The Universe of Mind


Don't Believe the False Prophets


To think that you will be saved by saying, "I believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord and Savior", or "I believe in Allah and his prophet Mohammed", or "I believe in Yahweh and the Torah" is absurd. You will not. You will be damned. Faith is Satan's greatest trick. The faithful turn away from knowledge and are thereby lost.


Whom should you believe? Christ, Mohammed, Moses, Abraham, St Paul, St Peter, the Pope? All the rest? The only way to test conflicting claims is by bringing the fruits of knowledge to bear, but that is the one thing you cannot do if you have subordinated knowledge to faith. The truth could not be simpler: most Christians follow Christ because they were raised by their parents to do so. Most Muslims follow the Koran and most Jews the Torah for exactly the same reason. If they were brought up differently, in different cultures, their beliefs would be entirely different. So of what value are these beliefs? How many believers have read all the holy books of rival religions? Hence how can they say that their holy book is right and the others are wrong? Invariably, they cite their faith. They don't need to search further, they say, because faith has been placed in their hearts. Who placed it there, and why is it different between Christians, Jews and Muslims? Religion based on faith is for people who are too stupid to understand the true nature of existence. Faith is for those who are too lazy to put in any effort. Faith goes hand in hand with brainwashing and self-delusion.


God is not concerned with saving people who are on their knees before him. God loves only with those who desire to emulate him. The ancient religion of Illumination rejects all those who cower in fear before their ludicrous gods. God wants us to join him. Those he helps, those he saves, are those who say, "I want to stand beside you," not those who prostrate themselves before him.


Nothing is more offensive to the True God than that people should be so alienated from themselves and from him as to believe that he is seeking worship. Can you imagine God's horror when madmen fly airplanes into buildings and then offer up this mass slaughter of themselves and of innocent men, women and children, as some "noble" sacrifice to him? Is God a psychopath? He would have to be to accept such a "gift". Why is that so many people who have faith seem to believe that God is deranged and wants blood and death to be served up to him? Religion on earth has been nothing but the history of violence. Can there be any doubt about it? Is that the work of the True God or of Satan? Only Satan wants blood sacrifice. For all the claims of love, peace, charity, kindness, tolerance, respect trumpeted by religions of faith, they have served up nothing but the opposite. These religions are Satan's toxic brew.


The Illuminati were pacifists originally but abandoned this position after the relentless persecution they endured at the hands, especially, of the Catholic Church. Now they support violence in the limited contexts of self-defense and the overthrow of tyranny, but they would never claim that they are fighting on behalf of God. They fight on their own behalf. God has no need of soldiers and does not want bloody massacres carried out in his name. There are no "holy" warriors. It's a contradiction in terms.


The gift God is looking for from you is that of maximizing your own potential, of enhancing that precious element within you which is godlike. He wants you to offer your own divinity to him. He has no truck with priests and popes, rabbis and imams. If you seek salvation through others you are already lost. Salvation comes from within, and from deep knowledge of yourself. "Know Thyself" was inscribed on the Temple of Apollo at Delphi in ancient Greece. "Know Thyself" is one of the central tenets of the Illuminati.


Illumination is the religion that dispenses with all holy men and prophets. Illumination guides the righteous on the twisting, treacherous path to the truth. If you think that all the answers will be laid on a plate for you, or in some ancient, dusty, holy text, and that you just need to say, "I believe", then you have already failed to pass the most basic part of God's test.


Before you can begin to understand Illumination, you must recognize that you contain a divine spark and that your mission, over many incarnations, is to burnish that divine element, to make it gleam and glint so brightly that God will recognize you from the other side of the infinite universe. The murmuring masses on their knees are invisible to him. They do not merit being seen.


Do you want to be God? To the religions of faith, such a statement is blasphemy and heresy. But bear this in mind - all great people wish to be surrounded by other great people, by equals rather than slaves. Would a man prefer the company of apes who worshipped him, or of other men who were as meritorious as he was? God is the greatest person of all, and he wants to be in the company of those who can appreciate his divinity. Only other gods can offer what he seeks. He is nothing like Yahweh, the Jewish deity who proclaimed himself a jealous God. Why would God be jealous? It is a category error. A jealous God is no God at all. God wants to admire us as much as we want to admire him. We have to prove that we are worthy of him. So, are we?


In the article below, we have provided some of the issues that inform the philosophical view of reality to which the Illuminati subscribe. This is not an account of the religious beliefs of the Illuminati. Rather, this is the worldview from which the tenets of Illumination arise. It covers a great deal of philosophical territory in a brief space, and highlights flaws in many metaphysical theories. It is not easy material, but it may point truth seekers in the right direction. Do not believe it - think about it, and decide whether it accords with your own knowledge. The Illuminati seek no one infected by the disease of faith. If you want to spend your life on your knees, go to a church, mosque or synagogue.




