programmed and our virtual reality evolved.

How do you define a character? How do you birth a character in the Sims, or in World of Warcraft? You go to a page where characters are created and you pick attributes. You can't just pick any attribute. There are some rules on the kind of attributes you can pick. Because otherwise everybody would pick the character with the most wonderful attributes. And that wouldn't make as interesting a game. If you have a lot of varied characters, that do different things in different ways, it becomes a more interesting game. So, there is a limitation with picking. Within those limitations you get to pick the kind of characters like an Elf, a Barbarian, or this or that. Within that you can pick attributes like how clever it is, whether it can do spells, how strong it is, its hit points, and so on. Once you're done with that character's attributes, as you’ve configured it, the character becomes an avatar for you. And you can play that character in the game.

Let's look at the consciousness part of it and we'll see that it's very similar. In the consciousness game of physical reality this virtual reality is evolved. It's not programmed. It starts with the big digital bang. The simulation of this reality, which we call physical reality, starts to unfold. Suns, places like Earth, cells, biology, and all that, evolves in this virtual reality. This simulation is just simulating potential. It forms the structure according to the rule set that defines this reality frame.

How does the consciousness connect to the avatar in the virtual reality? Let's say that in this simulation, the rule set has evolved enough that it has people, critters, bushes, trees, and all of our environment. All that in the simulation is just potential. It is based on the probability of what’s likely happen given the rule set, the initial conditions, and so on. In this simulation you'll have a couple who are going to have a child. You have that in the Sims as well. You have couples that have children in The Sims. This is something you can simulate. But again, in our virtual reality this is an evolved simulation. That child that they're going to have is a potential child, just as they are potential people.

You are consciousness, and you'd like to get into this virtual reality experience game. You're looking for an open slot to get in. You can look at all of the various potentials out there that suit you. Here's a child, and because of the parents that are producing this child, you have a certain genetic set that will give you some limitations. These are limitations in terms of probability. That’s like the character in World of Warcraft. You can’t just pick anything. You’re limited with the kind of things and combinations that you can pick. There’s limitations. But within those limitations there's lots of probability, and chance, that this might happen or that might happen. You look at the potential of it and you say, “Okay, this one suits me. Of all the potentials that are in this virtual reality game, that's a potential that’ll suit my next incarnation pretty well - reasonably well.” Sure there's some unknowns to it, and there’s some chances about the way things might go together or turn out. You can’t eliminate all the variables. This is not a deterministic exercise. This is a probabilistic reality where you play the game and you take your chances.

You as a consciousness are also information. You're also memory and experience. All the things you've ever thought, done, and said. You are all the quality you’ve accumulated up to this time. You can reduced that all to information. Information that describes you uniquely. You are your experience and your choices. You can take that information and insert it into this potential being. It is just like picking the characteristics of your virtual avatar in your computer game. Once you've done that your information has become “uploaded to,” “injected into,” (this is a metaphor, so however you want to put this,) into this potential being.

Now this potential being is born and grows up. And in its larger sense it is you. It started with your data input that was there. That's how you connect to it. It has your data input. It's like you take your data card, like your credit card or something, and put it in the slot. And it downloads your data into this potential being. From then on you work out, through this virtual reality, the experiences that this potential being will have. This new being will have experiences with other beings, and other things in the environment, that are in this multiplayer game. But it’s you in there because you put your own data as part of the input into it. That’s your part of the selection process. Just like in the World of Warcraft you pick how many hit points, (a way for the game to measure the amount of damage a player can take before dying of his wounds,) does this being do magic, and what are its characteristics? You get to load your own data.

This being starts out with the quality of consciousness that you brought to it. That's part of what you download when you stick your own data file into that being. Now you’re integrated. That's you in there. This being, of course, is an infant and it has to learn how to interpret the data. It has to interpret what all that data means. How do you interpret that? That's what this infant is doing. It takes this infant a long time just to realize that the thing that flies around in front of its face, and scratches it sometimes, is its own hand. It takes a baby a while to figure out, “Oh, that’s a part of me.” Then later the baby figures out, “Oh, I can control it.” Then the baby spends weeks practicing controlling its hand until that control gets better and better. And finally it can make its hand go where it wants to, and so on. The baby has to learn all of the data, and how to interpret every piece of data that it gets in its environment. When it sees things it has to learn to interpret them, “Oh, that’s Mom.” “That's Dad.” “That’s the crib.” "That's the wall, the ceiling, the mobile I'm looking at." The baby gets data, but at first it has no idea how to interpret it. It interprets it through experience. The baby learns and it grows. And after it is two or three years old, it knows what room, ceiling, arms, hands, legs, clothes, beds, and so forth are. The baby has a lot of images now, and a lot of input symbols that it can interpret. The baby has metaphors as part of its experience base.

At the same time the baby's got your input. When you put your data card in there, and said “this is me,” that is loaded in there too. So it sees reality, not only through its potential ability to see because it's in this simulation, but it sees it through your own filter. The baby experiences reality how you would see, how you would deal with, and how you would interpret different experiences. The baby also brings along your quality of consciousness. Which means that it brings along your fear, your ego, and your lack of love because that's the way you are. It brings all those things along with it. Or it brings your great quantity of love because that’s the way you are. That's the way to look at the process.

Then, here you are in this this simulation. It was just a "potential simulation." And now there’s a character, an avatar, in the potential possibilities within the simulation. And there are interactions with other potential beings that has your fundamental “stuff” in it. That becomes "you." And you play through that experience until this character gets run over by a truck, gets old and dies, or whatever. Then you repeat the process. Except now you've changed because you've learned things and you've grown up. So the next time when you bring out your data card and say, “I'm going to insert my data into this potential being in the simulation.” then it's different. It's a different "you." And the next time perhaps you make different choices. The next time you will have different situations.

That's just giving an analogy of putting your card in the slot and how that works with the World of Warcraft. It’s a different view to see how this world of consciousness connects with this world of physical bone and flesh. Remember this physical world of bone and flesh is just data. It's not real. The physical world isn’t real. It's not that the soul comes into the brain, and then lives in the brain, or lives in the body. That's ancient thinking. It's like thinking you have to cover your mouth to yawn so the evil spirits can’t get into your body. That's an old way of looking at things that didn’t turn out to be too useful or practical. It's not like that. You don't have a physical body. But there is a personal connection between you and this avatar, because it’s carrying your own quality with it. And you do that by basically downloading your data into it. It's just a "potential being" in a simulation and you put your own “stuff” in it, and then it becomes "you."

Donna: I think it’s a very interesting analogy, and it does help to clarify how this virtual reality works. The one thing that would be different in our virtual reality analogy with World of Warcraft, is that WoW is a programmable video game. It’s similar to what we are but we're evolving.

Tom: We are an evolving game. See, that's a completely different thing.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:48 pm 
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 7231
Location: Ocala, FL
Donna: We don't have a limitation.

Tom: No, we as consciousness are very different than our potential characters. We as consciousness are a whole different kind of being than this avatar we’re playing in the game. Just like we as conscious beings are very different to that Sim character that we play. We're not that Sim character. We’re a totally different kind of being than that Sim character. That's the way it is with us. We as consciousness are really a very different kind of being than that human that we're playing in this Earth virtual reality, in this particular universe.

