The ability to assign and unassign importances, while native to the being, will be found to require some attention on the route out. The assignment of the consideration of unimportance to a mental mass after having considered the mass important is merely an attempt to devalue it (Mustn’t know), and is just another method of attempting to vanish it by means of force. Hence, we have no need to consider the subject of unimportance. Once one grasps that the need to regard a thing as unimportant is an importance in its own right, one has entirely got the flavor of all this. The ‘button’* is importance; the unimportance comes out in the wash.
*Button: a hidden sensitivity that can be manipulated to produce a desired response. When one “pushes your buttons” they are trying to evoke a response from you. Used loosely in this context as something that is important to the person or that they are concerned/sensitive about.
The being, in his progressively more violent games condition with his own mind has endeavored to
devalue it in the hope that it will go away and leave him alone. The cycle has been:
Mind considered as a series of past scenes.
Mind considered as pictures of past scenes.
Mind considered as memories, having no objective existence.
Mind considered as configurations in the brain.
The truth is that we have a being who can look at scenes. He can look at ‘now’ scenes, and he can look at ‘then’ scenes. The only difference is that ‘then’ scenes are scenes of ‘then’ and ‘now’ scenes are scenes of ‘now’. If ‘then’ seems less real than ‘now’, it is only because the being has made it so. A being can only communicate across a distance. He cannot communicate through time. So, when he is looking at a ‘then’ he is looking at it now. Whatever he looks at, he looks at now.
A being can view ‘now’ from any viewpoint. A being can view ‘then’ from any viewpoint. Thus, every moment in time is a complete universe which is viewable to the being. (Viewpoint here is used in the sense of a ‘position from which to view’, and not in the sense of holding a mental opinion.) Thus, a being is natively capable of viewing every particle that has ever been brought into existence in this, or any other universe, from any viewpoint he so desires. He is also natively capable of taking any of these particles back out of existence again if he so desires. Whether or not he can get agreement from others on this latter step is merely a matter of how convincing he is to others and is not a pre-requisite to the accomplishment of the feat. That others may choose to keep these particles in existence, still is, in the final instance, entirely their concern. Thus, you can walk out of the trap without the need to take everyone else with you. Believing differently is not to grant others the right to their own convictions - a trap all of its own.
Any changes you bring about, whether changes in ‘then’ or changes in ‘now’ you bring about now. So, any changes you make to ‘then’, later than when the event occurred will not ipso-facto* produce changes in ‘now’. Thus, what is called the time paradox is exposed for the lie that it is.
*Ipso facto is a Latin phrase that means “by the fact itself.” Ipso facto can be used the same way you’d use the phrase “because of that fact…”
If this concept seems difficult to grasp, it is only because one has become used to the idea of moving through time. This is an illusion brought about by entrapment in mass which is enduring through time. Only the particles, the effects, are created, made to endure, and are finally destroyed. The spiritual being, the creator of all these postulates, is utterly timeless. Once one fully grasps this, it is easy to see that changing the past does not ipso-facto produce a change in the present.
The Law of Duality
This states that the assignment of importance to a thing, or class of things, automatically assigns importance to the opposite or absence of those things. Thus, if life is considered important, then death - the absence of life - has also been granted importance. If the concept of ‘self’ is considered important, then the concept of ‘not-self’ is thereby also granted importance. From this law we see the proliferation and self-perpetuating nature of games.
The evaluation of things, one against the other, is achieved by the noting of differences and similarities between them. The ease of evaluation is inversely proportional* to the considered spatial and/or temporal separation of the things being compared. Thus, evaluation is easiest when the two things are placed side by side in the same moment of time. The limit is reached when the two things are viewed simultaneously, for then no time elapses while the attention shifts from one to the other.
*Inversely proportional is best understood by comparing it to ‘directly proportional’ which is its opposite. An example of something being directly proportional would be, “The more junk food you eat, the more you gain weight”. Inversely proportional would be “The amount of weight you lose is inversely proportional to the amount of junk food you eat”. Dennis could have just as easily said that the difficulty of evaluation is (directly) proportional to the considered spatial and/or temporal separation of the things being compared.