Organic Portals Part 2

How An Organic Portal Views the Organic World

Fortunately, because OPs can be intelligent, observant, and analytical, and because they appear to include some of our most famous scientists, some are able to describe for us how they see the world and their interior “life” very accurately and in great detail.

At the bottom of this is perhaps the answer as to the source of one of the most enduring debates of human history, i.e. good versus evil.

Why is it that there is so much strife in the world, why are so many divided over the promotion of war or peace, respect or disrespect, environmental protection or destruction, in short, a purely material self-serving outlook or a spiritual serving of others outlook?

Perhaps we are getting close to the answer, for the truth would seem to be that there is not and never has been a homogenous “we” (the human race) on the planet; “we” are not all alike, “we” do not see the world in the same way; “we” are not just a divided race, we are two different races.

It becomes clearer then why most “top scientists,” in their theories, do not consider the spiritual dimension, or quickly write off any “unconventional” theories. The OP scientist (and just how many OP scientists there are is discussed further below) has no notion whatsoever of “spirit” or of the existence of higher centres. They are incapable of experiencing these higher centres, and therefore their descriptions of the world are lacking them. And because they cannot experience them, they deny their existence for everyone, including for those who are capable of “seeing” what the OP is incapable of seeing. In a materialistic world, where organic portals are in their natural element, and souled beings are NOT, with organic portal science drawing the boundary between what is true and what is false, there is no place for the higher realms. It is “false” compared with the self-evident “truth” of materialism as experienced at all levels by the OP.

The organic portal in his role of scientists is bound to come to a materialistic explanation for the workings of the universe because that is all they know and are able to see. This is very clear when we look at the question of consciousness itself. The answers are very revealing.

The apparent ability of humans to be “self-aware” and the question of consciousness is one that has troubled the minds of philosophers, psychologists, scientists and the odd layperson, too, since time immemorial. Today more than ever consciousness is one of the most perplexing problems outstanding in science, and one that reflects on our very nature and relation to reality.

Western culture has seen various theories put forward as to the nature of human consciousness. Most of these can be included in one of two main schools of thought, i.e. the materialistic, Darwinist, evolutionary/”survival of the fittest” approach which proposes that mind/consciousness is an epiphenomenon which arises on top of material existence. From this scientific viewpoint the brain is a computer, with neurons and synapses acting as basic switches and “bits,” and consciousness is thought to “emerge” as a novel property of complex computation.

On the other hand, we have the more “spiritually” inclined school of thought, which holds the above to be wholly inadequate in explaining the phenomenon (undoubtedly fuelled by various religious teachings and creeds), and which holds to the concept of an ethereal spirit inhabiting the body/mind and expressing itself in the form of consciousness and that this is the fundamental aspect of life. Other schools mixing and matching from the two also exist.

To this point, it is interesting to look at just who are the various exponents on opposing sides of the argument. In one camp we have the many scientists and MDs of various disciplines such as the “neural Darwinism” of Edelman and the “memes” of Dennett and Dawkins. In the other camp we find “new age” gurus and authors and the odd respectable scientist such as David Chalmers, as well, of course, as the Church and the many twisted turns of Christianity.

We find there that many OP concepts have been utilized to co-opt spiritual truth. We find many OPs, imitating souled beings in their “spiritual searching,” promoting ideas and theories that are fundamentally flawed because they are “imitations” of the real thing, which the OP can never, by his very nature, perceive accurately.

Startling figures recently released show that 50% of all medical and scientific papers are published by the same small group of academics, who account for just 6% of the total number. If we take it as real that our reality is manipulated to a large extent, then the logical step to keeping the scientific world under control would be to ensure that it is populated with people that will reflect the views and opinions that suit a specific agenda.

The same is true for the spiritual and esoteric world. Fourth density STS makes sure that the religions, spiritual concepts, and nearly the entire metaphysical “world” is dominated by OPs to keep the “cattle in the fence.”

Indeed, a perfect strategy might be to ensure that top posts are held by organic portals allowing the controllers to rest safely in the knowledge that all mainstream theories and research will have a definite materialistic and non-spiritual slant, thus perpetuating the Darwinist evolved “monkey clinging to a godless lump of rock spinning in space” shtick and keeping those pesky souled beings under their spell.

One “top man” with a relatively new axe to grind is Richard Dawkins.

Richard Dawkins, while developing the singular theory that humans were the method developed by genes to perpetuate themselves, coined the term “meme” in 1976 as a way to describe and validate the idea outlined above, i.e., that consciousness is merely a function of groups of ideas or concepts in our minds. What differs, however, in his interpretation is that it is not the “machine” that collects and organizes data and then takes some predetermined action based on it, rather these “memes” take on a more hostile attitude and in a “virus”-like way, they invade the human mind (individual and mass) and compete with each other for dominance and, therefore, survival in the fertile ground that is the human neurological network.

In the words of Dr. Susan Blakmore (another chief “meme head”),

Memes are ideas, skills, habits, stories or inventions, that are passed from person to person by imitation. Like genes they compete to get copied, but unlike genes their competition is for space in our memories, and for the chance to get into books, magazines and television programmes. The survivors in this game are the ones we see all around us. Just as genes have created our bodies, so memes have created our minds and our cultures.

