Ascension Experience

[spbill]

A long time ago (ca. 1968) I had what has come to be known as an Ascension Experience. As Alan has stated, they don't last very long. I had been trying to attain the state for some time and when it finally happened I wanted to "check it out" to make sure I had really achieved the state I was seeking. That's when the trouble started Something pretty awful keyed in hard, I took a panic and decided to "come down" off it or to "undo" it and get back to more familiar ground. Oddly enough, since that day I have never had any more cognitions (except very minor ones). It was like the ultimate cognition happened and after that everything else paled in comparison, nothing could top it.

It would be nice if I could operate at that level whenever I wanted. Seems to me it ought to be possible to find out all the negative things that an AE could restimulate, run them out and thereafter have free access to the state at any time. I was wondering if Idenics might be able to help me look at it? Has anyone here been able to re-hab the AE and handle all the negative things that could bring one down off it?

Any accounts of similar AE's would be helpful.
Bill

 

[lionheart]

I know this might not help you, but personally I just let the so-called negative things be, the less I resist them the less impact they have.

I hope Idenics or something else helps you, Bill.

 

[Been Done Had]

SPBill

I'd love to hear of your experience, some specifics. I myself have undergone such an experience, a sudden explosion of awareness and ability followed by the onset of horrors beyond belief. All in the space of minutes. And all very transforming.

Do share.

 

[Alan]

A long time ago (ca. 1968) I had what has come to be known as an Ascension Experience. As Alan has stated, they don't last very long. I had been trying to attain the state for some time and when it finally happened I wanted to "check it out" to make sure I had really achieved the state I was seeking. That's when the trouble started Something pretty awful keyed in hard, I took a panic and decided to "come down" off it or to "undo" it and get back to more familiar ground. Oddly enough, since that day I have never had any more cognitions (except very minor ones). It was like the ultimate cognition happened and after that everything else paled in comparison, nothing could top it.

It would be nice if I could operate at that level whenever I wanted. Seems to me it ought to be possible to find out all the negative things that an AE could restimulate, run them out and thereafter have free access to the state at any time. I was wondering if Idenics might be able to help me look at it? Has anyone here been able to re-hab the AE and handle all the negative things that could bring one down off it?

Any accounts of similar AE's would be helpful.
Bill

An AE most often runs into and turns on too much presence, too much truth, too much power, too much positive whatever!

It also throws a being into unmapped, uncharted territory that is unique to that being - thus it takes direct processing that follows that beings evolution.

Running out negatives - omits the basic emanating source point of the power or positive that underlies the negative.

The negatives are secondary to the positives - find, handle and rehabilitate the positives and the negatives just erase in seconds!

This morning I helped someone handle just such an AE as you described - it took less than an hour - he had grown beyond his game - consequencely lost what he was familiar with - it was just a matter to finding his next area of reach and reorientating him to his new operating basis!

Alan

 

[Alanzo]

On the False Purpose Rundown, I would usually end every session very blown out looking at the walls, the floor, and the objects in the room asking myself "What the hell is all this stuff?"

Like every session. It was a very basic spiritual confusion I had - "Where the hell am I?"

Then one day something tremendous happened to me. I had left session and was driving home on the 101 freeway in LA. All of a sudden, in 3D color, sight, sound, and feel, I realized, "I'm in a sea of energy."

It was a completely transformational experience for me. It was as if that was the thing I had gotten into Scientology to achieve. I felt I had "pierced the veil" and finally understood everything I felt I had not understood before.

I got it.

It was after this that I began to notice all the insanities in the Church, and other services were just not producing very much gain. It was like I was done, and the rest was just unneeded bullshit.

Maybe the answers are just not that tough.

Maybe existence is very simple, and continually wondering how much more aware you can be, or how many more questions you can answer spiritually, becomes a waste of time because you have already answered all the questions there are to ask.

There are still mysteries for me, like exactly where do I go when I die, but answering those mysteries no longer takes up much of my attention any more.

It's quite a relief.

And yes, Scientology did do that for me.

Or, *I* did that for me, using Scientology.

 

[Alan]

On the False Purpose Rundown, I would usually end every session very blown out looking at the walls, the floor, and the objects in the room asking myself "What the hell is all this stuff?"

Like every session. It was a very basic spiritual confusion I had - "Where the hell am I?"