* * * * *



The Nature of the Universe


Idealism is the view that the universe is a mental construct - an arena exclusively of ideas. There's no such thing as matter, or, rather, matter is itself just a mental construct. If no minds existed, no material world would exist.


Materialism asserts that there is nothing but matter. The mental world is a product of matter. If no matter existed, there would be no minds.


Dualism contends that matter and mind exist as independent substances. Descartes, the leading dualist, said that matter (res extensa) had the property of extension (i.e. physical dimensions) while mind (res cogitans) did not. Matter was a physical substance while mind was a substance relating to thinking, feeling, willing, perceiving and consciousness. Since they were completely different substances, it was unclear how they could interact. Descartes infamously suggested that the pineal gland in the brain acted as a mediator between mind and matter.


Idealists deny the independent existence of matter while materialists deny the independent existence of mind. Dualists assert that matter exists independently of mind, and mind independently of matter, but can't explain their relationship to each other. All three stances have failed to solve the mind/matter problem.


Is there another possibility?


Whatever the universe is made of, one thing is undeniable - it contains the capacity for intelligent thought. Humans are composed of atoms and yet they can contemplate the nature of existence. How can atoms that obey mechanistic laws combine in such a way as to give rise to intelligence?


There are different types of intelligence. A crocodile has a limited repertoire of behavior. A horse has a larger, more complex brain and can display more varied behavior. A human being is capable of vastly more complicated behavior still. Yet there's an enormous range within human intelligence. Some humans are mired in trivial, hedonistic pursuits while others are wrestling with the profoundest questions of life.


Then there is the intelligence of colonies of ants or bees. Individuals within the colony have limited intelligence and yet the colony as a whole can demonstrate astonishingly complex behavior. Is the intelligence of a collection of human beings also an example of the intelligence of a colony i.e. is human intelligence considered in isolation completely different from collective human intelligence? If someone pokes a stick into an ant colony, ants will scurry around in a host of different ways to repair the damage. If an airplane flies into a skyscraper, humans will scurry around in a host of different ways to repair the damage. Is there really such a difference between an ant colony and a human colony?


Can the human race be said to have some sort of Mass Mind? Could the inhabitants of other planets in the universe also exhibit Mass Minds? Could all of these Mass Minds act as individual brain cells for a Universal Mind? Think of the power of such a Mind. Would it be the Mind of God?


Pierre Teilhard de Chardin talked of the "noosphere" - the mind sphere, a kind of collective human consciousness. As humanity evolves and creates increasingly complex social networks and societies, so the noosphere evolves too, becoming ever more self-aware. Eventually this would lead to a Mass Mind.


Gaia theory - the view that the earth self-regulates - attributes an intelligence of sorts to the planet. If such a theory is true of earth, it must be true of every other planet. If planets have this type of intelligence, why not solar systems or galaxies? Why not the universe itself? If all the "intelligent" planets and all the Mass Minds combined, what then? Is the universe a vast brain?


Since a range of intelligence is known to exist, is there any reason to believe that human intelligence should represent the upper limit? Is there any limit at all? Why should there not be levels of intelligence that make humans seem like insects in comparison? Why shouldn't evolution be able to create any level of intelligence, up to the highest possible of which the universe is capable? If a maximum intelligence is not forbidden then it's compulsory. One way or another, the universe will maximize the intelligence buried as potential within it.


What single change would revolutionize humanity? Imagine that everything that any person learned was immediately learned, effortlessly, by every other person. So, if 6.5 billion humans were each learning new things and every person was immediately accumulating all of the knowledge gained by all the others, what would happen? In a very short time, the Mass Mind of humanity would be powerful beyond imagining. Is it impossible? Or has it already happened to another species on another planet?


Long ago, the planet earth contained no life, yet it now sustains billions of intelligent humans, and countless animals and plants. Is that not the perfect example of how an apparently inanimate world has, latent within it, the potential to express incredible intelligence and abundance of life? And if that is true of earth then it must be true of the universe as a whole, yet on a breathtakingly bigger scale. If earth can evolve human intelligence, what can the universe evolve? The answer is simple - the intelligence of God.


But how can mind be generated by matter, how can intelligence emerge from atoms obeying the laws of science, how can life come from lifelessness? Any human being can be decomposed into a collection of atoms that originate from the food and drink which the person has consumed during their life. How is it that a particular arrangement of atoms can exhibit intelligence while innumerable alternative arrangements of those same atoms would show no intelligence whatsoever?