This explains, so the theory goes, our incurably religious nature, our unusual forms of cooperation and altruism, our use of language, and our ability to defy our genes with birth control and genetic engineering. We humans, alone on this planet, are meme machines. The term meme (to rhyme with cream or dream) was coined in 1976 by Richard Dawkins, in The Selfish Gene. The purpose of his book was to explain the power and generality of Darwin’s great insight. What Darwin had realized was that a simple mindless process can account for evolution — without a designer. If you have creatures that vary, and if only some of them can survive, and if the survivors pass on to their offspring whatever it was that helped them survive, then the next generation must be better adapted than the first — and so the process goes on. In more modern terms, if you have variation, heredity and selection, then you must get, as philosopher Dan Dennett puts it “Design out of Chaos without the aid of Mind.” And this inevitable process works on anything that is copied — not just genes.

Dennett had this to say about memes and viruses:

Dawkins points out that we can think of cultural items, memes, as parasites, too. Actually, they are more like a simple virus than a worm. Memes are supposed to be analogous to genes, the replicating entities of the cultural media, but they also have vehicles, or phenotypes; they are like not-so-naked genes. They are like viruses (Dawkins, 1993). As with viruses, there is a phenotype/genotype distinction, but just barely. Basically, a virus is just a string of DNA (or RNA) with attitude. And similarly, a meme is an information-packet (the information, not the vehicle) with attitude — with some phenotypic clothing that has differential effects in the world that thereby influence its chances of getting replicated.

Dennett is one of the most ardent defenders of the theory “mind as program,” although in Dennett’s theory, the mind is not one program, it is a collection of very simple programs which each do one thing very well. This is detailed in his book Consciousness Explained.

Dennett proposes that this collection of programs gives the impression of a unity that is the “self,” but that this self as unity does not exist. Dennett is giving a very accurate description of the way the mind works in an organic portal. It is also the way of the mind for an External Man, that is, the “souled” man who has not yet begun the work of building his magnetic centre which will permit the balancing and fusion of his three lower centres and the establishment of a permanent link with the higher centres.

Mouravieff writes:

When we ask someone who lives under this constant pressure of contemporary life to turn his mental vision towards himself, he generally answers that he has not enough time left to undertake such practices. … If he acquiesces, he will in most cases say that he sees nothing: Fog; Obscurity. In less common cases, the observer reports that he perceives something which he cannot define because it changes all the time.

This last observation is correct. Everything is in fact continually changing within us. A minor external shock, agreeable or disagreeable, happy or unhappy, is sufficient to give our inner content a quite different appearance.

If we follow up this interior observation, this introspection, without prejudice, we will soon note that our “I” of which we are so consistently proud, is not always the same self: the “I” changes.

As this impression becomes more defined we begin to become more aware that it is not a single being who lives within us but several, each having his own tastes, his own aspirations, and each trying to attain his own ends.

If we proceed with this experience, we will soon be able to distinguish three currents with that perpetually moving life: that of the vegetative life of the instincts, so to speak; that of the animal life of the feelings; and lastly that of human life in the proper sense of the term, characterized by thought and speech.

It is as though there were three beings within us, all entangled together in an extraordinary way.

So we come to appreciate the value of introspection as a method of practical work which permits us to know ourselves and enter into ourselves.

The inner content of man is analogous to a vase full of iron filings in a state of mixture as a result of mechanical action. Every shock received by the vase causes displacement of the particles of iron filings. Thus real life remains hidden from the human being due to the constant changes occurring in his inner life.

Even so, as we shall see later, this senseless and dangerous situation can be modified in a beneficial way. But this requires work; conscientious and sustained effort. Introspection carried out relentlessly results in enhanced internal sensibility. This improved sensibility in its turn intensifies the amplitude and frequency of movement whenever the iron filings are disturbed. As a result, shocks that previously were not noticed will now provoke vivid reactions. These movements, because of their continuous amplification, can create friction between particles of iron so intense that we may one day feel the interior fire igniting within us.

The fire must not remain a harmless flare-up. Nor is it enough that the fire smolders dormant under the ashes. A live and ardent fire once lit must be carefully kept alight by the will to refine and cultivate sensitiveness. If it continues in this way, our state can change: the heat of the flame will start a process of fusion within us.

From this point on the inner content will no longer behave like a heap of iron filings: it will form a block. Then further shocks will no longer provoke interior change in man as they did previously. Having reached this point he will have acquired a firmness; he will remain himself in the midst of the tempests to which life may expose him.

Thus we see that the idea that there is no unitary self is correct from the esoteric point of view. Only, we go further than Dennett. We hold that the possibility to create this “self” exists and that approximately 50% of the population of the earth at this time actually possess the latent resources with which to do this. This work involves being aware of our actions and responses and bringing our “programs” to light so that we can reach what lies behind, what is obscured by the many little “I”s, the real, unified “I”.

