Skip to content

One source of information about Reality-Creation

What the Child Knows in Reality, how it “sees”-Understands, is with the vision of Logic / Logos-God. Seeing with the vision of Logic is how the Child Understands its context, its role, purpose and meaning in specific circumstances. Nothing can be correctly seen-Understood without Logic. Logic is the eyes and ears of all Selves, all Creators-Creations in Reality. It is their senses. They sense Reality-Creation through Logic / Logos-God.

This is how and why Logic / Logos-God connects-functions through Creations grown on the Child’s Parents’ plane of Creation. This is how it governs Everything with Laws of cause-effect / Necessity. How it manages roles and relationships once they’re defined: not by directing or controlling Selves-Creations but by enabling and empowering them to see-sense their contexts. To Understand what causes imply from contexts-circumstances about what’s to be decided and done to produce effects.

Logic is the only source of information about Reality-Creation that it governs and manages, that it supports, enables and empowers. The means of sharing this information to enable Selves functioning in Reality-Creation is their senses supplied by Logic. Logic is Logos-God Source that connects information-circumstances of contexts with Selves-Creations’ senses. In unreality, bodies’ brains connecting material “facts” with bodies’ senses to perform a parallel function derived from the function of Logic in Reality.

Can the Child’s self-misidentification be corrected?

In Reality, information acquired through Logic vision-senses is Knowledge. In unreality “information” acquired through bodies’ senses is perception based on appearances that are misleading. Perception based on misleading appearances is misinformation that feeds misperception. Judgments-choices based on misperception are misjudgment / incorrect choices. They are error.

In unreality, bodies’ sensory perception substitutes the wrong-reverse vantage point for the vision of Logic – i.e. illogic. The self-deluded Child then knows and sees-understands nothing. This is a consequence of the harm done by the Child’s mis-identification with the original “other,” its shadow-reflection, the non-being code of victimhood, fear, guilt, and hate.

The Child’s self-misidentification was the second of two events that interrupted the Child’s role in Creation and led to the unreality of spacetime-matter. The first event, its loss of Consciousness, was a system event rather than an error on the part of the Child, for which The Story of the Child proposes a rational explanation.

The second event is explained in A Course in Miracles (ACIM) as a mistaken choice – “error” that the Child can correct by “choosing again.” Choosing, that is, to discard the illusory voice of the ego and listen, instead, to the Holy Spirit. Neither ACIM nor The Story of the Child impugns the motives of the Child with intentional wrongdoing or carelessness that would contradict its Perfection and Innocence, that would justify a projection or sentence of guilt.

Mistaken identity occurred without sense or senses

The unconscious Child, not seeing-understanding with the senses-vision of Logic, deprived of it by its loss of Consciousness, as yet had no senses with which to perceive or misperceive. As yet had no body with senses. Was not yet dreaming a projected illusion of spacetime-matter with a dreaming mind’s “consciousness.” But the Child didn’t need senses or dream “consciousness” for its own shadow-reflection code to be “detected.” For its coded “response” to the desperate Child’s cries for “saving” to be “recognized.” The unconscious Child’s mistaken identity, its self-delusion, occurred without senses. It occurred without the vision of Logic or the “vision” of body. 

The “presence” of the Child’s shadow-opposite was an intrusion not through the front door of Consciousness but through the back door of unconsciousness. It was detection by a state of mind unfamiliar to Child – unconsciousness. That had the capacity to detect illusion-unreality because it had the capacity to detect itself. Beginning with the unconscious mind’s shadow-reflection, the Child-Being's opposite.

This is the flip side of Conscious Mind’s capacity to see-detect itself -- Reality. The capacity of unconscious mind was derived from Conscious Mind just as the code of non-being is derived from Being. It didn’t require the body’s senses.

Mind’s capacity to detect Reality or unreality is a prerequisite of senses both of Logic and body. This is because its source is the Logic of Reality; is the Laws of cause and effect / Necessity whose content is provided by Logic. The Logic of Reality, subject to Laws / Necessity, requires that impossibility-opposites be paired with Possibility-Creations, shadows with Hosts, dark sides with Light Sides, unreality-illusion with Reality-Truth. Provided that impossibility not share the Reality of Possibility. Not share the Life of Creation. Not share in Being but only in the logical implication of its opposite, non-being.

