Gnosticism, Archons/Greys, The Controller Agenda "They sought to overpower humanity in its psychological and perceptual functions... although they saw that human thinking was superior to theirs... For indeed their delight is bitter and their beauty is depraved. And their triumph is in deception (apaton), leading astray, for their own structure is without divinity."
Breathtaking, but what is that? Who said that? Of whom does it speak? Is it ancient? Is it contemporary? Is it correct? Is it relevant? What is it doing here in the pages of Open SETI?
Let's begin with the last part of the question.
Open SETI is in some ways the opposite of SETI. SETI is an extraordinarily "narrow-band" search arising from a most denatured strain of modern-day scientific/intellectual thought. Open SETI begins with being... open. And what does one see, when open?
Would you agree that one sees a magnificent planet inhabited by a humanity that is becoming demented, even by its own definition?
This humanity is fragmenting, at war with itself, and each faction looking desperately for salvation from its particular idea of deity.
No small number of humans hope for help from another quarter: contact with extraterrestrial beings. Surely the SETI community derives at least some of its support from this dream.68 It manifests strongly among many "UFO believers" as well.
It will turn out that this dream of salvation has everything to do with our opening passage.
The passage is tight with ideas:
Some group attempted to overpower humanity.
The field of attack was psychological and perceptual.
Human thinking was superior to theirs.
Something about their pleasure and beauty is off.
They succeed, but only through deception because...
...There is such a thing as "divinity."
...It is implied that we have it.
...They lack it.
These ideas form at least part of the "paradigm" for this page... which, as usual for this website, has little to do with that of conventional SETI with its focus on detection, astrobiology, habitable planets, etc.
Our opening quote is from The Apocryphon of John II, a Nag Hammadi text extensively discussed by the profoundly insightful author John Lash in his Metahistory.org web pages.69
What's so breathtaking and challenging about it is that deep mind recognizes its antiquity and its possible truth and relevance to present times.
As Lash explains, this passage reflects the view of the Gnostics:
Their interpretation of the "myth of contact" is a unique expose of alien intrusion with a strong warning message for humanity. It may well turn out that the Gnostic view of invervention is indispensable to our vision of ourselves as a species.
The word "divinity" is key in that passage and throughout Lash's pages. It is bound to be misunderstood, and the misunderstanding is itself a result of the intervention.
We are deviated from true human potential through delusional beliefs about Divinity.
For Lash and the Gnostics, the line of Divinity comes through our descent from the Earth - Gaia - and it is this connection that is the object of the intruders' attack. They cannot actually do anything about it - it simply exists - but they can deceive us into turning our backs on it in favor of their own contrivances... such as several of our major religions.
Readers may wish to review the page Soul Technology.
Lash is speaking of Pagan Gnostics (not the later Christian Gnostics) whom he describes as powerful shamans, asserting that what they saw with their clear vision is as important to our understanding and our situation today as it was in their time.72
Notice that Lash refers to intrusion, warning, intervention, and self-vision.
Conventional thinking dismisses the thought of "alien takeover", claiming that if there had been any danger of that, the invasion and takeover would have occurred a long time ago. Indeed. Please integrate that statement with our list of paradigm elements above.
Remember: field of attack is psychological and perceptual. Where then should we look for evidence of this invasion?
On this page we will discuss three dimensions of control:
Intrinsic control suffered by many or all of us as the beings that we are, either through genetics or through our earliest post-natal if not prenatal environment.
Extrinsic or societal control -- extrinsic to us as individuals but deeply embedded in our social structures, again possibly through "inner" means working on a few very powerful individuals.
Parasitic control mediated by something that has been implanted into us... either physically or nonphysically in the sense of "mental parasites" or something infecting "higher bodies" known well in non-western and western occult or esoteric traditions.
These dimensions -- given that they even exist, which is something that needs to be considered -- do not necessarily operate independently of one another. Thus extrinsic control systems may be set up to operate through intrinsic characteristic or embedded parasitic systems (parasites).
Intrinsic ControlThis deals with what we are (genetically) and how we think. The subject of our intrinsic nature and how it reflects intervention(s) will occupy much of the remainder of this page.
To understand how intrinsic control or intervention has worked, we need to be able to examine ourselves.
By this I mean that we, in ourselves - either our psychology if you accept Lash's variety of intervention, or more conventionally our genetics - would embody the results of one or more "invasions". If there were several phases of invasion, then the results might be layered.
Do we see layering in our psychological makeup and/or our genetics? We most certainly do. I am suggesting a new way of looking at this.
Here is another quote:
MYTH: Groups of advanced beings came here and found the planet inhabited by proto-humans, which they then genetically upgraded to the modern human form. Suitably advanced souls (that's us) were brought in and allowed themselves to be attached to this new human evolution. At that point, the arts of civilization could be taught to these hybrid creations.
That suggestion of intrusion and intervention in human affairs has been advanced on several Open SETI pages. You will also find it expanded on one of the final pages of The End of Enchantment (see A Synthetic Myth), a companion website that is heartily recommended.
That page explores the relation of humanity with a mysterious group of controllers. In support of the concept of intervention, the Synthetic Myth page reflects information that has surfaced in many fields, mostly outside the standard paradigm to be sure. You will find it suggested in UFO contact reports, open-minded studies of the literature of ancient civilizations, forward-looking interpretations of human genetics and fossil remains, and occult/metaphysical lore.