To further demonstrate the working of the organic portal scientific mind, we have the following from Francis Heylighen, a research professor at Free University of Brussels and editor of the Principia Cybernetica Project, “an international organization for the collaborative development of an evolutionary-systemic philosophy.” In attempting to convince us of the mind-as-machine theory, he defines this very situation and gives us an insight into and description of the mind and nature of an organic portal.

In “Is there a Hard Problem of Consciousness” he writes:

First person experiences or qualia are the essentially subjective, personal feelings or experiences that each of us have (e.g. the feeling of “redness” or “cold”), and that cannot be described by words, formulas, programs or any other objective representation. According to some consciousness theorists, such as David Chalmers, an agent without such qualia would merely be a “zombie”, a creature that may behave, sense and communicate just like a human being, but that would lack the most crucial aspect of consciousness. The “hard problem” of consciousness research then consists in elucidating the nature of first-person experiences.

We believe that this approach is essentially misguided. If the hypothetical zombie behaves in all respects indistinguishably from a person with consciousness, then the principle of the identity of the indistinguishable would force us to conclude that the “zombie” has consciousness. How else would we know that the people around us aren’t zombies? We assume they have conscious experience similar to ourselves because they behave in all other respects similar to us. But if you would take this reasoning seriously, then you might start to get nightmarish fantasies in which you are the only real, conscious person in the world, and all the others are merely sophisticated automatons that pretend to be like you.

Have you ever had this “nightmarish fantasy” that the world is populated by zombies? Well, guess what, it isn’t a fantasy. Half the people out there are exactly that: “sophisticated automatons that pretend to be like you.”

It is entirely fitting that he uses the term “agent” (the Matrix movie anyone?) for the type of programmed being, “be they made from flesh and blood or silicon chips.”

He goes on to say:

Agents do not sense the world as if they were impersonal, objective bystanders, that try to internally represent the world as it is, independently of themselves. For an agent a sensation is meaningful only to the degree that it relates to the agent’s goals, which, in practice, means that it is relevant to the agent’s individual survival.

Heylighen is describing the predator’s mind. This is startlingly close to the actual real-life scenarios of psychopath’s behavior and thinking that are presented in Cleckely’s book The Mask of Sanity.

The author concludes:

Consciousness is not some mysterious substance, fluid, or property of matter, but a level of organization emerging from abstract processes and relations. People who search for consciousness in elementary particles (a form of panpsychism that has been suggested as a way to tackle the “hard problem”), because they cannot otherwise explain where the consciousness in our brain comes from, are misguided. Their intuition may be correct insofar that particles, just like any other system, should be seen as relations rather than just as clumps of matter. But to attribute consciousness to these extremely simple types of relations is merely a way to evade the really hard, but solvable, problem of reconstructing the complex cybernetic organization of the human mind in all its details and subtleties.

Here we have seen the organic portals’ view of themselves. Whether or not the individuals named are organic portals is not the issue. They may be souled individuals who have not yet been able to see behind the lie of the Personality. As long as that has not happened, souled individuals will function and see the world and themselves as if they were organic portals. But it is clear that this manner of “explaining” consciousness is limited, explaining only that particular form of consciousness manifested by the Personality — the exterior man. It can describe the functioning of the OP or the exterior man; it cannot do justice to the consciousness of the Seeker engaged in the work of fusion to seat the soul.

We next look at the question of creativity.

We have seen that the OP learns through imitation. Meme theory posits that memes spread through imitation. And works of art, books, music, scientific ideas, all of these forms of “creation,” are merely the spreading of memes. A “creator” is someone who takes memes and finds new ways of putting them together, of arranging and rearranging. But nothing is ever really “created.”

This is because the moving centre of the organic portal is unable to draw energy from the higher emotional and intellectual centres, which do not exist for him. His creativity in the form of “love” is limited in its functioning to carnal love. Mouravieff writes:

It is important to remember that — except of course for adamic man — every creature taking part in organic Life on Earth, whether it has one centre to its psyche, two, or three as in the man of the VIth day [the organic portal], has only one higher centre. Indeed, on the hylic plane, the sexual centre is analogous to the higher emotional and higher intellectual centres, since it is by nature and structure whole, that is, indivisible.

Except when its energy is usurped by the three centres of the Personality, the sexual centre in its direct function, which is carnal love, has a goal that is well defined by the words: Be fruitful, and multiply. In other words, in a healthy organism, this centre, like the higher emotional and intellectual centres, knows neither doubt, nor hesitation, nor sadness, which is quite the opposite with what is too often the case with the three lower centres. (Gnosis, Book III, p. 143.)

The special function of the sexual centre in souled beings is explained further by the Cs:

Q: Does the recharging of the souled being come from a similar pool, only maybe the “human” pool?
A: No — it recharges from the so-called sexual center which is a higher center of creative energy. During sleep, the emotional center, not being blocked by the lower intellectual center and the moving center, transduces the energy from the sexual center. It is also the time during which the higher emotional and intellectual centers can rest from the “drain” of the lower centers’ interaction with those pesky organic portals so much loved by the lower centers. This respite alone is sufficient to make a difference. But, more than that, the energy of the sexual center is also more available to the other higher centers. 
Q: From where does the so-called “sexual center” get ITS energy?
A: The sexual center is in direct contact with 7th density in its “feminine” creative thought of “Thou, I Love.” The “outbreath” of “God” in the relief of constriction. Pulsation. Unstable Gravity Waves.