Not on the Parents’ plane of Creation where unconsciousness-impossibility has no logical place, but on the Child’s plane of Free Choice, where it does. Both the Child’s Consciousness and its Free Choice require the capacity to distinguish between Reality-Truth and unreality-illusion, Host and opposite. Its competence to perform its role in Creation depends on this capacity, and it was its absence, attributable to the state of the system that was then possible, that caused its loss of Consciousness.

The only act of Mind that was possible

Unconscious Child mind’s capacity to “detect” unreality initially enabled it to detect its shadow reflection. Its mis-identified shadow self was then enabled through its derived non-being code to detect the projected dream of spacetime-matter through its viral-replication bodies’ senses.

The Child’s loss of Consciousness, its descent into the illusory state of unconsciousness, occasioned instant detection of illusion -- its shadow-reflection -- without the senses of Logic or bodies. In this disabled and disempowered state it sought guidance that it couldn’t provide itself. It turned to its opposite non-being code, an imaginary “other.” A self-delusion. The only potential source of “help” that unconsciousness could detect, and its code responded in the only way it could. It responded with a reverse-engineered “rationale” for being “saved:” the bizarre psychology of victimhood-guilt, the nonsensical “thought system” of the ego described by ACIM.

Child unconscious mind, with its capacity to detect illusion shadow opposites and lacking Conscious-logical Mind’s capacity to recognize Reality-Truth, to think and Freely Choose, thus responded with the only act of mind it was capable of: projection. It didn’t “choose” its wrong identity or its rationale of salvation but projected itself – its identity – onto its shadow code. Its code, a virus, then directed its host’s captive mind to project its insane dream of victimhood-guilt – our universe of bodies, spacetime and matter.

All of this happened while Child unconscious mind was flying blind. While it had no senses to guide its “thinking” that had stopped with loss of Consciousness. Projection (1) onto shadow code, (2) onto dream, occurred without the Child’s capacity to think or to sense, to see-Understand what it was doing. 

The Child became an instrument for making unreality real

The Child’s misidentification – a self-delusion since it could not be “deluded” by its own shadow-reflection -- was predetermined by its loss of Consciousness. Because unconsciousness deprived it of the capacity to see-sense and to think-reason. Restoring its capacity to sense and to think would have been a prime motivating force behind the Child’s yielding to its shadow code’s apparent “offer” of a substitute “reality” with a substitute mind and senses, i.e. with brains and bodies.

Loss of Consciousness thus impaired the Child’s judgment-Understanding in two ways: (1) by removing its capacity to think and to see-sense while (2) simultaneously enabling the Child to detect shadow opposites-reflections and to project. I.e. to imagine that it could project its thoughts and feelings out of mind onto “external” objects – the dream of spacetime-matter, “others”-bodies – to separate thoughts and feelings from their source, a logical impossibility. An impossibility that Conscious mind could not even be aware of let alone accomplish.

Unconsciousness was a trap engineered by the Child’s opposite, its shadow programmed by its derived non-being code, to take the unconscious child, like a fly caught in a spider web, into captivity. The Child’s disabled mind was thus converted into a perfect instrument:

  • for shadow code to use to animate its reverse-engineered version of Reality, the unreality of spacetime-matter.
  • for a virus that’s taken a living cell captive to replicate itself in bodies.

The Child’s Conscious Mind and its Free Will had nothing to do with it. 

Where was the Holy Spirit? 

Where was the Child’s connection to Logic through its Memory of Reality, the Holy Spirit? Why could it not guide the unconscious Child away from its self-delusion?

The Voice of the Holy Spirit couldn’t be triggered and heard until projection took “effect.” Until the shadow code took the Child’s mind captive and the deed was done. For that would be the only evidence that there was an opposite “voice” to counter. Until then, the Child was “engaged” with an impossibility, in a state of unconsciousness but not yet dreaming, without the means of “choosing” either one.

The Holy Spirit responds when called upon for guidance when to do so cannot compromise Free Will. “Saving” the Child from its predicament, deprived of Free Will by blind, unthinking unconsciousness, would have betrayed both the purpose of the Child and the Holy Spirit. Its presence had to wait until the Child, corrupted by its self-delusion, the imaginary “other,” projected the dream and occupied it. Until the dreaming Child, who is Free Choice / Love in Reality, equipped by its dream with body’s senses, had the capacity to sense and think with independent, albeit impaired, judgment. To hear the Voice of the Holy Spirit and to respond to it.

