[Part two of a two-part column. Part one is viewable at www.thereader.com]
Years back, during my record-producing days in Los Angeles, I experienced a particularly rewarding morning. I arrived early for an all-day session at Westlake Audio’s Studio C on Santa Monica Boulevard in Hollywood. Studio C has seen the creation of any number of hugely successful records. At the time, it was also being used by Quincy Jones, Bruce Swedien and Michael Jackson to produce Bad, the follow-up to Michael’s Thriller album. They were on hiatus, which gave me the opportunity to use C for a few days.
I had requested that the control room be voiced, which means adjusting the sound of the wall-enclosed monitor speakers so they reflect an acoustic response that is accurate. It’s sort of like making sure the treble isn’t turned up too high in your car so the sound system presents the music in a normal way. In a studio as advanced as Westlake’s, it’s a tedious and intricate process. Techs usually hated to do it more often than they had to. But (surprise) I was pretty picky back in the day.
Jim Fitzpatrick was the head tech at Westlake and he came in early at my request to do the voicing himself. One of the tools used in voicing is a piece called a real-time spectrum analyzer. I’d seen this box a hundred times before but for some reason on this morning, asked Fitz why it was called “real-time.” He replied simply. (That’s one of the great things about Fitz, he distills a complicated techie thing to a simple answer.)
“That means it analyzes and provides data immediately, in the ‘now’ rather than having to wait for it to process to deliver later, in the future,” he explained.
“Wow,” I thought. What a cool and observant term. Computer geeks had recognized a metaphysical concept and nonchalantly labeled it in keeping with such. If “now” is, as they call it, “real time,” then that makes the past and the future both “unreal-time.” Brilliant. Anything unreal does not exist. By that indisputable logic, both the past and the future are not real.
Back to the future. So, previous issue we tackled the who, what, where, when of the creation myth. To briefly recap, God didn’t make the world you see. We did. It’s time to cover the why and the how this physical world came about.
God did create us, the real us, the non-physical entity that is you; but as for the body and the physical world, nuh-uh. That is, unless you mistakenly think that consciousness is a physical thing. So, on to the why God created us and why we in turn made the world we see.
God has no choice but to create us. By definition, God is the creator. In order to fulfill that role, God had to create something, a created if you will. We fulfill God. Without our existence as the created, God would be not-God. That can’t happen. So the why is actually a default position, required by definition.
The how God creates us is pretty simple, too: with thought. Thought is the ultimate creative energy, the coin of the realm that brings anything, even illusions, into existence. God thought and we exist. And bear in mind, that didn’t happen a long, long time ago. It happens in the “now.” Remember the lesson of Fitzpatrick? If you continue to think that God created us a long, long time ago instead of now, you are believing in something unreal: the past. Nice try.
What, then, is the answer to how this world of illusion met existence? Thought is the answer. But it isn’t God’s thought. It is ours. We thought this into existence. The illusion of a physical world reflects a faulty thought that we hold: the idea of the possibility of separateness. While quantum physics, metaphysics, the Lakota “Mitakuye Oyasin” and other tenets teach that the universe is one, we insist (mistakenly) on believing in separateness. The projected illusion of a physical world is our “proof.”
Assigning creation of the physical world to a spiritual deity is just another abrogation of our power and ability to manifest, another denial of the creative power of thought. Making a physical world such as a planet is not such a big deal, actually. After all, science is already using the term terra-forming to describe making a large mass of elements resemble and function as an analog to what we know as planet Earth. And once we realize the potential to make a planet, the leap to a synchronous solar system and beyond is not that much of a step.
Further, acknowledging that we are responsible for the world reconciles seeming contradictions about God. It’s a paradox that a God credited for a beautiful sunset is the same God responsible for a 70-foot, humanity-crushing tsunami. The list goes on. For that matter, so do we: in the now.
Heartland Healing is a New Age polemic describing alternatives to conventional methods of healing the body, mind and planet. It is provided as information and entertainment, certainly not medical advice. It is not an endorsement of any particular therapy, either by the writer or The Reader. Visit HeartlandHealing.com for past articles.