CB Willis ( wrote:
>Let's review, what's the difference between your defn of OT,
>and inhuman?   Or should I say, does your defn of OT preclude inhumanity?

      An OT is an Operating Thetan, a being with full responsibility for
all actions on all dynamics, whether his own or other's.  All beings are
OT in the native state.  OTness is 'lost' or descended from by fair
chosen choice to dream for a while in the manifested creation.

      Common usage of inhuman means evil, cruel, heartless TO OTHERS.

      And OT is an author, he creates characters of great humanness and
inhumaness, and then jumps into the game to play the roles HIMSELF.

      Humans might consider this inhuman because it involves creating
inhumans, they forget it also includes creating humans!

      Since humans would not create either humans nor inhumans,
we could call OT's, ahuman or unhuman.

>Does it make sense to say ethical OT or unethical OT, on your view?

      Existence has its basic mechanic, that which is not duplicated
persists.  Thus all persistance is of persisting lies.

      The very decent into dream time thus might be considered an act of
unethics, because it is a creation of persisting lies: 'all
consciousness is a pock mark on the face of God' -old Sufi saying.

      But creating tapestries of persisting lies is the PURPOSE of
manifestation, ALL manifestation, so it can hardly be called unethics
and there can be no judgement against such creation.

      When faced with a creation, the OT can either continue it by adding
more persistent lies, or vanish it by creating a perfect duplication or
recasting of the original creation and letting go.

      There is no such thing as 'shouldn't have been created", as long as
it is created in a finite while that will end one day, be it good or

      As a being CAN NOT create outside of a finite while, nothing can
last in time forever, good or bad, and thus there can not be any
judgement of ethics or unethics about any OT creation.

      There is no should or should not associated with any OT creation,
because basically manifestation is a 'should manifest', ALL OF IT,
followed by a 'should unmanifest,' ALL OF IT, each in its own good time.

      These form cycles of action, create, survive, destroy.

      Including the creations of humans and inhumans, and the little
dance or hate and fear, murder and mayhem that they do with each other.

      The purpose of manifestation is to manifest OT creation, by which
we mean manifesting persistent tapestries of human and inhuman.

      Thus a more sensible definition of out ethics for an OT is relative
to what he wants to accomplish.

      If an OT wants to withdraw back into the void, then out ethics is
Q&A which causes persistence.  Q&A means "I have a problem, what should
I DO about it?" Unethics here means trying to deal with an unwanted
creation by creating something MORE to deal with it.

      If an OT WANTS to manifest more, then out ethics is to recast it
properly which will cause vanishment instead.

      Ethics is simply doing what is right relative to what you want to

      Ethics is optimum reason towards a given goal.  The two possible
goals are persisting manifestation or vanishing manifestation.

      If you want to persist, create lies.

      If you want to vanish, create truth.

      It is not possible for an OT to cast something bad or wrong, they
can only do what comes naturally which is manifest from source the
outflowing tapestry of good and evil.

      And OT looking upon a human and an inhuman dancing with each other,
is just as likely to polish up the story line a bit, than take sides
with one or the other.  If he does decide to take sides, he can freely
take either side.

>Is an unethical OT one who is inhuman?

      Domain error.  OT's can not act unethically, except relative to
their desire to manifest or unmanifest.

      His basic natural action is to create both humans and inhumans in
grand tapestry, to manifest a worthwhile story.

      If an OT desires to manifest, then taking on the good guy or the
bad guy is an even toss, he is free to create the story, and do with it
what he will.  If one OT takes over the good guy, and another OT takes
over the bad guy, why then they can dance together in love of hatred and

      Within the story line, the same definition applies for humans and

      If you want to help, don't harm.

      If you want to harm don't help :)

      Humanness and inhumaness are not symetric.

      The human wants to help and be helped.

      The inhuman wants to harm but does not want to be harmed.

      If you were to ever run into a being who wanted to harm AND wanted
to be harmed, you wouldn't be able to look it in the eye.

      Thus we conclude that all beings are basically good, that
inhumans are humans that have given up trying to be good.

      Thus humans can fall from grace and become inhumans, and inhumans
can be redeemed to become humans again.

      Once all humans have fallen, and all inhumans have been redeemed,
that while ends for good, for its story has been told.


>- CBW

Sun Apr 26 14:56:51 EDT 2015