The question immediately before us is whether these two statements - the opening Gnostic one and the local one from these pages - can be sufficiently reconciled as to create a single initial position to explore here... or not.
Some group attempted to overpower humanity and The field of attack was psychological and perceptual vs. Groups of advanced beings came here and found the planet inhabited by proto-humans, which they then genetically upgraded to the modern human form.
Gnostics: Attack was psychological and perceptual.
Synthetic Myth: "Attack" involved a "genetic upgrade."
Both: The encounter occurred here between pre-existing races.
This comparison highlights a key position in Lash's description of Gnosticism: Actual genetic manipulations do not occur; they are simulated through the use of virtual reality technology.
As far as Open SETI is concerned, that is an open question, and an incredibly important one.
Human thinking was superior to theirs. and Something about their pleasure and beauty is off. and We have "divinity"; they lack it; this is why they succeed only via deception. vs. Advanced souls (that's us) were brought in and allowed themselves to be attached to this new human evolution.
The two positions are completely parallel. Each implies an inherent superiority of human consciousness over the mysterious "they". The root of this superiority could be "divinity". Whatever it is, this needs exploration.
In Lash/Gnostics the deed was/is achieved via deception. In Synthetic Myth, human souls "allowed" it. No intrinsic contradiction there.
We have not yet seen whether or not the term "soul" is found in Lash/Gnostics.
The remaining loose end is the point about teaching the arts of civilization.
Parasitic ControlFrom the Wikipedia article about parasites:
"A parasite is an organism that lives in or on the living tissue of a host organism at the expense of it. The biological interaction between the host and the parasite is called parasitism. Parasitism is a type of symbiosis, by one definition, although another definition of symbiosis excludes parasitism, since it requires that the host benefit from the interaction as well as the parasite.
"Parasites are generally smaller than their hosts, absorbing nutrients from the host's body fluids, but this is far from a universal strategy."
In fact there are many strategies, relating to what the parasite requires from its host, and how the parasite is going to get it.
An important class of strategies incorporates a modification of the host's behavior in order to achieve a result beneficial to the parasite and not necessarily beneficial to the host -- it could be fatal to it.
Examples seen in nature include that of the parasitic wasp Hymenopimecis sp. that attaches itself to a spider host, inducing it to build a special web that will be used by the pupating wasp after it kills and eats the spider (Parasite's web of death).
The parasitic Nematomorph hairworm develops inside grasshoppers and crickets. When mature, they "brainwash" their hosts, causing them to plunge into water, enabling the worms to emerge and swim away to find mates. The grasshoppers or crickets are for their troubles left dead or dying (Parasites brainwash grasshoppers into death dive).
Many other examples of parasitism in nature could be provided.
"...there is a parasite that attacks a certain type of crab and eats up all nonessential soft tissue inside of it, but leaves the basics that allow locomotion---key muscles, the optic nerves, etc. It is then able to take over this partly hollowed out crab and use it in the manner of an Imperial Lieutenant in the Star Wars fantasy operating an Imperial Walker.
"Rabies is caused by a parasite, and it produces a particular sort of madness that will cause an infected mammal, even a human being, to want to bite or otherwise cause bloodshed with other mammals thereby opening a vector, an avenue of transmission, for the parasite."
That was from Jonathan Zap, whose complete article Mind Parasites, Energy Parasites and Vampires takes us over the edge to where we need to be if we hope to understand this particular dimension of human control.
The point here is that parasitism could be a form of interaction not only among lifeforms in nature, but between ourselves and other types of entities, whether we call them extraterrestrials or anything else. And this interaction is capable of modifying the desire and intention of humans, enforcing behavior that is quite alien to their previous nature, but is felt to be of their own volition.
Interesting, yes?
Alain Gossens, of the Karmapolis.be website that has become something of a strategic partner of Open SETI, sharing interviews and articles, surveys this field with an emphasis on Gnosticism and the works of Carlos Castaneda, in Possession and Predation -- Aliens, Flyers, Clones, and Reptilians: The Enigma of Extraterrestrial Parasites (or see the original French Version).
By including this reference to Gossens' article here, we are not implying a transitive endorsement of all the material he covers. His is a survey and it is a good and useful one.
But with Gossens' article, we have opened the issue of attempts to control human activity and destiny by and through parasitic entities.
With a recognition of this possibility, we can begin to look at large-scale human activities for signs of self-destructiveness that could play into the needs and intentions of some other, alien, group.
It would be easy to say that we do not need to look very far, but of course we do not wish to be making up excuses for our own behavior, or shrugging off responsibility for terrible events.
What would be an appropriate approach to this issue?
Perhaps a good beginning would be to look for our own, unassailable, and immutable essence. This takes inner work.
And thus we open the dynamic for this page's discussion. It is to explore the inner nature of humanity's encounters with something other, and to try to understand as a human, what this has caused humans to be, and what, if anything, it has caused us to do.
We also will reflect this dynamic against a recent cosmological theory presented in Open SETI Physics 101.
Does any of this have anything to do with what you are trying to tell us Caana?
Tom