True creativity comes from this connection with “7th density in its ‘feminine’ creative thought of ‘Thou, I Love'” in its conjugation with the higher emotional and intellectual centers. Thus the souled individual is able to “create” in the sense of manifesting something new through his or her thought and the connection to 7th Density. This is a profound process for it ties us directly to the “Creator,” to the One.

The organic portal, when seeking to define this genuine creative impulse, is obliged to fall back upon the idea of the meme, of imitation. Look at Dennett describe the creative act:

This is a new way of thinking about ideas. It is also, I hope to show, a good way, but at the outset the perspective it provides is distinctly unsettling, even appalling. We can sum it up with a slogan: A scholar is just a library’s way of making another library.

I don’t know about you, but I am not initially attracted by the idea of my brain as a sort of dungheap in which the larvae of other people’s ideas renew themselves, before sending out copies of themselves in an informational Diaspora. It does seem to rob my mind of its importance as both author and critic. Who is in charge, according to this vision — we or our memes?

There is, of course, no simple answer. We would like to think of ourselves as godlike creators of ideas, manipulating and controlling them as our whim dictates, and judging them from an independent, Olympian standpoint. But even if this is our ideal, we know that it is seldom if ever the reality, even with the most masterful and creative minds. As Mozart famously observed of his own brainchildren:

“When I feel well and in a good humor, or when I am taking a drive or walking after a good meal, or in the night when I cannot sleep, thoughts crowd into my mind as easily as you would wish. Whence and how do they come? I do not know and I have nothing to do with it. Those which please me I keep in my head and hum them; at least others have told me that I do so.”

Mozart is in good company. Rare is the novelist who doesn’t claim characters who “take on a life of their own”; artists are rather fond of confessing that their paintings take over and paint themselves, and poets humbly submit that they are the servants or even slaves to the ideas that teem in their heads, not the bosses. And we all can cite cases of memes that persist unbidden and unappreciated in our own minds.

Let us look at this notion of “where do creative ideas come from?” In the external man, that is, the souled individual who has yet to begin the work of forming the magnetic centre, there is a connection, albeit veiled, with the higher centres. Because it is veiled, “ideas” which are able to pierce the veil will have the appearance of “appearing from nowhere.” They may well be genuinely creative acts; however, the Personality is unaware of this.

The arrival of a meme in the mind of the organic portal will also have the appearance of “appearing from nowhere,” but in this case, there is no veil that has been pierced, no higher centre from which it has received nourishment. Because the OP and the souled individual who has yet to begin esoteric work are describing the same surface features of an event — the “creative” act — they may well confound the genuine creative act with the mere propagation of the meme.

Thus, “creation,” our connection with “7th density in its ‘feminine’ creative thought of ‘Thou, I Love’,” is reduced to mere imitation and emptied of its expression of Love. If every creative act is an expression of Love, and every act of imitation is not, we can see clearly that we live in a world without Love.

Other Features of OPs

The internal structure of the OP is missing the higher centres, having only the three lower centres which form the Personality, the “I” of the small “I”s, and the “I” of the body, and a sexual centre cut off from the other higher centres. Mouravieff gives a clue to their nature in the following passage:

The adamic man who has even a vague consciousness of his real ‘I’ finds that this is a source of internal conflict that he cannot solve on a purely human plane. This conflict becomes more acute from the moment he actively enters esoteric work. It is then that he becomes weak and falls a prey to uncertainty, doubt, and mistrust towards himself, for the road that leads to Truth always passes through doubts. Throughout this work, we have seen several times the considerable sum of efforts and super-efforts that are demanded of the adamic man, who, after having recognized his position in life, resolutely crosses the First Threshold and climbs the staircase to attain and pass the Second Threshold with its promised Redemption. (Gnosis, Bool III, pp. 131-132)

So one of the features of an organic portal is a lack of “internal conflict and resulting doubt.” There are people who never doubt their thoughts or what they are told or what they have chosen to believe. No matter the circumstances, the failures or set-backs, these people are unassailed by self-questioning or questioning of the system. How many of you reading this site were prompted to do so because of a feeling of conflict or doubt about what was “out there” and what some intuition or inner knowing was suggesting? The character Morpheus sums it up pretty well in The Matrix: “You are here because you know something.”

An OP does not have this inner conflict, does not react to evidence of “more to life” than material existence. But even if the OP is not beset with this type of doubt, they can have a form of “inner conflict” that is Personality-based. Mouravieff explains below:

Pre-adamics are not subject to these fits of anguish and these permanent inner conflicts; not that they live in perfect peace, or are never troubled by conflicts — far from it — but in most cases their conflicts take place in the interior of the Personality, between different groups of the little ‘I’s which produce these conflicts. As a result, the character of the conflicts is purely psychic, and they are generally resolved by some kind of compromise.

The more acute conflicts that take place in pre-adamic man occur between the ‘I’ of the Personality and the ‘I’ of the body. We have dwelt at length on this subject in volume II of Gnosis, emphasizing the fact that the ‘I’ of the body usually wins over the weak, changing Personality, which capitulates without much of a struggle whenever it is a question of satisfying the stomach or the sexual appetites.