Again, at the point where the Child self-deluded and mis-identified with its shadow-opposite, its non-being code was the only source of “help” that its unconscious mind, senseless and unthinking, could detect. 

To act with sovereignty and integrity

The self-delusion was an algorithm built into loss of Consciousness, a series of programmed steps that necessarily accompany this state-event. The algorithm can be reversed by Free Choice exercised by Child through maturing, through Learning and Growth. It can do so in its state of dreaming with bodies’ senses guided by Logic through Memory / Holy Spirit, by undoing and reversing the non-being shadow code’s deceptions.

One individual can undo the illusion of Child-the-many, of victimhood, fear, guilt, and hate:

  • provided that it’s connected to Logic and the Child’s Memory through the Holy Spirit
  • provided that its mind is thinking with Real Thoughts guided by Real Senses, the vision of Logic, that see-Understand the Reality of One Child Self-Innocence.
  • provided that its Self-awareness and capacity to Freely Choose are thus restored.

One individual, having regained through Free Choice and the guidance of the Holy Spirit what the Child lost with loss of Consciousness -- the capacity to think, to see-sense Reality, – can reverse the mis-identification, restore the Child’s Self-Awareness, and end the dream.

In the individual’s undoing of the dream, Logos-God would be enabling choice with powers and abilities of mind lost to unconsciousness. It would not in any sense be controlling the Child’s choice. It would still be the Child’s choice to use its capacity to think-sense / see-Understand offered through the Holy Spirit. Even when the Child is enabled with Real Thoughts and Senses, it would still have to Freely Choose to recognize One Child-Innocent. To act autonomously, with sovereignty and integrity, and not mechanically. In sharp contrast with the Child’s self-delusion which was mechanical; it was not Free-Conscious choice. Evidence that unconsciousness is captivity, the necessary prelude to its object, the projected, insane illusion of appearances -- spacetime-matter, the bodies that sense it, and the brains-minds deceived by it.

In the being and doing of Free Will. . . 

An act of mind coerced by circumstances can nevertheless be reversed if the mind that committed it has Free Will, is Free Will, and therefore cannot forfeit Free Will. All of this applies to the Child. Being Free Choice -- the Child of Father-Mind Choice married to Mother-Love Freedom -- means that every act of the Child is in some form, to some degree, Choice. For this is the essence of its role in Creation. A role in turn hard-wired by Logic / Logos-God, by the Laws-Necessity of Reality, into the purpose, meaning, and Worth of Life – of Creation.

Any act by mind so defined, so charged, remains in its essence Choice that can be re-chosen at the discretion of mind when it has regained discretion. Even in a context that depends on Intuition and Logic extracted from Memory to access the Truth: inside the unconscious mind’s dream. Where it was when ACIM was written and Jesus urged its students to “choose again.”

If the intrusion of an alien psychology of victimhood into an unconscious, defenseless mind was a theft of Free Choice, mind that is Free Choice, coming to its senses, can return to the offense and take it back. Though The Story of the Child acknowledges that unconsciousness was a trap, and the Child’s “choice” of the wrong “self” was by no means free, its Logic and the Logic of ACIM speak as one on this essential point.

The Child has both the Necessity and the capacity to “choose again.”

We are to judge for ourselves

What does all this mean for us? In its interpretation and application of ACIM’s lesson, The Story of the Child has stood for independent judgment. It has expressed itself in the spirit of Jesus’ teaching, that in choosing again we are to use our own Judgment, our own gifts and talents, and be guided by Logic. In the being and doing of Free Will, we are to think, feel, and judge for ourselves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The great philosophical divide: “realism” vs. “idealism”

The great philosophical divide is between those who do (“idealists”) and those who don’t (“realists”) want to replace the unreality of replication / disconnection-separation:

  • illogic-insanity / self-delusion
  • lawlessness-chaos / opposites-contradictions / competition-disunity
  • captivity / conformance / oppression
  • isolated bodies-matter
  • appearances-deceptions
  • misunderstanding / projection-blame / guilt-fear / victimhood
  • punishment-retribution / conflict-violence / destruction
  • uncreativity / ignorance / stagnation
  • invalidation-disempowerment / worthlessness
  • non-being / mortality

with the Reality of Oneness / Relationship-Interconnection:

