The Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive

[Joe]

I'm rereading SH at the moment and I came across this passage where Laura quotes Mouravieff:

... as we have already stated, all the 'A' [influences] have counterparts which neutralise them - ['B' influences].

In Gnosis I, Mouravieff wrote:

The black arrows represent influences created within life by life itself, this is the first variety of influence by which man is surrounded. These are called 'A' influences. We will notice that they are distributed almost equally over all the surface of the circle of life. As in the case of all radiant energy in nature, their effect is inversely proportional to the square of the distance; thus man is subject most of all to arrows influencing him from those immediately around him. He is pulled every instant by the way they act at that moment.

The influence of the 'A' arrows on exterior man is imperative; driven, he wanders in the circle of his life from birth to death, following a broken line which is sometimes subject to dangerous changes of direction.

The ensemble of 'A' influences forms the Law of Chance or Law of Accident. Man is subject to its rule, yet if we examine the figure more closely we will perceive that each black arrow is counterbalanced, neutralized in some other part by another arrow equal in force and diametrically opposed, so that if we had left them to effectively neutralize each other the resultant force would have been equal to zero. This means that in their ensemble the 'A' influences are illusory in their nature, although the effect of each one of them is real, so that exterior man takes them for reality.

I thought that what cancelled out A influences were other A influences?

T.C.

Yes, that is in fact a typo in the first few runs of SH. It will not appear in future print runs. The important point is that the influences of normal life, like the ones that you see on billboards, your TV screen and that you hear repeated by friends and family, serve only to inhibit evolution, they are a morass of contradictions. For one simple example: 20 years ago we were all still told to eat red meat. Then we were told to stop and go more vegitarian. These are contradictory influences, and they cancel each other out for sure, but even if only one was promoted, it would not help humanity evolve. The same goes for differing eligions etc etc.

So maybe Mouravieff was not explaining the process very well. These influences do neutralize each other because of their contradictory nature, but even if there were no contradictions, following 3D influences would still not lead to evolution. From this point of view, to say that they neutralize each other is a bit misleading. As Mountain Crown has said, the only thing that really neutralizes the illusory power of such influences is the other more subtle influences of a higher order

 

[T.C.]

Thanks, Mountain Crown and Perceval, for the explanations.

 

[Rich]

So maybe Mouravieff was not explaining the process very well. These influences do neutralize each other because of their contradictory nature, but even if there were no contradictions, following 3D influences would still not lead to evolution. From this point of view, to say that they neutralize each other is a bit misleading. As Mountain Crown has said, the only thing that really neutralizes the illusory power of such influences is the other more subtle influences of a higher order

To give another analogy take the propaganda a nation gives to it's citizens to whip them up into a patriot ferver to go fight in wars. The net result is you have two nations killing each other. On the other hand if you have individuals who recognise the lies and use their creative energy to wake up others to these facts the effect is a positive one. Harnessing the B-influences.

 

[Infiniteness]

Hi all,

I was reading the "The Secret History of the World" and I dont understand one of the concepts. Its on page 63 where Laura talks about where the infinite potential spits. Heres a quote "It can be said that infinite potential spits is fundamentally Binary- on and off- to be or not to be. That's is the first division" I kind of it get it in someways but still dont have a clear picture about it. I did a search but nothing came up, so I just decided to post it here asking for help to better understand it. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

 

[henry]

I think it is something like this:

Infinite potential is the absolute. It is everything - in potential. In order for that potential to manifest, it must split. The first split is into Being on the one hand and Not-Being on the other. This split is then manifested as the two forces of Creation and Destruction (or Entropy) in the lower Densities. Being and Non-Being is the split that manifests in 6th Density. But there can be no such 'thing' as Non-Being except as an idea.

In the lower Densities, we see how the interplay between the two forces of Creation and Entropy plays out.

It's been awhile since I read SHOTW, but I think that is a good summary of what Laura is describing. If someone else has a clearer understanding, fire away!

 

[herondancer]

Hi all,

I was reading the "The Secret History of the World" and I dont understand one of the concepts. Its on page 63 where Laura talks about where the infinite potential spits. Heres a quote "It can be said that infinite potential spits is fundamentally Binary- on and off- to be or not to be. That's is the first division" I kind of it get it in someways but still dont have a clear picture about it. I did a search but nothing came up, so I just decided to post it here asking for help to better understand it. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Hi Infiniteness,

I'll give it a shot. :) It might be helpful to consider the sentences before and after your quote:

But Infinite Potential to BE includes - by definition of the of the word "infinite" - the potential to not be. And so Infinite Potential "splits" into Thought Centers of Creation and Thought Centers of non-being. It can be said that Infinite Potential is Binary - on or off - to be or not to be. That is the first "division".

Since absolute non-being is an impossible paradox in terms of the source of Infinite Potential to BE, the half of the consciousness of Infinite Potential that constitute the IDEAS of non-being - for every idea of manifestation, there is a corresponding idea for that item of creation to NOT manifest, "falls asleep" for lack of a better term. [...]Consciousness that mimic death then "falls" and becomes Primal Matter. [...] What this means is that the '"self observing self" at the level of the Master of the Universe is constituted of the initial division between Being and Non-being [...] You could picture this as an open eye observing a closed eye.

In order for the All to experience itself in every possible way, every possibility of manifestation, from atoms to galaxies to things we can't even conceive of, must be matched by the idea that each of these things cannot exist. So Infinite Potential "divides itself" in order to manifest all the ways of being and not-being. A little further on in that section is the idea that the half of Infinite Potential that embodies non-being becomes Primal Matter. Primal Matter (the sleeping half of creation embodying the idea of non-being) is what Being "clothes itself" in, in order to play out all the creative possibilities that lie between these two poles of Being and Non-being. Thus we get atoms, galaxies, gerbils, comets, human beings, whales, chickens, Lizzies etc. It has been said that everything we can possible imagine already exists somewhere in the All. Otherwise how could we imagine it?