Justification is then sought in slogans such as those which allow us to think that it is normal to ‘act like everyone else,’ or in a maze of paradoxical reasons that are simply lies to oneself. (Gnosis, Book III, p. 132)

The inner conflicts of the organic portal are not about his relationship to the world in the sense of his fundamental “Being” in this world. He cannot become preoccupied by such questions, because they arise from the influence of the real ‘I’. There can be no contradiction between the organic portal and his Being in this world because he is fully OF this world, he is the expression of it as a material realm.

The souled individual, however, is different, having “fallen” into this world, retaining a memory of the higher worlds which come to him through the real “I”. The tension between this “re-mind-er” of his true nature from the real “I” and the fallen nature of his Personality is what creates the potential for esoteric work, is what creates the grounds for the heating of the crucible as the two enter into conflict. [The conflict described in alchemical texts, the tests of the Knight on the Quest for the Grail.]

But the inner conflicts of adamic man, who often enters esoteric work because he has reached the last extremity of moral bankruptcy, cannot be resolved by compromise, as there is no place for this kind of solution in the consciousness of the real ‘I’ from which he receives his calls. In him, it is the ensemble formed by the entire Personality, with the ‘I’ of the body, an ensemble which, directly or indirectly, is often made to act by the sexual centre, which flees from the voice of conscience, i.e. of the real ‘I’. He then has a choice, either to obey his real ‘I’ and triumph over himself, or to flee from this invisible Combat into self-calming and powerful illusions offered by a life of lying to himself.

In every case, if he triumphs over himself, which is what will enable the adamic man to resolve the inner conflict of the moment, this will inevitably involve a modification of his attitude towards outer life. Generally, the result will be conflict with those closest to him, unless the latter follow him step by step in his esoteric evolution, which is rare.

This does not mean that those who are near and dear to him wish him any ill; on the contrary, it is nearly always his good that they have in view: the conflict arises simply from their different conceptions of what is real. If those who surround the individual in question are pre-adamic, they could never agree with him, being incapable of understanding the reasons for his change of attitude and unable to grasp the nature of the end he pursues. They will automatically become the instruments of the General Law, which makes sure that those who step out of line are brought back into the fold. This is how ‘a man’s foes shall be of his household.’ (Ibid.)

Mouravieff describes the situation for the Seeker, but only hints at the activity of the control system when he mentions the “General Law” or “A” influences. The Cs have said, in the session quoted above, “the Control System will seek to insert even more ‘units’ into that person’s life.” We have also seen how the organic portal’s natural role has been co-opted by 4D STS. This would imply that the problems arising from different conceptions of what is real will be used, magnified, and stoked to the wildest proportions imaginable by the conscious activities of the Controllers as they seek to feed themselves and prevent the Seeker from walking the Way.

Pre-adamic man cannot be subject to inner or domestic conflicts of this kind. He rarely receives ‘B’ influences. If he vaguely senses their existence, they only appear as a curiosity to his eyes and do not have the power to trouble him right down to the depths of his psyche. In him, the sexual centre reigns supreme, whether by its direct action that takes the form of carnal love, or by an indirect, ‘psychological’, action of the psyche to which his Personality submits. Like adamic man’s, his Personality contains three lower centres, but that is all. Equally underdeveloped and unbalanced, but sheltered from the troubles provoked by the ‘B’ influences, this Personality lives and acts obedient to the commands of the sexual centre. Nothing within him withstands the latter, which is known in contemporary language as temperament.

In the arena of the ‘exterior’ life of human society, dominated by the ‘A’ influences, the adamic man who has crossed the First Threshold proves to be weaker than his pre-adamic counterpart, and the greater the strength he acquires during his progress on the Staircase, the greater is his weakness when faced with life. (Gnosis, Book III pp. 132-133)

This last comment gives another clue. The pre-adamic being is IN his or her environment in a way that an adamic being is not. The world with its “A” influences holds great attraction. The activity of the sexual center seeks gratification in a world more and more sexually charged through media and open displays of sexual imagery. The “I” of the body can exist happily on the level of a basic animal existence governed by the lower centers, but the developing real “I” in the process of activating the higher centers cannot. And throughout it all, the soulless being doesn’t feel uncomfortable, unless they have been caught up in the brainwashing of Church or other institutions intended to control the souled. We see also that the organic portal will not react to “B influences” (which are evidence of a greater or spiritual reality) when they intrude upon his daily life but will rather quickly seek to dismiss them. On the other hand, a potentially souled being may struggle greatly to “fit in” this environment, and, by virtue of the fact that his or her lower centers are just as under-developed as the OP’s, be almost indiscernible to an outside observer.

The discussion in Quantum Future School continued:

J: Ok, but surely there would be much more evidence of this in our interactions with people, I mean there are 3 billion of them!

L: There is a lot of evidence.  But we are programmed by the system, through the OPs, to either misperceive, misinterpret, or simply refuse to believe the objective evidence.

As to the larger picture, there is also evidence that, in our interactions with them, they are prevailing.  Just look at the state of the world right now.  They are running the show.