We think of this physical body as being the source of things. It isn’t. It's just potential in a virtual reality game. If you think of that virtual reality game when you're picking your elf, or picking your Sims character, they're just potential too. They're just a potential character. And the character has limitations. But you picked various kinds of characteristics such as the job they have, or some other kinds of things that makes them a specific character.
We think of our brain as a processor. It takes in data, it processes, it chooses, and it makes the choices. It doesn’t do anything. Our brain doesn't process anything; it doesn't store anything. You say, “What do you mean? Of course your brain stores things. You cut out this part of your brain, you can’t remember stuff. It has to store things.” No, that’s not the way it works. The brain doesn't store, or process, anything. The brain is just a potential. It's a simulation. It's a potential that limits what the consciousness can do. The reason that you can no longer remember things, when you cut that part of your brain out that, is you change the potential of that character. That character now doesn't have that part of the brain. Then those are constraints that you’ve just put on the character.

It's like the World of Warcraft character. He gets beaten up by a monster of some sort, and now he only has a few hit points. Well, that's a constraint on your character. If he gets in another fight it would kill him because he's constrained. Now he’s wounded and sick. Or, he’s had a spell put on him, or something. It changes things. It puts constraints on the character. When you damage the character in the simulation, you just changed the potential. You’ve changed the constraints. And now that consciousness can no longer work that part of the character, because it’s no longer available. Maybe that elf no longer has a one hundred hit points. Maybe it has only has ten hit points. Now, there’s certain things you can't do now.

It's not that the brain stores information or processes information. It just appears to. Whenever you change something in the brain, you modify the potential in this virtual reality for that character to do something. That limits the consciousness in how it can interact and how it can respond. The character is limited to respond within the rules of the game. Just like your elf man, or your Sim character, can only respond within the rules of the game. They can’t do things that are outside the ruleset of the game. The Sim characters can’t just do this, or do that, as they will. They have to abide by the rule set, the structure, and even the social structure that's defined in the game. They have limitations.

Donna: Unlike our evolutionary type virtual reality, the Sims character are not self-modifying. But we are self-modifying. We're not limited to our DNA, or to our set of constraints. We can modify those.

Tom: Right, our whole point here is to grow up. And as we grow up we change. We’re a consciousness growing up and evolving. As we evolve our character has to modify itself in the virtual reality to support, to justify, and to mirror what we learn as consciousness. We're talking about the sheep morality issue again. The sheep learns morality and the brain has to modify itself to support that function. In other words, the simulation has to modify itself to match the change. If your elf learns a new skill, he gets a bump on his head that represents that skill. If his body changes he gets a bump on his head, or whatever. The elf gets purple arrows, green skin, or something happens that signifies the he has that capability. It's a similar sort of thing.

So, we don't live in a physical reality. This physical reality is not real; it’s a virtual reality. It describes potential. Another way to say that is that it describes constraints. All potential isn't just infinite potential. You have potential within the constraints that mold that potential to within certain limits. The constraints have to do with the ruleset. They also have to do with what we do. We can change the constraints. If we become very fearful, and if we become trapped in beliefs, then our constraints grow. When our constraints grow that character can’t do things it otherwise would have been able to do. We can change ourselves; we can drag ourselves down, or we can lift ourselves up. We can learn new things, or we can forget old things. We can de-evolve as well as evolve.

So here we are playing this game and it changes us. That doesn't happen that much when you're playing Sims. You play the Sims but it doesn't change you that much because it's not the kind of game. You’re just supposed to be entertained with the Sims. It's not really a teaching role. But, we could say in some ways it is because people can learn things. People become better players. They learn the ins-and-outs of the game. They learn how to deal with a fight, how to deal with a bad job, or how to deal with a crying baby. That's all part of their thing, and as they learn to deal with that they may actually learn something. They may actually gain from that experience of playing a video game.

You can learn a lot from virtual reality games that are meant to be educational. They have pilot simulators because it's just too risky, and expensive, to put pilots in a three billion dollar jumbo jet and have all the engines go out for practice. You’re not going to do that in a real jet someplace because there's too much risk. Plus there's just too much danger, and it costs too much money. Pilots have those experiences in a simulator so that they can have that experience of what happens when all the engines flame out. Pilots can practice what to do if that happens. That's an experience you practice in a reality simulator. And pilots do learn a lot from those kinds of experiences. In the same way, you can learn from games. Think of it that way.

We’re players in this virtual reality and the virtual reality has a rule set. It can only do certain things. As it does these things, and as it makes choices, we learn from them. We, consciousness, are the players. Our point here is to grow up and become Love. The point is not to become mean, become full of fear, or become full of beliefs. The point of being a player in the virtual reality is to let all that stuff go and become greater.

It's good we have examples of virtual realities now. It makes it so much easier when people look at virtual reality games that they or their children play. They can see that those virtual reality games are a similar kind of thing to what I am describing. The difference is that nobody's programming all the details in our virtual reality. The details just evolved. In The Sims if there's a blade of grass some programmer had to put that grass there. That is not true here. There’s a blade of grass here because it’s probable that it would be here. This virtual reality is a probability simulation of an evolving potential. This universe, our planet, us, and our biology is all part of filling out the logical consequences of the original initial conditions, and rule set, that started in the big digital bang. We are the logical ramifications of all of that. We’ve evolved as a possibility.

There could have been other ways we evolved. There were choices and random events that happened. If something from outer space hit and it created a big cloud that shut off the sunlight we might have evolved differently. We’ve had extinctions and chance things can happen. It's not like this is a deterministic reality. It’s a statistical reality. Here we are as a result of all that. We're here and we make just the perfect play space. It makes the perfect growth simulator. This is an educational virtual reality for Individuated Units of Consciousness (IUOC) to become Love. That's what we're here for.
It all makes sense. That's how the soul, the consciousness, or the spirit, depending on the kinds of words you use, actually interact and become a character here. It's not that you have a soul that enters a physical body. It's that you have a potential that a consciousness then operates within the constraints of that potential. And those constraints can change based on the choices you make.

Donna: Thank you. I think that added considerably to the answer you gave to Arthur’s question. Would you say the nature of this system is Love? Is it the fundamental fabric of our reality? Is why we are evolving towards Love, and anything else that is counterproductive to the system is de-evolving?

Tom: That’s probably a good way to say it. Love is the fundamental fabric. The fundamental imperative is to change. Our imperative is to evolve. All of us have that, and we have it at a deep level. There’s something inside of us at the being level that says, “grow up,” “change,” “be different and become more.” We're all driven in that direction. It's a natural drive because that’s what we're here for. We have this sense of needing to improve ourselves. We have a need to understand; we have a need to grow.

Donna: So, the system supports this positive growth?

Tom: Yes, the system supports that.

Donna: And anything other than a positive growth would not be growing towards Love, and would be counterproductive. This is why we come to the consequences, and the importance, of how we live and how we should make good choices.

Tom: How we live, and the choices we make, will depend on whether we evolve, de-evolve, or stay the same. What are consequences of staying the same? What if you just say, “I don't want to play this game”? You can do that. But eventually you’ll either make yourself useless as a potential evolver of consciousness, or you will change your mind and grow. Because if you’re stagnant your life is not fun and you're not happy. Just doing nothing, and refusing to play the game, does not make you a happy player. Doing nothing makes you a miserable player because you've got this innate drive inside of you to become something, to do something, to connect with other people, and to share.

Connecting, sharing, and helping, what are these? These are processes by which you lower entropy. These are processes by which you get rid of randomness and create content in your life, and in your consciousness. This is about the lowering of entropy and you have this drive to do that. Though people have this drive to do that, often we take that drive and aim it at something counterproductive. This drive to become, "more," sometimes gets perverted into a drive to become dominant, a drive to have power, a drive to be wealthy, or a drive to do other things. That's your innate drive to better yourself being perverted on a non-useful direction.