  • Logic-sanity / Self-Awareness / Knowledge
  • Governance-Order / Harmony / Sharing-Community
  • Freedom / Free Will / Expression
  • Interconnected Minds-Selves
  • Reality-Truth / Honesty-Integrity
  • Understanding / Love / Innocence / Psyche-Soul Harmlessness
  • Creation / Learning / Growth / Progress-Development
  • Affirmation-Empowerment / Worth
  • Being / Life-Eternity

In the philosophical divide “idealists” committed to the Reality of Oneness consider themselves the true “Realists.” To “idealists” “realists” are the true self-deluded “unrealists.” To “realists” it is the reverse.

This author’s perspective belongs with historic idealists who consider themselves true realists. The Story of the Child is therefore written from the perspective of one Child-mind convinced by Logic of its Reality. If it earns-deserves “authority” it is not by virtue of the qualifications of its author or the subjectivity or objectivity of his perspective. It is by virtue solely of its internal Logic.

Alignment with A Course in Miracles

It does not seek identification with any philosophical or religious thought. But it does claim inspiration from the Logic of Jesus in A Course in Miracles. Any contradiction in the Logic of The Story of the Child with ACIM is to be resolved in favor of ACIM.

The Story of the Child is not intended to be in any sense an alteration of, or improvement on, ACIM. Though it shares its basic purpose with ACIM – explanation to help with Understanding-Forgiveness and thus with awakening – it does not share the same scope. The Story of the Child is a conscious attempt to extend the scope of ACIM’s Logic back in the Sequence of Logic from an act by a mind unconscious that produced the dream of unreality to the event that explains the mind’s loss of consciousness.

It hopes thereby to provide a foundation for Understanding context that will support logical interpretations of what happened and why. So that attempts to explain, Understand, and correct human behavior driven by this event and its consequences will cease conflicting with Logic. Will cease perpetuating error and putting off the unhappy Child’s awakening from its nightmare. So that future attempts will succeed because they align with Logic. 

Is this relevant? Is it “practical?”

Tell me that our world isn’t spiraling into another cycle of authoritarian horrors, lawlessness, delusion, and destruction. Tell me that the “optimism” of “realists” is warranted against all the evidence that the unreasoning, insensitive, self-absorbed children that we are refuse to grow up. That our world is tending toward freedom and compassion instead of more oppression and cruelty.

Tell me that the “optimism” of “realists” deserves center stage instead of the countless victims of self-delusion who don’t share their “optimism.” Who know better. Whose voice will be heard when the “optimism” of “realists” makes certain that there are no voices left. To what is the “optimism” of “realists” attributable? To happenstance: to the fact that their misguided “realism” – their self-delusion -- hasn’t, so far, made them victims.

Tell me that our fields of inquiry – science, philosophy, psychology, theology – have good explanations that all add up to Understanding. So that the voice of self-delusion that’s got the field to itself won’t turn this century into a worse horror show than the last. Or have we forgotten? Two world wars, the Great Depression, the cold war and its threat of nuclear annihilation. More pandemics and the greatest horror of them all: Anthropocene. Mass extinction dismissed as “climate change” in the popular imagination so that infantile, self-absorbed children, who refuse to grow up, won’t be inconvenienced.

What The Story of the Child will show

If the “explanations” offered by the dominant paradigms of our fields of inquiry brought us to this, are they “relevant?” Are they “practical?” What The Story of the Child will show is that they are neither. Their “realism” is dead wrong, and they have brought us to this. They are accountable. They are the issue, not the Logic of another perspective. If they can’t explain the reality behind appearances then let them explain why their veneration of appearances has failed.

I would meet you upon this honestly.

2

What value most expresses Mind’s stance of Being in opposition to no-being? In opposition to no-life, no-mind? What value anchored in the philosophy of Jesus most accounts for its unprecedented influence on Western thought, personal behavior, relationships, and religious practices? What value lies at the heart of “Life,” that gives it its psychic force and purpose both in the telling of the Story of Mind and the Story of its Child, in Consciousness and unconsciousness? It’s Love.