And because they have acted as the “portals” of the 4D STS manipulations (ya really gotta read this “operators and things” to see how it all works!) — what we see in our world is exactly what the 4D STS wants.

But again, remember what Cs said: the really good ones are SO good that it is almost impossible to identify them.  And that is exactly what we are trying to formulate here: how to identify????  How to keep from “dancing” with them so as to conserve enough energy to grow our awareness so that we can SEE the unseen better, so that we can be colinear with others who see … so that our frequencies will mutually and reciprocally commutate … so that there will be sufficient “leaven” to leaven the whole loaf at the point of “splitting of universes” which will guide our trajectory to the 4D STO reality?

Or so it seems.

H: We have learned that the “best” OPs are really, really hard to identify, even after a long period of study. Factor in that in the social circles within which most if not all of us move, there might be a preponderance of the better ones. I would guess that the people on this list are fairly well educated, they have internet access, they read regularly (right there, that sets us apart from most people these days), and we read things which have more meat on them than a Danielle Steele novel. We most likely do not spend much time with people who live in front of the TV. And if the people around us do this, then we will think they are “like us.”

But consider that people like Dawkins and Sagan are/were very possibly OPs. What in their day-to-day lives would tell you they were OPs? They married, had families, live lives which are the “model” for our society. And therein may very well be a clue. Our models of “life” are probably based upon the “perfect” OP life. So when we go to make the comparison, we may be comparing OPs to OP models. Of course it is hard to see! We have ingrained the OPs, soulless existence as the “norm.”

Maybe it is the “souled” individuals who will be easier to see, they will stick out like sore thumbs because they are hurting like crazy.

L: Oh, excellent point!  And just as you were writing it, I was reading in Cleckley some ideas that make it really understandable why he could not quite get to the problem … he was using models of psychiatry to try to formulate what is “wrong” with the psychopath … and those models are essentially flawed — they are created by OPs!

No wonder the poor guy was driving himself nuts trying to figure this one out.  All the psychiatric models say that the psychopath is the sanest of individuals.  They say that people who are “paranoid” — even if everything else about their lives is successful — MUST be deeply psychotic — even IF those things that they are “paranoid” about are possible, not absurd, and even explainable in logical terms.

See how cleverly the system is set up?

It is set up to establish as an incontrovertible FACT, that anybody who suggests a “deeper” reality is crazy — or being taken in by a cult — or is delusional — or psychotic — etc.

But OPs — those who aren’t defective so that their machines don’t act up like the psychopath does — in their firm commitment to what you can weigh and measure as the only REAL reality, are the arbiters of our existence.

What did the Cs say?  STS worships the physical universe.  For that orientation, that is all that really matters: matter.

And, of course, their pin-pointed devotion to it ensures that what they worship is what they will become … primal matter.

J: So the idea is that the 3 billion OPs are fundamentally the same as the psychopath subjects that Cleckley details, from the POV of not having a real feeling, intuiting, “reading between the lines,” soul aspect to their being, but they are simply too good at mimicking actually having these qualities for us to be able to discern the difference and they simply don’t have the flaws that the psychopaths have?

L: That seems to be the point.

And we started out studying them in the really “flawed” aspects where the “mask of sanity” was not too securely tied on.  Our interactions written about in the Adventures Series and others, woke us up in a startling way. After a certain period of time, we realized that there was something much deeper than just simply bald-faced lying, theft and general spiritual corruption going on out there in New Age land.

Since we have a couple of clinical psychologists in the school, there was quite a bit of off-list discussion about the possible dynamics, and that led to the idea of psychopathy. Of course, the most available work on this has to do with Hare’s work with psychopaths in prison.  That did not quite “fit the bill.” Yes, the casual lying for which none of them seemed to feel any shame even when exposed with evidence was there. Yes, the complete “fabrication” of their version of reality was there. Yes, it was evident that there was absolutely no real empathy there — they could spout grand words about their interests in helping children, their “philanthropic activities,” and charities, etc., and then turn around and wilfully conspire to expose our children to danger by stealing and publishing very personal information, as well as writing about them in a libellous and defamatory way in public.

It’s one thing for them to be hostile toward us, our work, our group, and the fact that they were mad because we refused to allow them to use us to either destroy our work or use it for their own financial gain. It was something else altogether to put our children in harm’s way deliberately and with vicious intent to hurt us through such maneuvers.

What was even more interesting was the completely irrational nature of the attacks. On the one hand, they would accuse us of being a cult and making tons of money off the readers of our site, never mind that we barely scrape by. At the same time, they would write lies about how we lived in squalor and how much our children were suffering from filth, vermin, and God knows what else. The one thing that was clear about these attacks — based on our personal interactions with Vincent Bridges — was that the main reason they were angry was because we had been their object of prey — they had seen us as a quick ticket to big bux selling their seminars and books to our readership, all the while making sure that our own work was buried. And when we saw through them, and refused to be prey — it was like the fury of a predator whose dinner has escaped.