Then one day something tremendous happened to me. I had left session and was driving home on the 101 freeway in LA. All of a sudden, in 3D color, sight, sound, and feel, I realized, "I'm in a sea of energy."

It was a completely transformational experience for me. It was as if that was the thing I had gotten into Scientology to achieve. I felt I had "pierced the veil" and finally understood everything I felt I had not understood before.

I got it.

It was after this that I began to notice all the insanities in the Church, and other services were just not producing very much gain. It was like I was done, and the rest was just unneeded bullshit.

Maybe the answers are just not that tough.

Maybe existence is very simple, and continually wondering how much more aware you can be, or how many more questions you can answer spiritually, becomes a waste of time because you have already answered all the questions there are to ask.

There are still mysteries for me, like exactly where do I go when I die, but answering those mysteries no longer takes up much of my attention any more.

It's quite a relief.

And yes, Scientology did do that for me.

Or, *I* did that for me, using Scientology.

WTG Alanzo!

 

[Div6]

I had a similar one to Alanzo. I finished the FPRD basic form, and about 3 days later, during that period of "wakefulness" while the body was still asleep, I went ext from the body, ext from the physical universe, and then went "Native State"
ie: no location in time or space but the ability to postulate and percieve.


I can't say how long I stayed in that state, but after a while I realized the total bliss of nothingness was not a game, and that I needed to let those still in games know about this. So I moved back in to the time stream, and then regained the body controls.

That also was the beginning of the end of my Scn career.

 

[spbill]

SPBill

I'd love to hear of your experience, some specifics. I myself have undergone such an experience, a sudden explosion of awareness and ability followed by the onset of horrors beyond belief. All in the space of minutes. And all very transforming.

Do share.

I was looking for complete understanding, complete alignment of everything I had ever experienced. For a couple of weeks leading up to the big event, I sensed that it was about to happen. When it finally did happen the feeling was like the biggest cognition ever. Everything was perfectly aligned, everything made total sense. And "I" was creating it all. The awareness level is hard to describe. Imagine being simultaneously aware of everything, that comes pretty close. The tech side of me then started to systematically check it out - to make sure I hadn't inadvertently omitted something from the total solution. At that point I experienced the sensation of burning up. I recalled something I had read years before about being born with so many million neurons; the neurons supposedly die off (starting at birth?) at the rate of about 6 per second. No new neurons ever appear. I put things together to form a new theory (later dubbed the "neuronic death theory") - to explain how things get understood. It assumed there were afferent and efferent nerve channels leading to and into the brain, that at intersections where a lot of nerve electrical signals were superimposed and simultaneously active the intensity would increase to a point where the neuron would get electrocuted, thus blocking outflow along that particular channel. It seemed to make sense at the time and to serve as a mechanistic model of all understanding. I then experienced a sensation similar to a 120-V lightbulb being operated at say 150V: the bulb will glow very brightly for a short time then burn out. I felt that was exactly what was going on in my brain at the time and that within a few seconds *all* my neurons would be dead from overload. That's when I figured I had to do something real fast if I wanted to survive. I decided to get away from the hot place and to look at it from a cooler, safer perspective. I came down fast. One just instinctively knows how to do that. It's a matter of managing attention. Of course, at that high level any postulate has a very wide-ranging and compelling effect. It was like going down in a fast elevator. I could "feel" (or so it seemed) my brain cooling off. Problem was I kept on running away even after the danger was past. I came "down" too far. I became smaller as a person. My postulates no longer had the power they had a few moments earlier. They certainly could not over-rule the decision made previously (when I was much closer to the hot place) to get away from that hot place. That left me with a problem: how to get back there whenever I wanted. I figured out there must have been something I'd missed in my quest to understand everything, something that caused a lot of grief when I tried to integrate it into a larger picture. That led me to a model where there are still remaining bits of nasty stuff in the bank which normally do not ever get noticed but which *are* restimulated when one gets close enough to the point of total understanding. I would like to systematically identify these items and to run them out one-by-one, so to create a safe environment in which to explore the AE more thoroughly and without panic. At present, the only way I know to turn 'em on is to revisit the AE - so I'm looking for a controlled way to do it without the meltdown risk. I think it is very likely that many people have experienced the same phenomenon but each of us will have a different interpretation of it. Would be nice to get an understanding which is more universal, closer to what actually happens in the brain during an AE, with less additive interpretation.
Bill

 

[spbill]

An AE most often runs into and turns on too much presence, too much truth, too much power, too much positive whatever!