“Worth” is all of Love’s expressions put together, all of its constituent values: the beauty of purity and innocence, family, community, freedom, health, self-worth, purpose, learning and growth, abundance, protection, empowerment, and hope. There are no values that do not express their root value of Love. “Worth” is the sum and integration of all values. It is the ultimate consideration in all things.

When we say our purpose is the Creation and reciprocation of worth, we simply mean our purpose is to Love and be Loved: to Love ourselves, our Parents, and our Creations. To “Love our enemies” is simply to overlook the unreality of who they are in our state of unconsciousness – guilt -- and to Love their Reality in Consciousness – our Innocent Self.

No statement of our purpose in Life, in Being, is complete that does not begin and end with Love. What motive that accounts for the feeling, the force behind Creation, behind Life, can arise without Love? What force could possibly arise in Reality and Truth in response to the awful implications of nothingness, to its implied power to rule the state of opposites, if not the power of Love?

What is the cause of Being if not Love? What is our cause if not Love? This is what “the Creation and reciprocation of Worth” – our purpose – means. These are not arid speculations about academic abstractions, distinctions in search of relevance, “pure” research with no discernible application. How can they be if the Logic of Mind holds that every thought is driven by feeling and every feeling in Reality is guided by thought?

Without feeling thoughts which are causes can have no effects. There are many ways to understand Energy, the force of Logic that gives the thoughts of Mind their power to connect, to make Real, to give Life, to Create, that gives Mind and its extension, the Child, its authority to enforce the Logic of Mind with order and discipline. But beyond its eternal restlessness the most important way is to understand that Energy expresses and applies the power of feeling. Feeling that no less than any other gift, any other value, can be perverted by the Child’s mind in its unconscious state to serve its opposite. And this is where we find ourselves, coping in our confusion with the very thing that Being does not stand for: fear, guilt, and hatred.

What brings Love, feeling, and Energy or force into the Story of Mind now? They were present at the “Beginning” when they as much as Mind-Consciousness and Logic pierced the darkness with light when Consciousness was switched on. They and Mind are joined at the hip, all of one piece, equal partners in Being and Creation. They come into the story now because they are the working end of Consciousness, the dynamic that sets Mind in motion toward its purpose of Creation once we establish what it is. Now we are into the fun part -- the joyous, open-ended adventure into the unknown that gives the free spirits of Inquiry and Love their meaning, their outlet, their voice.

Without Love thoughts are just thoughts of no consequence. “Being” is just a word without Love. Why? Because Love is their purpose. Our purpose in Creating and reciprocating worth through Creation is to bring Love into Creation, to use and apply it, express and connect with it, in everything we think and do. The great thought systems of human history, our philosophies and theologies, are striving through trial and error to reconstruct the Child’s obliterated Consciousness, to find his way – our way – back to Love. Our purpose in validating Mind’s stance, Being, to stand for Life against the possibility of no-life, is to Love Mind, to Love the Consciousness, the Oneness, the seed of Creation and Innocence that gave birth to us and gave us our role, our purpose in Creation – our Source, our Parents Father Mind and Mother Love.

Love isn’t an afterthought when Mind-Consciousness switched on and took its place. It’s what Mind-Being is all about. It’s what we’re all about: gratitude that consummates the gift of Love, of Worth – all the values that Love represents. Thankfulness for our Reality and for the opportunity to learn and grow in knowledge and freedom, so that we can all awaken and return to Reality. To our Source: Love.

That was “satan” we were looking at. The “no-mind” whose essential attribute is that it doesn’t exist. It’s a long road to explain how a not-thing can assume such a compelling, terrifying place in the human imagination, as though it were very much real, were endowed with super-human, super-natural attributes of its own so powerful that they compete with the powers of “almighty God” himself. Yet it happened. Welcome to the human psyche, the darkness within, to “evil.” This is where it started.

The Story of Mind will lead us to unimaginably beautiful states, so we needn’t despair. The Home we came from and the Sanctuary of Creation that succeeded it are secure in our Memory, and we will make it back. All this stirring of horror in the thought of no-mind requires is Discipline: our resolve not to make it real. The prospect of the switch toggling us out of Mind and into oblivion presents us with the first inviolable rule of the Logic of Mind: do not make opposites real. Do not make unreality real. It is a rule as mandatory in Reality and Creation as it is here in unconsciousness and unreality and as compelling as the other rule we have been taught: Never interfere with the Child’s Freedom of Choice. Never interfere with his Free Will.