So, there we were, observing them while they wrote noble-sounding essays in public exuding sympathy and the milk of human kindness — all the while they were libelling us, defaming us, and — behind the scenes — trying to destroy our work and our family. And when we published the FACTS — with witnesses and evidence — they simply brushed it off and claimed that WE were lying. It was astonishing to me to see such behavior. I simply could NOT conceive of human beings with literally no empathy, no shame, and utterly no ethics whatsoever. Especially when they were so capable of giving the impression that they had them and further, were able to convince others who simply believed every word they said, and never did their own checking or asking questions. I’m sure they relied on the laziness of their readers.

So, it was this astonishment, this puzzlement, at their behavior that actually drove us to investigate. Had they behaved as “normal human beings” — as we expect normal, ethical, human beings to act — most especially those who claim to be knowledgable seekers of higher knowledge — we would never have followed the threads that led to the revelations we have presented on the site. And, as the puzzlement grew, as we dug deeper, we began to see that there was a whole lot more to this puzzle than met the eye.  We realized at some point that the characteristics of the psychopath were like caricatures — writ large and in flashing neon.  Yes, we certainly saw them in the actions of these people, but the niggling idea that these are things we experienced with other more “normal” people who never did any of the horrible things that say, Ira Einhorn or O.J. Simpson, or even Vincent Bridges would do, just wouldn’t go away.

So, we moved to another area of study: Cleckley.  And he does, indeed, talk about some psychopaths who have never gone “over the line” in social terms.  They are successful doctors, lawyers, even psychiatrists …

What we now suspect is that there is an even more covert “layer of the onion” on this subject: the effective and efficient organic portal.  The PERFECT Mask of Sanity.  But more than that: the perfect Mask of Consciousness.

If we accept, as Mouravieff describes, that the organic portal has the possibility of moving forward in his own evolution during the next cycle, moving from pre-adamic to adamic, and if we also admit that the current cycle is approaching its end, there is the following possibility. We are living in the period when a certain number of OPs have achieved an imitation of the souled being which is so realistic, so developed, that they can only come back as adamic beings. They cannot evolve any further within these bodies.

This forces the Seeker to develop his or her discernment, to refine it continually in order to “see” finer and finer degrees of manipulation happening around and to us. It will heat the crucible to higher and higher temperatures, creating in turn the conditions of liberation.

Summing Up

Let’s pull together the various threads and weave a tapestry which illustrates our current situation.

By “going for the gold,” that is, desiring to experiment with physicality, our consciousness unit fell from its state of “grace,” that is, a 3D STO existence in a “semi/sort of” 4D state aligned with 4D STO into a 3D STS world already populated with an anthropoid race who served as organic portals, the bridge linking 2nd Density to 3rd Density. Having fallen, and thereby losing awareness of its connection to the higher centers, the souled race was in no way different from the anthropoid race when seen from the exterior. He differed only in having the potential to reconnect with the higher centers by developing the magnetic center. The DNA which seated these higher centers was burned away — disconnected and dispersed in the cell structure. However, the ability to get it back remains.

This 3rd Density STS world in which adamic man “awoke” was not his natural habitat. It is the world of the anthropoids, the dead who think they are living, the world of the organic portal, a world of matter and material explanations of existence. It is a farm run and controlled by 4D STS to provide their nourishment. It is the world of the three lower centers and a sexual center limited to a role of procreation through carnal love. It is a world organized on the basis of hunger, sex, and fear.

The souled race came into this world and became part of it, interbreeding with the native race until the genetic pool became thoroughly mixed. Now, the two races are so mixed that they can both be found within the same family.

More than that, the models we are taught and forced to internalize are based upon the “natural” inhabitant of this realm, the organic portal. Thus, material explanations are the norm. The inner life of the organic portal, cut off from the higher centres, is the “norm.” Should we then be surprised that we live in a world which is more and more “mechanical,” which treats individuals as “units,” where “creativity” is the replication of existing ideas as in a production line, where “franchising” and “branding” are so important in the economic world, where democracy is a multiple-choice test every few years rather than the creative input of individuals into the organization of their lives, where people who “see” other beings, other worlds, are shipped off into prison camps for the “mentally disturbed,” where culture consists of endless copies of the same product with slight modifications to fool the consumer that it is something “new” and “revolutionary”? And on and on it goes.

And it is all organized to prevent YOU from advancing, to distract YOU, to keep YOU concerned with a husband, wife, mother, father, daughter or son who is beyond your ability to “save” because he or she cannot be “saved” — they are fundamentally different from you, they do not have the DNA which would allow a soul to “seat” so as to enable an understanding of the possibility of a higher life. Worse, they are draining you of vital energy and thus denying you any chance of developing your magnetic centre, with the final destination of this energy being 4D STS. It feeds and maintains the Matrix. In these interactions, you are nothing but a battery and the organic portals in your life are the “feeding tubes.”

You need that energy to advance. It is yours, and it is your right to claim and retain it. But to do so, you must stop this “dance of death” with the organic portals in your life.

Laura addressed the importance of this in a message to members of the Quantum Future School.

Q: So, based on what you said, right now I am thinking that seeking a “definitive difference” between OPs and souled individuals might be practically accomplished more easily by learning to “see” souled individuals, as you say. Of course this is further complicated by the fact that souled STS 4D candidates ALSO exist and STS actions by STO candidates are also tossed in the mix.