But, that's okay. That's part of the learning process. Making a good choice wouldn't have any particular value if you couldn’t also make a bad choice. That's where the free will comes in. You have the ability to take this innate drive to better yourself, and instead use it to damage yourself, or use it to waste your time so you're not really evolving. Instead of growing you're off making money and becoming powerful. Maybe you end up very powerful and very rich but you haven’t grown any. You haven’t developed the quality of your consciousness. Well that makes that incarnation a failure not a success. Just because you are rich and powerful doesn’t earn you any points, because that's not what you're supposed to be doing. You took your drive perverted it off into something that was non-useful and wasted your time.

Yes, you can de-evolve. You can just stymie your evolution or you can go forward. Most of us, if we’re not going forward, if we're not somehow making progress toward that goal that we feel inside of us, we're dissatisfied. We’re restless. It doesn't feel right; we don't like it. Of course we blame it, not on ourselves and our own choices, we blame it on everybody else. “Well, it’s because my spouse doesn’t do what I’d like them to do.” “My boss doesn't realize how brilliant I am.” We start saying that's why life is so hard. It’s because all these other people don’t do the kind of things I’d like them to do. That’s pointing the finger outside. The reason someone is unhappy is because of what’s inside. That's where the happiness, or lack of it, that's where the growth, or lack of it, comes from. It comes from the inside. It is not from things not being right in the outside world.

Donna: You spoke before of the truly evil acts that we see in the world every day. We know some acts from history, and some acts you see on the news every day, are truly evil. These stem from peoples’ lack of understanding how things actually work. These acts are also judged by others as well. “They’re going to hell.” “Hitler must be in hell.” The consequences that you’re speaking of seem to be far more serious than consistent bad choices. It seems to me that if you continue the gradual lowering of potential that you are a candidate for deletion from the system. Even though hellfire and brimstone is preached often as the punishment for those who consistently do bad acts, this is the ultimate, “Game Over.”

Tom: Yes, that’s true. I would hasten to s ay that being deleted from the game is probably not something that happens a lot. It’s probably a very rare circumstance. It's an exceptionally rare circumstance because at this point in this game, if you have potential, if you have the capacity to change, to grow, or to be different you will be given that chance. Even Hitler, or Idi Amin, or whatever despot that was a mass murderer, that's the corner that person worked themselves into in this particular experience packet. When they start over in another experience packet it may not turn out like that at all. Some of it is just luck. It could have been when Hitler did the “false flag” process of burning down the Reichstag and then blaming it on his enemies, which allowed him then to takeover a larger part of the government. Had that not worked out, had he been found out as the one that had done that, then it would have been entirely different. Instead of him taking over more of the government he would have been thrown in the clink, tried, executed, or something else.

So there’s things that can happen. There were all sorts of things that just happened to enable a Hitler that were really outside of Hitler’s control. It’s not that he manipulated the whole thing. He happened to be at the right place, at the right time, to get a lot of support out of the German public. They had been pushed down from their problems after WWI. And there were a lot of Germans who were looking for a little glory back like the old days. And he hit at the right time. It was a hard time, and in hard times people are looking for scapegoats. There was a lot of fear and economics were bad. There was a lot of disgruntlement, and people who are afraid are easy to manipulate. Then he pulled a couple of stunts and the stunts worked. There was a whole string of things that just fell into place to put him in a position of power where he could be a mass murderer, and a doer of great evil deeds. If any of those things didn’t come together right then it wouldn’t have worked for Hitler. He would have been some little old guy that made shoes somewhere in an alley in Berlin. And nobody would have noticed him. He would never have been a figure of history. He would have been the disgruntled old guy always complaining, and banging his fist, down at the corner shop.

That's another point. We think about the great evil people, (the mass murders of our time, the ones who do genocide, and other sorts of terrible things,) the major difference between them and the average guy, or at least if not average then the one-in-ten man or woman in our population, it isn’t that they were exceptionally evil in their makeup. It was that they, for one reason or another, ended up with power. Because of the lack of growth, the lack of love, and the fact that they were driven by belief, fear, and ego, they had the ability to spread that lack of growth far and wide. They had the ability to do huge amounts of damage. The guy in the little shop in the alley who's an old curmudgeon, who fusses and bangs his fists down all the time, he doesn't have any power. The only thing he can do is maybe kick his dog when he gets home. That’s all he can do. Maybe all he can do is just fuss, grumble, make a lot of noises, and rant and rave. But that's all he can do.

You could probably find a Hitler, an Idi Amin, or any number of the people who've done mass crimes in any group of fifty people. You could find them in any group of a hundred people anywhere on the globe. If you gave those kinds of people that kind of power, they would do those kinds of things in those kinds of times, and in those kinds of circumstances. That's the thing we have to look at. It's not that Adolf Hitler was so consummately evil and nasty that he deserves special treatment. He actually was probably just kind of an ordinary guy who found himself with a very unordinary amount of power. He didn't really care much about people. He cared about power, manipulation, and control. It probably wasn't so much that he hated Jews as much as it was a device he could use to help manipulate others to go his way. The Jewish population was a scapegoat he could blame for problems. It wasn’t so much a real dislike as it was a use of the situation. It was his need of a scapegoat, a need of somebody to blame things on, and a need for some way to let people vent their anger that helped him gain power.

There are lots of people who use other people. Often they're just a boss and maybe they just have twenty people that work for them. Maybe those people are generally miserable because this guy is a real jerk. Would that guy do things any differently if he could control armies and nations? Save us all from that sort of thing! Hitler was not such an outstandingly evil person, as he was somebody that reflects what's not all that uncommon among us. Many would do the same if they just had the power to use it in a way that made a big splash in history.

Donna: So are you saying that the curmudgeon in the cobbler’s shop is de-evolving at the same rate as someone who was in power?

Tom: Yes, he’s de-evolving at the same rate. It's not what you do that makes a difference in your change at the being level, or in your evolution. It’s your Intention. If you had somebody who wouldn't mind burning a million people, or gassing six million people, but they don't have the power to do it, they’re just as de-evolved. They’re de-evolving just as quickly as the person who does have the power, and who does it.
It’s not the action that's the key ingredient. It's not what you do. It’s the Intent behind what you do. That's where the judgment comes. That's where the choice comes as far as growth, or no growth. Yes, some people do terrible things, and that shows they’re a terrible person. But there are a lot of terrible people who don't do massive terrible things; they do little terrible things. They harass their employees. They rant and rave at their customers. They kick their dog. They are de-evolving just the same as they would if they had the power to do something massive on a historical scale. That then would be history for the next five hundred years.

“The doing” isn't the point. It's the Intent. So you’re a curmudgeon and you’re, “Well, we ought to nuke them.” You’re no different than someone who actually was able to do those things and did them. You’re de-evolving in just the same way. It's the quality that you are. The quality of your Intent is what determines whether you evolve or de-evolve. So, if we pick a Hitler, or an Idi Amin, (a warlord in Africa who murdered people by the hundreds of thousands,) they are not such particular cases of evil that wells up in our society. These are not unusual people. They just happened to get power and expressed their low quality of consciousness. It’s full of, “It's all about me and my ego and my power. It's all about what I want and my beliefs. I’m in control. I can make anybody do what I want, because I’ll kill them if they don't.” That's not all that unusual in our culture. We see it all the time played out in small ways. But these people have constraints that don't allow them to become historical figures of evil doing.