Too much truth? This brings to mind a TV interview with John McMaster. John formed his fingers (both hands) into a pyramid, looked the interviewer right in the eye and asked, "How can there be two sides to the truth?" I would ask, "What is too much truth?" Perhaps you mean too much to handle?

It also throws a being into unmapped, uncharted territory that is unique to that being - thus it takes direct processing that follows that beings evolution.

I have the distinct impression that this is something which isn't unique to every being. I could be wrong about it, but there is just too much mutual recognition of the state. The details could be unique but there seems to be an underlying emotion or process which is commonly experienced.

Running out negatives - omits the basic emanating source point of the power or positive that underlies the negative.

The negatives are secondary to the positives - find, handle and rehabilitate the positives and the negatives just erase in seconds!

That makes sense. I'm wondering if you have extrapolated the insight from some lower level? Seems to me the AE I had was senior to positive/negative - the nearest "positive" end-word for me would be completeness. I'm not so sure positive/negative is senior to complete/incomplete where understanding itself is concerned. Have you actually had an AE yourself or are you going on what your clients have described?

This morning I helped someone handle just such an AE as you described - it took less than an hour - he had grown beyond his game - consequencely lost what he was familiar with - it was just a matter to finding his next area of reach and reorientating him to his new operating basis!
Alan

What was the EP of the handling? Can he now operate at the level indefinitely without triggering the bear traps? Do you think he'd be willing to come on here and tell his story?
Bill

 

[RogerB]

What Alan writes on this thread is quite correct.

In my now 50+ years of the tech I've had several colossal ascensions. In 1994, I found out about what Alan was doing in Dallas and went down to check it out. Fact is, he has the R/Ds to recover and fully restore to your knowing control any ascensions you've had and "lost". More important, the tech he's developed puts any ascensions you have instantly within your full knowing control and responsibility.

Two R/Ds are used the instant a client has a huge ascension: "The Celebration of Regained Abilities, States and Wins Procedure," and the "Futures Alignment."

From my personal experience I will relate the folowing.

Typically, a huge ascension frees you out of what you had been stuck in (and, of course, there are lots of different levels of stuck-inness; hence my many different ascensions over the years). When you go free you get booted up into a state of beingness and awareness at a higher level of spiritual existence---problem here is that it is a level of existence/place you've been in before, and before, when you were there, you didn't handle it too brilliantly:-( So here you are ascended up into an area or state of existence that you still have case at--case you failed to handle last time you were at that level.

What happens then is, as you try to get on in life, you begin to unwittingly empower this case and/or trigger old wrong answers and solutions to it and also the goofs that caused you to originally loose that ascended state.

All this gets handled on Alan's R/Ds. I speak from personal experience on that.

He's right about the key to it being the recovery and empowering of the underlying "positive". Fact is, that is where your native power is and stems from . . . you pursuing your purposes; you directing your power towards the attainment of your wants.

Getting distracted by "not wants" or others' nonsense takes your directed power off of where you want it and embroils it it what becomes "case."

LRH did this in the early days of his tech actually.

If you go to his PABs of November 1955 on the subject of "The Postulates" you'll see in PAB 66, LRH actually states the First Postulate as being NOT KNOW.

Now that is a negative, and a colossal error; and the reason it is an error is that our games and relationships did not begin on or by a negative postulate.

If one looks at what such a such a "first postulate" as to not know, or to not love, or not be, etc., etc., would bring about, you'd have to admit it would preclude any game!

The first postulate had to be a "positive"; for example, to reach to know, or to connect and to love, etc.,

My recovered ascension states, by the way, recovered to me these goodies of knowing control of and responsibility for these positives of knowledge/knowing, love, awareness and the capacity to direct it, etc.

I had the above cognition on LRH's error some time early last year (2008). It afforded me a colossal ascending up into fuller control and appreciation of the true nature of these "positives." However it is also true that I have done a colossal amount of processing to enable me being able to benefit from it.

In my view, I'd say this early error of LRH is one key item that led his tech astray and which caused him to continue to have strife---he was fixated on fighting "negatives"; and on getting rid of things. He omitted the bright idea that there are some positives to recover and empower.