A little further on we find:

These "thoughts of being and nonbeing" interact with one another - the observer and the observed - like a viewer looking into a mirror. Creation manifests between the viewer (that is, Being) and the mirror (Primal Matter). It is at once real, because it consists of matter informed by consciousness, and unreal, because it is ultimately composed of only consciousness (Being) acting on consciousness (which is "sleeping").

(all parentheses added by me)

Then there is this from Statement of Principles of the Fellowship of the Cosmic Mind:

2.2. On Cosmic Duality

Within the impulse of the Cosmic Mind to Be ALL, exists the impulse to not-Be. Just as a mirror is needed to see one‘s own reflection, Being must contemplate non-Being in order to know itself. However, non-Being, as a Thought of the Cosmic Mind, does not and cannot acquire the preeminent reality of Being. Just as one‘s reflection only takes an apparent or virtual form of one‘s self, the Thought, or contemplation, of non-Being only takes an apparent or virtual form; absolute non-Being cannot, by definition, exist. This form, Matter, is sleeping Consciousness. It exists, yet it is a mere shadow of Consciousness. As such, it becomes the vehicle or instrument of Consciousness, containing the Potential to remember itself and awaken to its Divine source.

Hope that helps you a little.

Herondancer

 

[Infiniteness]

Thank you Galahad and herondancer for you help, it really helped.

 

[GranMoomie]

Hello everyone,

Could someone please clue me into what "urano-diurnal force" means?

Quote: "Returning to the remarks of Fulcanelli in describing the tranmission of the knowledge of the 'descent of a venerable God', further explicating the matter by telling us that Diodorus was on the right track when he said, 'this star was not one of those which people the heavens, but a certain virtue or urano-diurnal force, having assumed the form of a star in order to announce the birth of the Lord among us', .....

I've defined each word, and what I come up with doesn't seem to fit the context.

Thank you,
granmoomie

 

[JonnyRadar]

GranMoomie,

I think in this context "urano-diurnal" means something in the sky that appears in the daytime, or on a daily cycle. I could be wrong but I think diurnal in this context means a little of both - i.e., something that's cyclical and also appears during daylight. "Uranal" refers to the sky or something associated with the sky.

Remember, it was Diodorus, translated from the 1st century. It may simply have been his way of saying "it was some kind of force that appeared in the sky, not a literal star."

Hello everyone,

Could someone please clue me into what "urano-diurnal force" means?

Quote: "Returning to the remarks of Fulcanelli in describing the tranmission of the knowledge of the 'descent of a venerable God', further explicating the matter by telling us that Diodorus was on the right track when he said, 'this star was not one of those which people the heavens, but a certain virtue or urano-diurnal force, having assumed the form of a star in order to announce the birth of the Lord among us', .....

I've defined each word, and what I come up with doesn't seem to fit the context.

Thank you,
granmoomie

 

[GranMoomie]

Thank you Jonathan,

Whenever I hit a snag, I do the get quite and ask my higher consciousness to clarify, sometimes it's instant, and sometimes it takes a bit longer. I was just getting the mental image picture and decided to check and see if there was an answer to my querry. Again, thank you.

 

[Laura]

Urano: of the sky
diurnal: occurring in the daytime rather than night OR occurring daily, cyclically.

 

[GranMoomie]

Thanks Laura,

That's what I got looking it up in my ole trusty dictionary, but it just didn't feel right. I had to step aside and get the concept of a cyclic occurance out there.

I'm embarrassed to say this, but I bought this book, SHW, August 2008. I got really stumped in the first 60+ pages and had to start it over again - 3 times. I'm also a pretty slow reader, but not that slow. I finally put it aside and read Mouravieff's first two volumns of Gnosis, and a couple of other books. Then someone suggested I start doing something with what I had learned, and I remembered you had been envolved with Reiki, so I took Reiki and just completed the Reiki Master Teacher level. After completing my first level of Reiki, I picked up The Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive, and couldn't believe I had ever been stumped. It's not the easiest read, but not that difficult either. And by the way, it is an incredible master piece of research. Thank you for all your hard work.

 

[Slow Motion Mary]

Laura, I just scrolled through the comments here so I hope I'm in the right place. I finished reading the book "...Secret History..." and it is awesome! I've tried putting many of the same pieces together and it really helps! If you need any help editing/proofing/researching your work, I will gladly donate my time. I have lots of experience in different areas of research and editing. I ordered it from QFG because I thought the $ would benefit your group more directly. I ran into some articles at UFO Digest and thought they might interest you re Arcadians, etc. This link is to a specific article posted recently, but the author has several more articles posted towards the bottom of the page relating to the same material: _www.ufodigest.com/article/111111-saint-martin-day-and-revelations I hope this day finds you and yours well, and Thanks Again!

 

[Sentares]

Re: Castaneda:
Read "Journey to Ixtlan" later, as this book would send many people off in the wrong direction.
The book on dreaming *is* a good choice to read first, despite its difficulty.
Read this or one of the later books - then read them largely in order would be my advice.

 

[Vulcan59]

Hi Sentares,

Welcome to the forum. :) We recommend all new members to post an introduction in the Newbies section telling us a bit about themselves, and how they found their way here. Have a read through that section to get an idea of how others have done it. Thanks.