Donna: The pastors preaching hate, and the heads of religious groups preaching hate, it's the same thing. They’re on a smaller level but it is the same thing.

Tom: Yes, it’s a similar kind of thing. We can't look at ourselves and say that we're all that much different. We’re not all that much different. We look at these historical characters that were monsters, and we need to look at ourselves. And when I say “ourselves,” I mean humanity. We need to realize that they are a reflection of us. It's not that they're just this huge anomaly that just happened and hardly anybody would ever be like that. The fact is they're very much like us. The anomaly was that they happened to rise to enough political and military power that they could actually do those things. That's the anomaly. Not the fact that they would do those things.

They represent us. Look at all the meanness in the world, and look at all the selfishness. All the, “What about me?” It’s about “mine.” It goes from politics to personal relationships. Look at all of that, and that’s us. The nightly news is telling us the way we are and we express that where we can. If you don't have a dog to kick, maybe you just go home and mutter. If you've got a dog you get to kick your dog. If you’ve got a wife and kids, maybe you get to holler at them, berate them, and tell them they’re stupid, ineffectual, or something. That’s your way of making yourself feel better. But if you happen to be the leader of a nation with a huge army, you just do things differently. You do it in a much bigger way. If you’re a boss maybe you just lord it over your employees. You make them step, fetch, jump, and tell them that they’re inadequate. You rant and rave, or do other things.

If we look at our history, and at our current events, that's a product of all of us. That's the way we are. Bad things happen that can have a major impact on a lot of people, when some of us end up with huge power and big decisions. Then it's just more the quality of, "us," except they have huge power and an ability to make big decisions. They're not anomalies. The anomalous thing is their power and not their quality. Their quality is pretty typical. I don't necessarily say that it’s average. They may have below average quality, but they're not like “rare” beings either. That's just the nature of how we are. Again I say, this is not a graduate school for consciousness. This is an elementary school. This is not a bunch of advanced consciousnesses here on their last few steps to becoming Love. I mean, good gracious. Look out the window, catch the news, and look at our history. It’s obvious that we're a long way from becoming Love as a people.

When we talked with Bruce, (Lipton,) 1 he talked about how the cells had to learn to co-operate. They had to learn how to live together. The cells had to learn how to be productive. They had to work in ways that they were not competing with each other. The cells were all doing their own thing in their own way. It doesn’t mean that they’re all equal. It just means they all had a place, they all had a job, and they all worked together to make a, "whole thing" work. You have all the various kinds of cells doing specific tasks in one effort working together. That’s a low entropy configuration of a whole lot of things working together.

Here we are trying to do the same thing at a higher level of complication. It's co-operation at a higher order of the simulation. It’s easier at the lower levels of the simulation because the choices are not so great. Yes, those cells had choices too. They could have had a choice to work as pieces of a larger organism, or just stay independent little one-celled things. There were choices that were made. They weren’t intellectual choices but they were choices just the same. Eventually, they evolved to a point where you have billions of cells all working cooperatively together for a specific purpose. Each one does its part. The liver doesn’t go on strike. The heart doesn’t say, “I’m carrying the load here guys. I work all day. I work all night. I don’t get to rest. I beat and I have to work all the time. I’m taking the weekend off. I want to stop beating for the weekend.” We don’t have any of that, "What about me? It’s unfair to me. You guys get to rest and I don’t.” That’s just ego. These cells have all come together and they are working as a unit.

Like Bruce says, everybody gets fed, everybody gets paid, and everybody has a job. That doesn’t make it some egalitarian social configuration. The jobs are different. Some are more important than others. Some are more crucial and critical than others. Some are higher paid than others. Their "pay" is the amount of energy they get to use and expend, and the amount of choices they have. You get all kinds of variations of what’s going on in body cells. They’re all significant, but some are more significant than others. It’s just the way it is. We can do without fingernails but we can’t do without a heart. It’s the way we are.

Now here we are, as Bruce points out, trying to duplicate that same thing at a higher level of complication where we have a lot more choices, and a lot more ways that we can go. Those cells only had maybe just a couple of choices. They could either go this way or that way. And they chose eventually through evolution of trying to lower the entropy. In other words, they chose to be more cooperative, to be more connected, to have more information, to have less randomness, and to build more complexity. They made those choices as they evolved into these more complex structures which were more cooperative.

Here we are doing the same thing. We are trying to evolve into a more complex structure that’s cooperative except all the cells, (FWAUs) running around here are all about “me.” They’re full of beliefs. They’re limited. They can’t see big pictures. They have huge egos, needs, wants, and desires. “But that’s unfair. How could you have so much money and I don’t have any? I’m at least as worthy a person as you are. I should take some of your money. You can tax it and give it to me, or I can steal it at night while you’re asleep.”

We have all this stuff that’s all fear and ego. And we’re having a hard time building a constructive organism out of humanity. But that’s our job. That's where we’re going but we’re not doing too well at the moment. But we’ve come a long way. We’re probably better at it now than we were a thousand years ago. It’s growing but it’s going to be a while yet before get it.

Donna: This system that is evolving towards Love, because Love is the direction that we naturally strive towards, is the nature of the Larger Consciousness System (LCS). As we discussed last night, there is assistance in various forms brought to help us because the system is trying to evolve positively. We get messages look past ourselves and look towards the larger picture.
This is why we talked about traveling out-of-body for certain people. It’s not the same for everyone. Out of body, glimpses into reincarnation, psychic messages, visions, (sometimes collective visions such as Lourdes or Fatima,) and crop circles, are ways to open us up to the bigger picture. Are various things like that that are “paranormal” really assistance from the larger consciousness system to help us grow and evolve positively?

Tom: Yes. The Larger Consciousness System (LCS) has a great incentive for us to succeed because we are it and it is us. In other words we are pieces of this system. We are just Individuated Units of Consciousness (IOUC) that are parts of the system. We make up the system. The system is us, and we are it. If we succeed, it succeeds. If any human being, any sheep, any monkey, or any dog increases the quality of its consciousness, then the average of the whole system ticks up just a tiny little bit. The whole system evolves by all these little personal tick-ups, in quality of consciousness, adding together. That’s how the system evolves.

We are the LCS's strategy. But it is not just "us" in this earth virtual reality. When I say “we are," I don’t mean "we" exclusively. There are other reality frames. Here in this particular reality frame we are limited parts of our Units of Consciousness. We are a limited part of our consciousness, (FWAUs,) being rendered a data stream to have experiences within this virtual reality. We are here so we can make choices and speed our evolution. This physical universe, this virtual reality we’re in, is an evolutionary training device

The system has every reason to want to help us succeed, but it can’t do it for us or there’s no success. Something doesn’t evolve because a big hand reaches down to the board and moves a piece. You have to move it yourself. You have to evolve at the individual level. Consciousness is individual. So each little Individuated Unit of Consciousness, (FWAU – Free Will Awareness Unit,) contributes to the evolution of the whole.
The whole wants us to succeed so the Larger Consciousness System does give us lots of help. We find this help in all the things that you listed. Those are wake-up calls. They are a like a little sprinkle of water in the face. They are like a little slap to wake-up. Most people have had experiences that would be called paranormal. Paranormal doesn’t mean anything spooky. It just means that normal, traditional science doesn’t have an explanation for it. Well, there’s lots of things that you would expect traditional normal science not to have an explanation for. Traditional, normal science doesn’t have all the answers. There’s a lot to learn yet. There’s much that scientists don’t understand.