But then, he was a bit of a dominator, I am told, so it figures he would want to fight everything

Roger

 

[nexus100]

My interpretation: In this universe one is a piece of God. Therefore one has limited understanding and limited attention, or "beingness". That limited understanding, over time, has been dispersed. So knowing all of who one is has been dispersed.

Pure understanding, however, takes place outside this universe. One can know who one really is simply by suddenly knowing it. The spark likely is that one has re-acquired enough dispersed attention that the veil comes off. But one is still in this universe, as that was the original decision. You still know what you know. You are just back here.

What you don't know is also here, but in the form of dispersed attention. You aren't looking at it and you don't know where it is. To reaquire it one intends to do so, then understands what is going on as it happens. Things open up as one sees more of one's own viewpoint and that of others. There are aids. Idenics is one I've used. But ultimately one sees at one's own pace, my experience. There isn't anything wrong, though, except as one decides so.

 

[spbill]

What Alan writes on this thread is quite correct.

In my now 50+ years of the tech I've had several colossal ascensions. In 1994, I found out about what Alan was doing in Dallas and went down to check it out. Fact is, he has the R/Ds to recover and fully restore to your knowing control any ascensions you've had and "lost". More important, the tech he's developed puts any ascensions you have instantly within your full knowing control and responsibility.

Two R/Ds are used the instant a client has a huge ascension: "The Celebration of Regained Abilities, States and Wins Procedure," and the "Futures Alignment."

From my personal experience I will relate the folowing.

Typically, a huge ascension frees you out of what you had been stuck in (and, of course, there are lots of different levels of stuck-inness; hence my many different ascensions over the years). When you go free you get booted up into a state of beingness and awareness at a higher level of spiritual existence---problem here is that it is a level of existence/place you've been in before, and before, when you were there, you didn't handle it too brilliantly:-( So here you are ascended up into an area or state of existence that you still have case at--case you failed to handle last time you were at that level.

What happens then is, as you try to get on in life, you begin to unwittingly empower this case and/or trigger old wrong answers and solutions to it and also the goofs that caused you to originally loose that ascended state.

All this gets handled on Alan's R/Ds. I speak from personal experience on that.

He's right about the key to it being the recovery and empowering of the underlying "positive". Fact is, that is where your native power is and stems from . . . you pursuing your purposes; you directing your power towards the attainment of your wants.

Getting distracted by "not wants" or others' nonsense takes your directed power off of where you want it and embroils it it what becomes "case."

LRH did this in the early days of his tech actually.

If you go to his PABs of November 1955 on the subject of "The Postulates" you'll see in PAB 66, LRH actually states the First Postulate as being NOT KNOW.

Now that is a negative, and a colossal error; and the reason it is an error is that our games and relationships did not begin on or by a negative postulate.

If one looks at what such a such a "first postulate" as to not know, or to not love, or not be, etc., etc., would bring about, you'd have to admit it would preclude any game!

The first postulate had to be a "positive"; for example, to reach to know, or to connect and to love, etc.,

My recovered ascension states, by the way, recovered to me these goodies of knowing control of and responsibility for these positives of knowledge/knowing, love, awareness and the capacity to direct it, etc.

I had the above cognition on LRH's error some time early last year (2008). It afforded me a colossal ascending up into fuller control and appreciation of the true nature of these "positives." However it is also true that I have done a colossal amount of processing to enable me being able to benefit from it.

In my view, I'd say this early error of LRH is one key item that led his tech astray and which caused him to continue to have strife---he was fixated on fighting "negatives"; and on getting rid of things. He omitted the bright idea that there are some positives to recover and empower.

But then, he was a bit of a dominator, I am told, so it figures he would want to fight everything

Roger

Thanks so much for your input on this Roger, and welcome to the board.
Bill

 

[spbill]

My interpretation: In this universe one is a piece of God. Therefore one has limited understanding and limited attention, or "beingness". That limited understanding, over time, has been dispersed. So knowing all of who one is has been dispersed.

Pure understanding, however, takes place outside this universe. One can know who one really is simply by suddenly knowing it. The spark likely is that one has re-acquired enough dispersed attention that the veil comes off. But one is still in this universe, as that was the original decision. You still know what you know. You are just back here.

What you don't know is also here, but in the form of dispersed attention. You aren't looking at it and you don't know where it is. To reaquire it one intends to do so, then understands what is going on as it happens. Things open up as one sees more of one's own viewpoint and that of others. There are aids. Idenics is one I've used. But ultimately one sees at one's own pace, my experience. There isn't anything wrong, though, except as one decides so.