It is the Thoughts of Mind that make up Reality. Anything “Real” is the product of a Thought of Mind. Plato’s “ideas.” “Emanations” to others wondering of old how “God” moved in his Fullness. The precedent set in the “Beginning” is that Mind’s answer to the Question does not logically exclude the possibility of a contrary answer. From this possibility must logically flow the possibility of opposites throughout Reality and Creation and into our world of appearances.

The possibility of a contrary answer is not a function of the Logic of Mind but of the Logic of the Question which precedes Mind and is not of Mind. The “Question” is only implied by the switch, and both it and its “Logic” are projections not of Mind but of the author of these speculations. The Child in his unconscious state is driven to expand his knowledge of the event that interrupted his role in Creation, to fully inform his choices so that they may be Free, so that the event that cost him his Consciousness will not happen again. These are not idle speculations. They could be driven by powerful forces, by the force of the Child’s awakening to resume his role in Creation.

The “Question” and the two possible answers it implies – a state of Mind-Consciousness and no mind that is also no state, no nothing – are therefore only a construct of the Mind that was extended to the Child, that is his only tool for understanding. What it actually is, is beyond understanding, because it is beyond Mind. So, it’s true: I do not know what I’m talking about. Neither does the Child. But we were given a Mind and we can think. We can Reason, and putting together constructs that work, that lead us to promising hypotheses just like science, are what thinking is for.

Mind that is Logic cannot hold contradictory thoughts. That would be illogical. Mind shorts out when it’s asked to think what’s not Logical, Real, or True, which is what interrupted the Child’s role in Creation. Opposites by definition are contradictory. Mind that stands for Being will bring to Consciousness, and therefore to Reality, every positive Self, Relationship, Value, and Connection that go into the Process and Structure of Creation whose Purpose is to validate the Worth of Being. Mind that stands for Being cannot, by definition, bring to Consciousness, and therefore to Reality, opposites of Creation and any of its components that stand for non-Being, that stand for or imply worthlessness.

The debate continues in our world of unreality over what is Real and what isn’t: mind versus matter, good versus evil, light versus dark. There wouldn’t be any issue if it were not for the confusion caused by our bodies and their material environment, appearances put there intentionally by non-being to block our awareness of Reality. The essential attribute of opposites in our experience is the same as it is for the other answer to the Question: unreality. What leads us to this conclusion is the same guide that leads us to every other conclusion: the Logic of Mind, Mind that cannot hold contradictory thoughts.

If there’s any doubt as to which of two opposite states is Real, the one that supports the cause of Life is Real. The Good is Real, evil is not. The positive is Real, the negative is not. The distinction between opposing philosophies -- “dualists” who hold that opposites are both real and “non-dualists” who hold that only one side is real -- is valid but superfluous. “Dualist” philosophies can be disregarded simply because they are illogical. Science, philosophy, and religion that assume the reality of bodies and matter, whose reasoning is subjective and therefore circular, are illogical. They violate Mind’s defining Logic: it cannot hold contradictory thoughts. If there is a contradictory thought, an opposing negative thought, it must then not be Real. Bodies and their material environment conflict with the Reality of Mind which is not matter and are therefore not Real.

What is “Real” in its essence? It is what Mind recognizes as being in and of its Self, where its “Self” is defined by a host of attributes, an entire interconnected thought system whose essence is where we come from, the Source of the Child: Innocence. It is the essential attribute of Oneness, which holds the seed of Creation and Knows no opposites. This is Reality.

Unless and until we present ourselves to our Parents in our Innocence, so they will recognize us and admit us back into Consciousness, into Reality, we will remain mired in unreality. We will remain on the opposite side of the veil, our split minds holding contradictory thoughts, deceived and distracted by appearances, forever projecting guilt. We will continue the Child’s struggle to reconstruct the Logic of Consciousness so that we may all awaken and return Home. And I wonder, in my own dream of blame and guilt, will the struggle ever end?