Let’s go back to three hundred years ago. What did traditional science know then? What didn’t they know? They didn’t know anything about the way we live now. They didn’t know anything about computers, automobiles, and networks. None of that stuff was known. Three hundred years ago, a computer would have been paranormal. Computers would have been beyond what science could think about. A color television, and even a radio, would have been paranormal then. All these things would have been beyond normal. That’s what “para” means - beyond normal. Paranormal are events that don’t flow logically out of normal. "Normal" means what is understood in today’s traditional science. That’s not because there is something spooky about these events. It's because traditional science is still ignorant about a whole lot of things. The whole point of My Big TOE is to offer a different view of science. MBT offers a theory in which all these things make sense, rather than the view in which these things are “para” and beyond science.

The experiments at PEAR Labs are all paranormal in the sense that normal science won’t explain them. Same with all the experiments that Dean Radin2 does or J.D. Rhine3 did are all listed paranormal, not because of any particular attribute of its own. It’s simply because the limited physics of our time can’t explain it. Let’s not say that the paranormal stuff is goofy because we believe that the physics is complete. Why don’t we say that the unknown that’s “para” (beyond our normal understanding) is just because the traditional science is ignorant? What’s wrong with that view? They just don’t know yet how to explain out-of-body, visions, crop circles, and all the rest.

With My Big TOE there is a logical science that does explain all those things. And that’s the way it normally works with Newtonian physics. There was a logical science with Newtonian physics that explained all kinds of things, like the motion of all the heavenly bodies, and the stars moving across the sky. It turned out they really weren’t being drawn by angels in chariots attached to the stars and the moon. That wasn’t right. There was a simple equation. GmM/r2 4(where G is the gravitational constant). That explained it all. Just that one equation of Newton’s explained how everything worked.

You can’t say, “Well, the paranormal is a bunch of goofy, woo-woo people that are all hallucinating.” instead of saying “The paranormal reflects a whole bunch of facts that science can’t explain, but perhaps science will change and evolve one day to be able to explain those.” That’s a more rational approach than “We in science know everything. We are omniscient and we know it all. These things don’t fit in our scientific understanding therefore they’re goofy and wrong. And anybody who thinks they’re experiencing these things are goofy, and wrong, and are having hallucinations.” It is a supreme arrogance to think, “I know everything. And if this isn’t part of what I know, then obviously it’s wrong and it doesn’t exist.” Rather than, “Well, paranormal events have been studied very carefully, the last fifty or sixty years, by very good scientists. And they have been shown to exist. Therefore we, scientists, don’t understand everything that there is to understand about reality. There’s more to reality than we know of. And we need to modify our models so that we can understand these things, and make them rational. We need to modify our models so we understand how paranormal events work, and why they work that way. We don't need just some metaphor for them, or not just admitting that they exist, but actually understanding how, and why, they work. And we need to understand that they are just as repeatable, just as rational, and just as explainable as anything else."

That would be a more intelligent way of approaching the problem rather than, “I know everything. And if this isn’t part of what I know, then it has to be wrong. You people who think paranormal events are true have to be crazy. You have to be wackos, and you have no credibility because we, scientists, know everything.” When you put it in those words it’s obviously just arrogance beyond belief. But we tend to believe that we know everything.

Donna: The science has arrived that explains the big picture outside conventional physics and that is your book My Big TOE.

Tom: The point of My Big TOE is to explain the subjective. The subjective world is also explainable. Our science says, “No, the subjective world is not explainable. It changes based on the whim of the subject.” While that’s true, that doesn’t mean it isn’t explainable. It’s just not explainable in terms of a deterministic world view. In traditional science if it’s not part of a deterministic world view, if it’s not this clockwork process, then it can’t be real. But we know that most of our life is not clockwork process.

Most of our decisions are not logical. Most of what matters to us, love, affection, cooperation, integration with others, and satisfaction are not clockwork processes. Traditional science doesn't have any understanding of what is most important to us. Science doesn't understand why they are and how they fit. Our traditional science says, “Well, these things are non-scientific.” That’s another way of saying, “We don’t understand the science that explains these things.” They would never admit that. They would just say “It’s non-scientific. There’s some things that science just doesn’t apply to. They’ll never be scientific. Nobody will ever know.” That’s just a confession of ignorance. Claiming that nobody will ever know excuses you from being ignorant. “Well, it’s not that I’m ignorant. Nobody will ever know.” That sounds like quantum mechanics guys right? “Nobody will ever understand how the double slit works. That’s just impossible.” That’s just ignorance claiming that ignorance is okay, because nobody will ever know. It’s justifying ignorance.

That’s not the case. You can understand all the subjective. You can understand all the paranormal. It does make logical sense. It is part of the larger theory that unites the metaphysical and the physical. That’s the point of this is a bigger science that explains the whole thing.

Donna: One of the other subjects that we touched on last night was aliens. It’s a word we use for, “other than here,” but it is information.
It is information from other virtual realities. Accessing them is something like when you travel out of body you can access these different realities. It’s really the same sort of benefits you would get traveling here. It opens your mind to the nature of the Larger Consciousness System (LCS) and the variety of ways it refines and evolves itself towards the goal of love.
If you’re exposed to “There’s more than my home town. There’s the capital city. There’s the state. There’s the country. There’s other countries. What else is there?” There’s always that question of what more is there? As you see more, and experience more of other cultures the value is that you’re open to simply more understanding. I think that it's the same with accessing these other virtual realities, as you have done.
You have accessed dozens of other realities. These are just the same as here but they have their individual systems. I wonder what your experience has taught you?

What is the value of tapping into these other realities? What are their constraints? What are their challenges? How do they structure their reality so that beings can learn the way we’re learning? And can you get a much broader perspective of this whole system?

Tom: We can define an alien as “not from here.” In other words, not an “earthling.” Anything that didn’t evolve on this planet then is called an alien. It would include everything that’s also in this virtual reality, within this universe, but not from earth. It would include, as well, everything that has nothing to do with this universe. It would include everything in different reality frames. All of that would become "aliens" whether they were just part of this universe, (other planets in this universe,) or whether it was outside this universe, (other reality frames.)

Most people can’t think of, “outside this universe," and, "other reality frames.” That’s too big a concept. Those ideas don’t compute. It’s like, “What? What’s that mean? That’s garbage.” Or, “That doesn’t make any sense.” They’re limited by their beliefs to only within this universe, to other planets, to other suns, and so on. They're limited to a belief of things within this particular virtual reality. But that’s not true. Because they’re limited by their beliefs doesn’t mean that the reality is limited by their beliefs. There are lots of other reality frames in addition to this universe. So if we call all those “aliens,” then that’s a real large conglomeration of different kinds of beings that might exist. That is a lot of beings we can interface with. And, it is true that the more well-travelled you are, the bigger perspective you have.

The reason you have a bigger perspective is that we tend to model the world on ourselves. We tend to think everybody else is like us. So you grow up in a small town, and you have certain attitudes and ideas of the way the world works. You have a belief of what's right, what's wrong, what’s proper behavior, and what isn’t. You have these ideas, and as far as you’re concerned that's the way the world should be. It’s the only world you know. So you pattern the world on what you know. Well, there’s really no fault in that. You can't do anything else but pattern the world on what you know.