Interesting interpretation. I have a feeling which could be interpreted that way, maybe we all have it. Thanks.
Bill

 

[spbill]

[..]
If you go to his PABs of November 1955 on the subject of "The Postulates" you'll see in PAB 66, LRH actually states the First Postulate as being NOT KNOW.

Now that is a negative, and a colossal error; and the reason it is an error is that our games and relationships did not begin on or by a negative postulate.

If one looks at what such a such a "first postulate" as to not know, or to not love, or not be, etc., etc., would bring about, you'd have to admit it would preclude any game!

The first postulate had to be a "positive"; for example, to reach to know, or to connect and to love, etc.

It seems intuitively the first postulate would not be able to refer back to any existing postulate. So I'm inclined to agree it couldn't be a negative. I'm willing to assume positiveness itself was somehow wired in a-priori, as in: anything which helps survival. The idea of "not-X" must always refer to an X, but the X could be neutral and have nothing to do with survival. For example, using not-male to characterize a female, assuming Adam came first We should bear in mind that "not" doesn't particularly imply oppositeness. For example, not-blue could be red, green, orange, etc. I don't recall the context of LRH's assertion in PAB-66 that NOT KNOW was the first postulate. It could mean a decision to not-know something or perhaps it was a realization that some things were not inherently known. I'll go see if I can find the PAB.
Bill

 

[Leon]

He gave different versions of 1st, 2nd, 3rd postulates at different times. A bit inconsistent on the subject.

 

[RogerB]

It seems intuitively the first postulate would not be able to refer back to any existing postulate. So I'm inclined to agree it couldn't be a negative. I'm willing to assume positiveness itself was somehow wired in a-priori, as in: anything which helps survival. The idea of "not-X" must always refer to an X, but the X could be neutral and have nothing to do with survival. For example, using not-male to characterize a female, assuming Adam came first We should bear in mind that "not" doesn't particularly imply oppositeness. For example, not-blue could be red, green, orange, etc. I don't recall the context of LRH's assertion in PAB-66 that NOT KNOW was the first postulate. It could mean a decision to not-know something or perhaps it was a realization that some things were not inherently known. I'll go see if I can find the PAB.
Bill

For those who may not have the PABs easily available, the subject referred to here on "The Postulates," is covered in 3 or 4 PABs.

Basically in PAB 66 (from memory) LRH lists a sequence.

It begins with us in "Native State" . . . nice, pristine and virgin
The comes the "First Postulate" to Not Know which changes that condition
The "Second Postulate" is to Know About
The Third Postulate is To Forget
The Fourth Postulate is To Remember
That is the sequence as written by LRH

It is in the context of starting games or of in first addressing scenarios.

Roger

 

[nexus100]

It seems intuitively the first postulate would not be able to refer back to any existing postulate. So I'm inclined to agree it couldn't be a negative. I'm willing to assume positiveness itself was somehow wired in a-priori, as in: anything which helps survival. The idea of "not-X" must always refer to an X, but the X could be neutral and have nothing to do with survival. For example, using not-male to characterize a female, assuming Adam came first We should bear in mind that "not" doesn't particularly imply oppositeness. For example, not-blue could be red, green, orange, etc. I don't recall the context of LRH's assertion in PAB-66 that NOT KNOW was the first postulate. It could mean a decision to not-know something or perhaps it was a realization that some things were not inherently known. I'll go see if I can find the PAB.
Bill

The idea of postulates is an error in my opinion. We do not exist separate from our thoughts unless we choose to see it that way. At any rate believing there is any overall order of merit in thought is not likely to aid understanding.

We simply split and assumed a quadrillion trillion different viewpoints, each of which has full capabilty of god except in limited form. One knows oneself, but not other viewpoints. The game is play. But we have gone so far from operating as spirit that it seems the pure game isn't even seen anymore. We understand as process in order to get back to it. That isn't easy looking from human viewpoint. So the grind is, addressing viewpoint with understanding and working back through. One is in the dark till the next step and unless one has a handle on how it works it is easy to get lost in the process. It probably is necessary for most people to have at least some sort of guide for a time, if not actual help addressing that next step. At some point that need likely passes.
It is all pretty simple as structure. The process, not so much.