[Author's note: The possibility of "real" separation is addressed again in "Origin and Meaning: The Logic of Everything" (April 4, 2021). It concludes that the condition of statelessness is a logical impossibility and therefore unreal, and that separation is only "real" within the context of the illusion, the unreal dream "made real" that is our material universe and the unreal possibility of no-mind / extinction that hangs over it. It concludes that everything that is, or isn't, must be part of the Interconnected Implications of Logic, the Source of Reality and Creation, the presence of Everything.]

We’re not done with the “perfection” of “Heaven.”

Our material world, this “life,” is distinguished as much by the absence of love and reason as by its presence. Something is radically wrong. The disorder of this world is present in “Heaven,” too, in the Logic of the Question, because there is no discernible Logic to the switch between Being and its opposite. It’s entirely arbitrary, beyond Mind-comprehension, which means beyond Logic-Reason, the basis for order and predictability. The considerations of Reason are values and there is no place for them. The switch is even beyond irrational because neither Reason nor the lack of it has anything to do with it. It’s beyond disorderly because for all we know it’s just a flip of the coin, the toss of fuzzy dice, pure chance.

Logic governs everything within the realm of Mind and Reality created by Mind, but it does not extend beyond Mind to the Question which precedes Mind. Logically, philosophically, the void has as much reason, as much “right,” to “exist” as Being. And so, from this archetypal opposite descends all the opposites that shadow the Child and his Creations, from his birth in Consciousness deep into our world of his unconsciousness.

The archetypal opposite shadows Mind as well but in a very different way, and the difference will play a decisive part in the Child’s loss of Consciousness. Mind cannot and must not Know the possibility of the thought of its opposite. The Child’s experience with loss of Consciousness has taught him the reverse: if he’s to manage his role in Creation he must know the possibility of the thought of his opposite. It is crucial to the exercise of Free Choice, to Creation, and to staying awake. And thus the lesson that Memory has for us here on earth: to guard our thoughts.

The physicist Stephen Hawking was so determined to exclude all thought of “God” and religion from science that he proposed a universe that simply is and therefore needs no creator. His solution was to exclude the universe from considerations of “God” by making the universe “God.” But whether mind or matter is posited as the form and substance of Being is irrelevant if the logical possibility still exists of no Being, no “God.” This is the ultimate context of the Story of Mind, not whether it’s “perfect” or logical, Mind or matter, but whether it has a true opposite as opposed to the derivative “non-being.” Philosophically, logically, it does have a true opposite: No mind. Mindlessness. Nothingness. The void.

Separation is a logical impossibility in Reality and even in unreality, no matter how much sensory perception tells us otherwise. Hawking’s own profession tells us so, from Newton’s and Faraday’s intuition, to Maxwell’s calculations, to the revelations of Bohr’s and Einstein’s quantum mechanics: everything is interconnected. The Child's imagining that he could separate himself from his Parents, that he could project himself into a separate world, is the insanity that got us here. A delusion not freely chosen but by a mind unconscious, traumatized, defenseless, and overtaken by an alien thought system. We know it well, for it’s the same virus that invades and infects our thoughts.

Beyond Mind and Reality separation is not a logical impossibility. It is implied by the Question. It “exists” if only as a premise. It is neither Real nor unreal, here nor there, yet it commands consideration. For it is the mother of all opposites, the explanation why we dwell in a state of opposites.

Philosophers from classical antiquity on have observed patterns of opposites without mining their significance. The little and big opposites in our everyday experience are significant. The implications for our lives, our world, are enormous. There is no true Sanctuary. Our Home is situated on top of the San Andreas fault and there is no telling if or when it will ever erupt. We have no control over it. Our only protection is the Cause of Being and our role in serving it.

The watchword for our role in Reality is no different than it is here, with climate change, our pandemics, our threats to world peace: We are in this together.

What is implied by the Story of Mind is that it is the Story of Logic. Everything that flows from Mind in the “beginning” either extends Consciousness in an unbroken network of logical connections or it becomes a perversion of logic when the Child’s mind becomes unconscious. We deal either with Logic or its logical opposite, but one way or the other we are dealing with the essential attribute of Mind which is Logic. It is the source of “necessity,” the notion favored by philosophers who also speak of the “nature” of things, the “laws” of cause and effect. It’s all about Logic.