Now you travel to a different culture and you see that people do things very differently. If you're open-minded, you realize that it's just different. It's not worse. It's not uncivilized because they eat with chopsticks instead of a knife and fork. It’s just different. There are these different customs and different ways of looking at the world. They may have a whole different worldview, a different ethic, and a different sense of how reality works. Then you realize that is just another perspective. That is another culture’s way of looking at the same things you look at. Suddenly your little ego patch of turf, in the little town you grew up in, now has to include other things as possibilities. You’ve found different ways of looking at the world and they don't seem to be wrong or bad. They just seem to be different. That gives you a bigger perspective. Whereas before you couldn’t think outside of this box, now your box is bigger.

Then you go for a while and live among people who are starving to death. You go to someplace where there's famine and you visit camps where food is being passed out. That will teach you a compassion that you never had before. Because in your little town everybody was well-fed. Everybody had a house. Everybody had a job. Everybody was doing fine and no one was starving and homeless. You didn't realize that was even going on in the world. Maybe you saw pictures but they're just pictures. When you are there and you’re a part of that it’s a different perspective. Now perhaps you have compassion for people that you’ve never had before. Compassion in your old view meant that somebody had to have a new pair of shoes. The old ones weren’t quite worn out yet but they were no longer stylish. That’s a different amount of compassion than compassion about all these children, and their mothers and fathers, that are all starving to death. It’s a different degree of compassion all together.

So traveling broadens your sense of possibilities. It broadens your reality. So instead a living in a little reality, based on a little bit of experience, you live in a much bigger reality based on a much bigger experience. The larger your reality is, the larger your choices are. If you have a big perspective you can look and say, “Well here's something that happened. Stuff happens. What am I going to do?” You now have maybe a hundred choices instead of just ten. Because now you’ve seen how lots of other people from other cultures, might deal with that same kind of situation. And now you've seen how other people have other ways of looking at it. Traveling broadens your reality, which broadens your choices, which broadens the scope of your free will, which expands your awareness. When you take that idea further to include exploring the larger reality, then again it broadens your awareness.

There are all kinds of life, and not just in our reality system. There are many virtual realities. They're all doing similar kinds of things, but doing it differently. Why is that? What are the similarities? What are the differences? What is significant about the differences? What can I learn from those differences? Exploring the larger reality gives you another perspective. All of that is helpful in your growing up. When you travel, instead of being a citizen of the U.S., or a citizen of Japan, you become a citizen of the world. You become a citizen of the universe when you communicate with other entities that are part of this Universe. Maybe you even become a citizen of the larger reality in consciousness.

Traveling out of our universe can expand your general awareness. A larger awareness can give you a larger reality to live in. And you can learn to live in those realities. You don't have to just live here. Your mind can take you other places. You can learn to parallel process. You can begin to live in multiple realities at the same time. That's the nature of life.

One of the things that comes to mind here, is that sometimes I seem to stutter and can’t pronounce the words right. I have people write and say, "Were you drunk? You were slurring your words.” I’ll say, “No, actually what’s going on, is that I’m probably only about 30% in this physical reality frame during these interviews. I’m elsewhere most of the time gathering information, putting the words together, and trying to understand all of the minds that are going to listen. I am figuring out how I can put the information together in such a way that more people will understand it better."

While my mouth is talking, I'm also gathering information and trying to put it all together. Because I’m only 30% in this physical reality, I don’t work my body quite as well as I would with more focus. I’m not quite as coordinated, and I don’t speak as clearly. My lips get a little heavy and thick. Also when you talk for 3 hours your lips dry out, and they do get a little heavy and thick. So it’s because I’m only partially here when I do this.

If I had to give these interviews all from my intellect, and I was 100% here in this physical reality working out of my intellect, it would be awful. I wouldn’t have the scope or the breadth to explain things in a way that other people would see big pictures. Everything I say would be sliced and diced. There would be more intellectual process, and it would be more left-brain. The right-brain isn’t as tightly closed in as the left-brain. So, I don’t pronounce words very clearly sometimes. It's because there’s only a small percentage of me here manipulating the physical body that has to move its lips and talk. If I get to where I’m only 10% here, then my eyes tend to glaze as well, and then I don’t look like I’m really focused on anything.

Donna: I think Dennis (Mennarich) once described you, in one of your experiences, as having, "the thousand foot stare."

Tom: I have a lot of people who tell me that. It’s because I’m not entirely here. I’m doing other things in other places and I’m gathering information. I will sometimes just let my body go on auto, in which case, I might never blink and just stare. After a while people feel a little uncomfortable with that. It makes them feel uncomfortable that I’m not blinking and I’m staring at them. Actually I’m not staring at them at all. It’s just the position I left my body in and it just doesn’t have a signal to do anything else.

Donna: In your vast experience of accessing other realities, are other beings struggling as much with beliefs, fears and ego as we are? Are their challenges much the same?

Tom: Yes, but they’re not the same because their whole social situations are sometimes very different. Their bodies are sometimes very different. They have a different rule set. In general, the part that matters from the big picture is exactly the same. They're struggling, they're trying to learn to become Love, and they're not doing a very good job of it. There's lots of ego, lots of control, power, and force. It's the same, “What about me?” because that's the nature of consciousness.

That’s how consciousness grows up; it lets go of fear. Love is letting go of fear; it is getting rid of ego; it is getting rid of belief; it is getting rid of fear, and all the rest. Fear creates all these things. Ego and belief create a lot of fear. Not all belief, but quite a lot of it, is a creation of fear. And expectations is a creation of fear. Fear’s the big thing. You get rid of the fear and all this other stuff drops away. And what do you have left after the fear’s gone? Love is the end result.

Becoming Love is not this magic thing that you have to figure out how to do. What you have to do is get rid of the fear. You have to get rid of expectations, get rid of ego, and get rid of beliefs. When you get rid of all the stuff that limits you and gets in your way, you’ve arrived. You are Love
Sometimes people want a prescription on how to become Love. What steps do I take to become Love? But the steps you have to take is to work on yourself. You have to get rid of the bad habits. You have to get rid of the fear that you have. Then you are Love. Love is fearless; Love has no expectations; Love requires no belief; Love has to be freely given. Becoming Love is really letting go of all the things that are blocking you from expressing, and being, that Love.

You have that potential in you, but it’s just potential. You’re not there yet. You have to evolve through experience. Your “elf” has to, through experience, learn how to become a level sixty in its game. It can only do that through experience. You can’t buy your level sixty in our PMR, (Physical Matter Reality) like you can in a video game. And nobody can do it for you.

Donna: That brings us to judgments against all the evil that’s going on. Judgements about evil people and evil deeds. About how we look at others and say, “Well you know, I’m not like that.” But really what you have to do is only look at yourself. I think one of your primary statements in your My Big TOE is that the only thing you can change is yourself. And that judgment on anything else outside is really futile and non-productive.

Tom: Judging outside yourself can be non-productive for your own growth. But we do have to judge certain things because we have to interact in the world. We might say, “Well, that guy, with the real greasy hair, told us this car was owned by a little old lady who never drove it over thirty miles an hour. And although the car is twenty years old, it only shows 5000 miles on the odometer, and it has rust all over it. Maybe I don’t trust him. Maybe I should go someplace else. Maybe I should be very careful and should get a mechanic to look at that car.” That’s making a judgment. You make those judgments because we have to interact with others all the time.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:50 pm 
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 7231
Location: Ocala, FL
Donna: That’s a discerning judgement maybe?