 

[Vinaire]

Here are some thoughts that I had on infinity that may apply to this topic. I see AE as "popping out of a viewpoint."

Our perceptions are based on what we might be considering at a more basic level.

Perception is essentially the interpretation of sensations. The incoming sensations are measured and given a meaning, which becomes perception.

When we perceive the extents of a car as 12 feet long, 6 feet wide, and 5 feet high, we have simply measured certain sensations using the dimension of length, width, and height and given it meanings in the form of “dimension points.”

In a mathematical sense, anything we perceive is a “dimension point.” Our awareness of dimension points depends on the use of appropriate dimensions. If we do not use a dimension then we won’t be aware of dimension points associated with that dimension.

Perception is the interpretation of sensations based on dimensions.

A VIEWPOINT is “a position from which something is observed or considered; a point of view.” In other words, a viewpoint would be a “mix of dimensions” used to interpret incoming sensations. The “physical viewpoint” would be a mix of physical dimensions from which to interpret the incoming physical sensations.

Viewpoint is a “mix of dimensions” used to interpret incoming sensations.

A viewpoint provides the context in which dimension points are viewed. In order to view, one must establish the viewpoint at a “distance” from what is to be viewed. To view a “viewpoint,” one must retreat to a more fundamental viewpoint (a mix of more basic dimensions).

For example, a student who is viewing from the fixed idea, “calculators always provide the correct answer,” cannot doubt the answer computed by a calculator. He is not aware of the fixed idea he is operating from. He can become aware of that fixed idea only if he retreats to view from a more fundamental principle of “garbage in = garbage out.”

To perceive a viewpoint one must retreat to a still more basic viewpoint.

A “basic viewpoint” will be a mix of basic dimensions; and to view it one must retreat to a still more basic viewpoint. The most basic viewpoint would be dimensionless, because from the context of “absence of dimension” any dimension may be interpreted.

Dimensionless INFINITY provides the most comprehensive viewpoint.

The viewpoint of dimensionless Infinity is unique, because, to view, it would have to postulate basic dimensions as “dimension points.” Secondary viewpoints may then be formed from these basic dimensions; and, to view, these viewpoints would have to postulate secondary dimensions as “dimension points.” One may then form viewpoints from these derived dimensions to come up with more complex dimension points. And so on…

Our perceptions are based on what we are postulating at a more basic level.

 

[spbill]

[..]
Basically in PAB 66 (from memory) LRH lists a sequence.

It begins with us in "Native State" . . . nice, pristine and virgin
The comes the "First Postulate" to Not Know which changes that condition
The "Second Postulate" is to Know About
The Third Postulate is To Forget
The Fourth Postulate is To Remember
That is the sequence as written by LRH

Let me try to understand this. I assume knowing was a part of "Native State", right? Along comes first postulate, to Not Know. Not know What? Not know everything? Guess that makes the most sense. Second postulate is to Know About - know about what? Supposedly he would not be able to know about anything from Native State because of his existing prior postulate turning the lights off. What else is there to Know About? We can guess LRH himself was confused about this stuff if he changed the scenario several times. I'm inclined to think he was just postulating all this, groping around without a clue.
Bill

 

[Div6]

Let me try to understand this. I assume knowing was a part of "Native State", right? Along comes first postulate, to Not Know. Not know What? Not know everything? Guess that makes the most sense. Second postulate is to Know About - know about what? Supposedly he would not be able to know about anything from Native State because of his existing prior postulate turning the lights off. What else is there to Know About? We can guess LRH himself was confused about this stuff if he changed the scenario several times. I'm inclined to think he was just postulating all this, groping around without a clue.
Bill

The Knowingness scale goes:
Know
Not-Know
Know About
Forget
Remember
Occlude

The know to mystery scale goes:
Native State
Not Know
Know About
Look
Emotion
Effort
Think
Symbols
Eat
Sex
Mystery
Wait
Unconscious

A thetan is knowingness. Engaged primarily on a game called "physical universe" the being adopts viewpoints by not-knowing his native state, and adopting the viewpoint of the space from which they are viewing. Thus, they now "know about", by looking from their current viewpoint.

And so on down the scale. Total knowingness, like total ARC and Native State, is a "no game condition". As it seems that we all maintain our subscriptions to the primary lie of time, it follows that there must be games.

There is also the Douglas Adams effect: - "There is a theory which states that if anybody ever discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened many times."