The number of ways of grouping atoms in the human body in ways that don't lead to intelligent behavior is almost infinitely larger than those that do. Yet humanity exists - six and half billion people, and rising. What are the odds? Is there an underlying factor that makes humans, and human intelligence in particular, much more likely than it might seem?


Evolutionist Richard Dawkins talks about "the selfish gene" and of humans being "gene survival machines". He doesn't mean that genes are literally selfish, but, rather, that if we characterize them in this way then it helps to better understand observed behavior. For example, in moral terms, no one should be more willing to help one person rather than another, yet it's self-evident that families (i.e. groups with high genetic commonality) almost always help each other in preference to non-family members. Although other explanations can be given, this is suggestive that genes act as if to promote their own interests over those of rival genes. But if genes - particular organizations of atoms - are "selfish" then what of individual atoms?


"Panpsychism" is a theory that claims that all matter is associated with mind. If atoms are "minded" in some way i.e. aren't just passive objects being buffeted by physical forces but are active to some degree, albeit difficult to define, could it better explain scientific phenomena?


It is difficult to understand how life can emerge from lifelessness, how mind can emerge from non-mind, how a chemical soup on earth billions of years ago could randomly create the single living cells from which humanity eventually evolved. Some people find it so improbable that they dismiss it entirely and look for explanations involving God.


But if everything in the universe already has mind in some way, and can be said to be "alive" at some level, then several mysteries immediately become more comprehensible. If the chemical soup from which life emerged on earth was already "alive" (though at a non-conscious level) and was, in a sense, seeking to actualize itself in the optimal possible way; if the chemical soup were striving to generate higher forms of life from itself, then that would make the appearance of single cells more likely. Such a factor underlying evolutionary forces can't be quantified and isn't readily susceptible to scientific study, but it would radically increase the chances of complex life appearing.


Nothing is lifeless. Nothing is mindless. Life and mind are an ascending scale. The most elementary particles have little that would be recognized as life or mind, but nevertheless those qualities are there. To assert the opposite position, that there is both life and non-life, is to assume a dualistic position. How can these two entirely different "substances" interact? How can one give rise to the other? How can specific arrangements of non-life generate life? The reality is that what has been defined as non-life does contain life, albeit at a much more primitive level. A single brain cell in a human brain doesn't appear to have either life or mind, and yet that brain cell is part of a functioning mind within a living organism. There are only two possibilities: either life and mind miraculously emerge from non-life and non-mind, or life and mind were there all along, but unexpressed in any meaningful way.



* * * * *



The Complementarity Principle of Quantum Theory says (http://universe-review.ca/F12-molecule.htm):


"According to the uncertainty principle, the pair of conjugate variables such as the position and momentum of a particle is not well defined but exist only as opposing potentialities. These potentialities complement each other, since each is necessary in a complete description of the physical processes through which the particle manifests itself. This is referred as "principle of complementarity". The more general statement reads: At the quantum level, the most general physical properties of any system must be expressed in terms of complementary pairs of variables, each of which can be better defined only at the expense of a corresponding loss in the degree of definition of the other. In particular, particle and wave can be considered as one of those complementary pairs - no experiment can reveal both at once."


Mind and matter are also a complementary pair. No experiment can reveal both simultaneously. Mind is the inner, internalized aspect of the universe while matter is the outer, externalized aspect. If a human skull is opened up, a fleshy brain will be exposed, but no mind. Yet the mind is there. No one can deny it. In fact, the appearance of the physical brain is, ultimately, nothing but an idea in the mind.


Illumination teaches that everything that appears in the physical world - the world of dimensions - has a complementary appearance in the mental world, the non-dimensional world i.e. every physical event also registers as a mental event. All physical objects are also mental entities. The physical world is objectified mind while the mental world is subjectified matter. Mind is the inner experience of matter while matter is the outer experience of mind. The physical world is the objective, external reality experienced in a scientific way while the mental world is the subjective, internal reality experienced within the spectrum of consciousness.


Human consciousness belongs to the non-dimensional domain, yet it is tied to the physical world. It is impossible to probe it directly because it is not in the dimensional reality of science. Science has provided a vast amount of knowledge about the physical world, but it cannot say anything significant about the non-physical world. That is the province of metaphysics. Historically, science and metaphysics have clashed because metaphysics has strayed into scientific territory, and vice versa each contradicting one another.


Illumination combines science and metaphysics, acknowledging the primacy of each in its own sphere. If the proper applicability of science and metaphysics is understood, science should never contradict metaphysics, and vice versa.