Tom: Yes we do make discerning judgements, and to some extent that’s OK. If you’re just looking at the probabilities and making a decision, then that’s doing the best you can to get along in a sometimes very confusing, violent, and unpleasant place. When it becomes judgement made by not looking at the probabilities and data, it becomes a matter of prejudice. “Oh, look at that guy. He has this skin color, so you can’t trust him. He’s probably a thief.” Now your judgement has gone past the point being useful into the point of being harmful. It’s no longer judgement based on just the data. Now it’s judgement based on belief.

Judgement from doing a rational analysis of the data, looking at the probabilities, and saying “This is a bad part of town. There’s a lot of crime here. I don’t think we ought to drive through there tonight. I think we ought to go around.” That’s probably a rational decision to make. To say, “Oh, so-and-so came from that neighborhood therefore they’re probably a criminal.” That is not a rational decision to make. One decision is looking at the statistics of an area and making a decision on where to drive. The other is painting a person with the attributes of the area he comes from. Those attributes may or may not be true. Now you’ve got a belief. You have a prejudice, and that is wrong.

It’s a little tricky. You say, “Well then, don’t make any judgments.” We do have make some judgments. But we need to make them without belief, without prejudice, without ego, and without fear. If we get rid of all of those, then it’s looking at the data and making rational judgements. The judgments we want to get rid of are the judgments of comparison. “I’m better than that person.” “I’m more loving than them.” “This guy’s really evil. I don’t want to hang around with him.” We make these kinds of judgments and they’re mostly ego, belief and fear. If that’s where we’re coming from then the judgment is just wrong. That kind of judgement drags us down and is not useful.

Most people live their lives based on fear, ego, and belief. That’s what drives most of us to do what we do. For the average person walking around in this learning lab, fear, belief, and ego make up probably 99% of all their motivations for doing anything. Fear, belief, and ego influence the way people treat their children, and their spouse. It influences how people work. It influences how they relate to their co-workers and boss. Fear, ego, belief, expectations, needs, wants, and desires influences everything from their religion, to their jobs, to their families. It drives their lives. Fear, belief, and ego influence everything.

Well, that’s a problem. For somebody who makes 99% of their decisions based on fear, ego, and belief it’s fair to say, “Stop making judgments. Judgments are wrong. Give up making judgments." That’s a fair thing to say because that’s generally true. But that's not necessarily true. You can make judgments. You have to make judgments. Do you drive through this neighborhood? We just got out of a movie and it’s midnight. So are we going to drive through central LA tonight through this neighborhood? Well that's probably not a good idea, particularly if you’re driving in a BMW. That's probably a bad idea. Judgments aren’t bad in themselves. It’s just judgments based on fear are bad.

That’s true of anything not just judgments. When we learn how to meditate, and we tell our mind to settle down, the thing we have to do is quiet the monkey mind. It’s that monkey mind that’s chattering. What that monkey mind is doing is analyzing and judging. “Am I doing this right?" "Is this working?" "Am I in a meditation state?" "Oh, it’s not working." 'I must not be doing it right." "Maybe I should say my mantra quicker." "Maybe I should say my mantra slower." "Maybe I should think it harder." "Maybe I should try harder.” We start second guessing, judging, and analyzing. It’s this litany of monkey mind jabber that prevents us from ever being in a meditation state. We want to tell it to sit down and be quiet. People have a hard time quieting the monkey mind. They immediately start analyzing. As soon as somebody makes contact with something outside of them, the very next second it's, “Was that real?" "Was that me?" "What did it mean?" "I can’t tell." "I don’t know whether that was me or not.” They get all wrapped up in this stuff and they just killed the opportunity to learn something because of their constant judging.

When we are talking about blanket advice, “Don't make judgments." or "don't do this or that,” it confuses people. Because people know you have to make some judgments. But you need discernment when making judgements. You need to be able to look at the situation and decide what is a smart move, and what is not.

Being Love doesn’t mean becoming an idiot. Some people think, “If I became Love I would be this mumbling idiot who had nothing to say. I couldn’t talk. I couldn’t think. I’d just be experiencing Love and I’d turn into a rock. I'd turn into a happy rock.” It’s not like that at all. That’s not the point. People think that when you’re detached, that means you're removed, aloof, and no longer connected. No, being detached means you’re not attached to your ego. It means you’re not attached to your fear. That’s what we mean by being detached. It’s not that you can’t be compassionate. It’s not that you can’t care deeply. You can be detached and care deeply. Those two are not mutually exclusive. People have a hard time with those kinds of distinctions so they are worth talking about a little bit.

Yes, you can be completely detached. It just means there’s no ego, fear, or belief at the root of your Intentions. You’re Intentions are not working out of that stuff. That’s I mean when I say you have to be completely detached. It doesn't mean you have to let go of your sense of reality, sense of community, or sense of caring for another individual. Now you’re detached, so you’re above it all. You’re just floating above life. You neither care, nor not care, for anything. That's the wrong idea; it’s not that way at all. You should stop the judgment, and stop the chatter. I'm only saying that it is good advice for most people to just cut out judgment and chatter. Because most of what you do is that. That’s what prevents you from meditating. It’s all that chatter coming from the ego, fear and beliefs.

It’s important to understand that the source of your problems is you. It’s not somebody else. If you have to make comparisons, “Am I doing it right? This has just happened to me. Is that OK? I think I’m probably a lot more loving now than I was six months ago. What do you think?” Well, all of that’s OK. You do need some feedback. You do need to ask these questions, but it’s still your ego. You’ve heard the old saying, “Inquiring minds want to know”? Well, “Inquiring egos want to know.” is probably a better, more accurate, saying. Inquiring egos want to know, “Am I doing it right? Is that really somebody I’m talking to or is that just me?” An inquiring ego needs to know these things. “If it’s just me then I’m being a fool. If it’s somebody else then I’m excited. But how can I tell? I can’t tell. I’m paralyzed now with confusion and an inability to go forward.” It’s that sort of thing because inquiring egos want to know.

Did you ever go back and look at Albert Einstein or another historical figure? Wouldn’t it be neat to go and have a chat with them? Why? Inquiring egos would like to know what it was like. There is very little to be gained from that because growth has to come from inside you. It’s not about somebody else. It’s not about understanding somebody else’s viewpoint. It’s not about memorizing My Big TOE. It’s not about believing anything I say. None of that’s going to help you grow up.

Expanding your world? That’s good. But you don’t have to travel out-of-body, do remote viewing, or do lucid dreaming to grow up. That’s really not the point either. You don’t even have to travel. You could stay in the same town you were born in, and never leave Podunk, Oklahoma if you want to. You could do that and you could still grow up and become Love there. It would be a different path. But you could do that, perhaps through the path of service. That would be a way that you could do that without travel, and without expanding your awareness.

There are several paths to this. If you take the warriors path, or the path of knowledge, then travel is very helpful. It expands your awareness, expands your knowledge, expands your world view, and expands your picture. And things start making sense. On the path of knowledge things making sense is how you evolve. You learn, you grow, and you understand a bigger picture.

In Western culture, you, I, and most everybody we know tend to be left-brain dominant. That’s our natural path because we in the Western world want to know. We want to understand. It has to make sense to us or we can’t go there. “If I don’t know that the person I’m talking to is not me, then I can’t continue to talk to them.” See, we can’t understand unless we have left-brained connection to the process. It’s just the way we are in this culture.