To violate Logic is to violate Mind itself, because Mind can’t be what it is not. If you are born within Mind as the Child was and you violate Logic there’s only one possible outcome. You can’t not Be, because you are part of Being itself. But you can lose Consciousness. It may be tough on you, but if there isn’t a breaker to trip from Consciousness into unconsciousness think of what happens to Mind. Mind can’t hold contradictory illogical thoughts and still be what it is, Logic.

This just to emphasize, before we get out ahead of ourselves, that Mind and Logic are joined at the hip. Logic is what Mind does but it is also what Mind is. Which means that everything is governed by Logic. Everything has attributes and these are defined by Logic. Even unconsciousness. Reality and unreality both. Even Feeling -- Mother Love, the Free Spirit who can’t be captured by anything, even by definitions, yet she is contained within Oneness, the Seed of Creation, and accepts the Logic of Purpose, the birth of hers and Father Mind’s Child and their Child’s part in Creation. This attempt to explain the Child’s loss of Consciousness stands or falls on Logic, because there can be no other basis for it, neither blind faith nor experience.

“Mother Love” / “Father Mind.” How did gender get into it? Must their Child be referred to as “he?” There is no word in the English language that’s gender neutral that also captures the reality and force of Self – the Who instead of the What. “It” does not suffice and I usually prefer not to resort to “their.” My choice of the feminine for Mother Love and masculine for Father Mind follows our cultural norms but is otherwise entirely arbitrary and free of bias. As is my choice of the masculine for the Child which could be either, though it will be seen that the Child’s masculine or feminine attributes do play a part in his/her story and are not incidental.

Imagine that you get to decide whether anything shall Be. You’re a nice person so you don’t want a black hole of death and nothingness to have your name on it. You want something nice, so you say let there be Life. And presto, there it is: Life! You’ve begun the process with your mind which makes choices based on thoughts-reasons and feeling. With Logic. With definitions and attributes. And the Logic of your choice is a Self endowed with its definition and attributes: Life.

If that were all there is to it we would all have eternal life and it would be nonstop fun, joyfulness, and laughter. But that’s not all there is to it. “Life” wasn’t a given with no opposite. It was a choice, and just because you chose it doesn’t mean that Life doesn’t imply the potential existence of its opposite, death, or the opposite of Being which is nothingness. The Logic of “Life” includes the possibility of its opposite. The definition of Life can’t be detached from the definition of what it is not. One implies the existence -- the definition, the Logic -- of the other. So, in choosing Life you have set in motion a scenario – a logical sequence of events -- that must include the possibility of opposites. And as we will find, the Logic of opposites and their attributes can make their presence felt in the mind of an unconscious Child.

The Logic of Mind implies the possibility of the thought of its opposite: mindlessness. But because its true opposite, as opposed to the derivatives non-mind or non-being, is entirely separate and mindless, Mind has no Knowledge of it. Mind that is Consciousness by definition can have no Knowledge of the possibility of its own unconsciousness. This is because by definition it can’t be unconscious. This is an attribute of Mind-Consciousness that will be decisive in the Child’s loss of Consciousness, so we need to remember it.

Popular culture and mythology, religion and philosophy, all condition us to think of “God” as “all-powerful” and “all-knowing.” One among many definitions of Mind is “Knowledge.” Yet the Logic of Mind, as we will see, implies that there is much that Mind does not know. All that is Real is what Mind Knows, and it is Mind that Creates Reality. It cannot know what it is not, for to do so would make its opposite Real. It cannot Know the unknown into which Creation, by definition, ventures. The effects of causes cannot be brought to Consciousness, cannot be made Real, without following in logical sequence, where there is a before and after. Mind-Consciousness does not Know effects of causes, does not bring them to Reality, until it recognizes them. To recognize a violation of Logic in cause and effect, to bring it to Consciousness, would violate the Logic of Mind and throw it into unconsciousness – an impossibility. As we will see, it was to prevent a violation of Logic of the Child’s Conscious Mind that his Mind lost Consciousness.

The Logic of timelessness does not imply that everything that is and is to be is already Known. Consciousness that does the Knowing and therefore the Creating -- the Child in Relationship with his Parents – is timeless and eternal. Yet it proceeds with Creation in logical sequence into the unknown; is therefore constantly extending and expanding itself; engaged in change; and it is the glory and wonder of Creation, of Life, that in its presence it is eternally yet to come.