L: Yes. And we might think that souled individuals are those who are “suffering” in some way. And some of them that suffer the most, might actually “act out,” and they might be classified as “crazy” or whatever because they simply can’t adjust to the emptiness of the 3D STS life.

But of course, because they also have a strong create/expand-survive impulse, they may learn to knuckle under, to “play the game,” to “do the right thing.” In these cases, they live lives of quiet desperation.

And they can be programmed so early on that the power of their soul is channelized into the “belief systems,” so that, as has been pointed out, their soul energy is what is feeding and sustaining the Matrix. In fact, I think that this is the usual thing, and even the purpose of the whole thing.

Q: Hmmm … why do we need to specifically identify OPs at all?

L: Ultimately because “dancing” with them — or being intimately involved, or unaware of the true nature of the interaction with them — is what keeps us drained and unable to achieve sufficient graduation frequency. IF — and that’s a big “if” — we can really and truly interact with them without them draining our energy — all fine and good.

But, the likelihood is that we can’t do that until we can truly SEE — and we can never SEE until we have sufficient energy to do so … and we can’t have the energy to do so as long as we are “dancing” with the OPs in our lives. So it’s like a Catch 22.

You can’t see them until you stop interacting. And you can’t stop interacting until you can see them.

So, you have to discover the clues to the program — and to “experiment” and watch for “reactions” in the Matrix — and base some choices on the most ambiguous evidence.

If your decision is correct, it will result in saving enough energy to be able to see that your decision was correct!

Q: Maybe for our purposes it is better right now to focus on the “A” influences and the “B” influences.

L: In a very real and important sense, determining the nature of our relationships IS the very process of discerning “A” influence and “B” influences. It is the most important work we can do. We can accomplish NOTHING else without doing this first. You cannot be “unequally yoked.” You cannot serve two masters.

Q: Instead of labelling definitively the more subtle cases of OPs, maybe it is better to focus on identifying within ourselves how much energy is being drained in any interaction. This can be done I think. And this is the crucial distinction that needs to be made, IMO. I think this is essentially how we are doing it already …

L: Indeed. And when we discern that our energy is being drained in an interaction … we are then faced with a very difficult situation especially if the OP in our lives is of the type that is not overtly “defective,” so to say. It may be a “doggie” type that is very nice to have around most of the time, though demanding and draining.

For example: if we are in a relationship where we feel we “need to get away now and then to recharge” or something, but in most other respects, the relations are satisfactory, we may be involved with an OP that is very subtle and good in terms of draining our energy off.

It may take years to realize that we are really getting nowhere in terms of spiritual growth, even if we do sort of manage to “hold the line” with our regular “getaways” or other coping mechanisms we develop in our relations.

To sum up, knowledge of the concept of the organic portal is essential to soul advancement, yet putting that knowledge into action can be problematic. It requires the Seeker to analyse his or her relationships in depth, to see which are draining, and to take action to test the ideas related above in order to free up the energy necessary to develop spiritually. But it is even more important to analyse one’s own self and responsibility (or lack thereof) in the relationships in question. It’s easy to get caught up in the idea that one is “special” and superior to others, to assume one has a soul to speak of, and to project one’s failings onto others. This type of self-importance is a stumbling block on the Way to the development of a soul, and when combined with a desire to “identify the OP” in one’s life, is a recipe for disaster. In fact, as Mouravieff makes clear, in one sense, the potentially souled is in a very similar condition as the OP: his or her centers are not properly developed. In another sense, they are worse off: while their higher centers are functioning, the connection with them has been broken, and their lives are one of struggle – with life and with oneself. Until one has achieved some level of self-development, there is little difference between the OP and the non-OP than the POTENTIAL for a soul. It is still hard work.

Update

In the years since we first discovered Mouravieff and Cleckley’s work, another source has come along confirming much of the information presented in the above analysis. Psychologist Kazimierz Dabrowski’s Theory of Positive Disintegration presents a system of five levels of personality development, features of each level, essential differences between ‘types’ of humans (including psychopaths), and clinical observations of individuals at each level. According to Dabrowski, some 60% of the population are categorized as Level I — primary integration, a small subgroup of which includes psychopaths. These individuals share the features ascribed to OPs in the analysis above, including lack of inner conflict (except for conflict between low-level instincts like sex drive, aggression, socialization — there is no existential conflict or struggle between the higher and lower in oneself) and inability to change. They lack the genetic potential to develop and tend to “fit in” with existing social structures and norms. In fact, the norms of society are created and shaped by Level I, providing a source struggle for those at higher levels.

Only at Level III (multilevel disintegration) and higher does the potential for development show itself, and even then only as a potential, achieved by a minuscule number of individuals at Level V — secondary integration. The inner disintegration experienced by Level III individuals can be debilitating, and cause a feeling of alienation in a world that is controlled by those at Level I, who dismiss many such experiences as “mental illness.” Dabrowski’s work provides a detailed psychological framework in which to place compare the more esoteric views of Mouravieff and the Cs and is probably the only modern psychological theory to take such ideas seriously.