Other cultures are different. They don’t have to do approach everything from a left-brained perspective. They can walk right into mystical understanding without the left-brain ever getting connected to it, because their culture supports that. Ours does not. You’re an idiot if you do that in our culture. You’re a woo-woo, right-brained, space cadet in our culture if you take that path. So most people in our culture don’t do that. They want the path of knowledge. Then if that’s your path you’re much better off to travel. Get out of Kansas, or wherever, and view the larger reality. To travel around this planet, and to travel outside of this universe, gives you a bigger reality and a bigger perspective. There's a more localized way to this path. People can do very well, and can grow up, even if they've never lived anyplace other than that one house their whole lives. But they still grew up anyway.

My point is, it’s not necessary to do these things but it is helpful if you happen to be of a mind frame and a culture where your natural path is through the path of knowledge. Then it becomes very valuable.

Donna: Would you say that there are many paths and one goal?

Tom: There are many ways to go. Even within each path there’s many ways. Even through the path of knowledge there’s a hundred different ways you can go. Then there’s the path of service, and the path of surrender. The path of surrender is typically a religious path. The western religions have migrated a bit from that. But if we look at the Hindu or Buddhist, if you’re on a serious religious path you become a monk. You go sit in a monastery. You surrender yourself to the higher power. That’s the path of surrender.

That doesn’t happen too much in western cultures because surrendering your life to a higher power is a low value activity in the west. It can be the highest value activity elsewhere, but not here. So, we don’t have a whole lot of westerners taking the path of surrender. You may have examples like Mother Teresa. Her's was probably the path of service. Her main thing was helping others. It wasn’t to convert others, preaching to others, or to explain things to intellects on the path of knowledge. It was just service - period.

My guess is, I didn’t know Mother Teresa, but from what I’ve read I would say she had very little use for dogma and rules. “Here’s the way we do it, here’s the way we see it, and you need to believe this.” I don’t think that was her strong suit. I think her strong suit was, “Here’s where I can help. Here’s where I can be of service.” The rest of it wasn’t that important. The service was important.

Then you have those like the Dalai Lama who are obviously on the path of surrender. They have given themselves up to something bigger than themselves and they grow through that process. The Dalai Lama is probably as well-traveled as any being here. He goes all over this planet, talking and interacting with people. So he’s active at the left-brain part, and he also is in charge of certain amounts of service that they do. You don’t have to just pick one and stick with it. It’s not like you pick one of these three. It can be all of these three. It can be bits and pieces of them tied together in interesting ways. There’s an infinite number of paths to the same conclusion.

Donna: Even though the Dalai Lama is connected with a certain religion, he recently was quoted, (and I’ll have to paraphrase because I don’t know the exact quote,) that we need to look outside religion or this world is not going to be on an evolving path. That was an interesting thought.

Tom: Yes, it’s absolutely correct. Just like Mother Teresa who applied the path of service within the structure of the Catholic religion. Catholicism has all sorts of structure, beliefs, and things to swear to, but that really wasn’t that important to her. It was the service.

The Dalai Lama is on the path of surrender. And he is one with the greater reality because he’s surrendered himself to it. He’s learned a lot, and he is a very wise man, but he’s not really tied to the concept of religion. You’ve got to rise above it. The reason you have to rise above religion is that religion is not about surrendering to a higher power. Religion is about structure, dogma, belief and creed. Belief is a problem. Belief goes hand in hand with fear. You have all these people tied up to “I’m right, you’re wrong." "My beliefs are right; you’re beliefs are wrong." "You will go to Hell; I won’t." "I’m better than you are.”

That’s just ego, fear, and belief talking. We need to get rid of that. The Dalai Lama sees that. He sees that “religion” isn’t the mystical attachment to the larger reality. To most people religion is a belief set to a bunch of dogma. He’s saying that’s not helping people. We need to get above this attachment to a bunch of dogma. That’s holding us back. That’s limiting us in what we can see and understand. It’s natural for him to come to that conclusion. It’s a little startling because here is a guy who is primarily more than anything else, a religious figure. He’s saying we have to let go of that.

He doesn’t mean that we need to let go of our surrender to the larger power, to the larger system. That’s not what he’s talking about. He’s saying we need to let go of religion. We need to let go of the creed, the dogma, and the stuff that makes us dislike and hate each other. All that negative ego junk and fear is what we have to get rid of. And that happens to be what most people think of when they think of religion. It’s not about the surrender. It’s about “my dogma, can beat up your dogma.” It’s that kind of childish ego approach.

It was a wonderful thing for him to say because I’m sure it made a whole lot of people think. The Dalai Lama is probably one of today's most primary symbols of religious activity. Whatever your faith is, everybody respects the Dalai Lama. He's obviously a wise man. He speaks of peace and love and nothing else. That’s what he talks about. He talks about coming together and being one.

All the things he says are hard for anybody to disagree with because he’s such a world-renowned man of wisdom and understanding. And for him to say that was extremely enlightening for lots of people.

1 YouTube videos featuring a discussion of Tom Campbell with Bruce Lipton:

2 Dean Radin is a researcher and author in the field of parapsychology. He has been Senior Scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), in Petaluma, California, USA, since 2001, and is on the Adjunct Faculty in the Department of Psychology at Sonoma State University. Wikipedia

3 Rhine, Joseph Banks (1895-1980) J.B. Rhine PhD was a botanist, psychologist and experimental parapsychologist. He introduced the term "parapsychology" to the academic community and founded the World's first dedicated parapsychology laboratory at Duke University in 1935 (now the Rhine Research Center). With William McDougall, Rhine established the Journal of Parapsychology in 1937 and also proposed the formation of the Parapsychological Association (established 1957). His research focused on the experimental study of ESP and psychokinesis (PK). Wikipedia

4 Where F is the gravitational force, G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the Earth, r is the radius of the Earth, and m is the mass of another object (near the surface of the Earth).

PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:52 pm 
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 7231
Location: Ocala, FL
Many, many, many thanks to ErneRose for the original transcript and an edited version. I spent a bunch of hours putting the transcript into the best version I could for the easiest understanding.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 8:14 am 

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 4:57 am
Posts: 4
Im a bit this is like a simulation where you come to improve your consciousness and become isnt real?
But then what is real...what is the use of improving it since you just come back here and you start all over from scratch?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 8:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
It is not that this is not real. It is that it is not the primary Reality and that you are much more than the you that you see in the mirror and so forth, were born here as. This has been discussed many times and is in Tom's books also. It is real, real experience and the most important for development of your self as the digital mind that is your base being. It is not however the only experience that you as an IUOC, your digital mind and base being, experiences. You exist also in NPMR but have a different purpose there than here. If these ideas are new to you, I suggest that you read Tom's books for a deep background of information to get up to speed understanding what we talk about.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 9:02 am 
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 7231
Location: Ocala, FL
Look at the example of a training simulator for pilots. Is it real? It is just data that the pilot is receiving in a big metal container. It is real enough that many pilots report that they completely forget they are in a simulator. But they are able to react and make decisions. If they make a mistake in the simulator, they don't really die but it is Game Over for that round.

So, here we are participating in our consciousness training virtual reality, and the same principles apply. This Virtual Reality is millions of times more sophisticated than that pilot's trainer. And while the pilot's trainer is programmed, our reality is probabilistic. When you die in this reality it is also Game Over for this round. But you just transition data streams, re-orient to your oversoul, do a life review, and start over.

While the pilot is trying to learn how to make decisions in life threatening situations, you are trying to evolve the quality of your consciousness. You do that through intense interactions and situations. You evolve by getting rid of your ego which comes out in fear and belief.

Does that help?

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC-06:00

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited