But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."



1. So anyway… It sure looks like the popular scientific model of our own existence is wrong – it sure looks like we are not finite, short-lived and accidental.

2. So, what are we?

3. I don’t know about you, but I suddenly get this sense of miracle… I suddenly seem to be a miracle. I suddenly perceive a magic in my own existence. It’s just like that 3D Christmas tree I told you about (back in http://messiahornot.com/SmokingGun.php). I just discovered a new way of looking at things.


4. This is the smoking gun that you probably don't see – not yet, at least. Most likely, you will only see this as interesting and confusing, but not “revelationary,” and not convincing of immortality or magic or anything like that.

5. I would just encourage you to keep coming back till it does… It’s there -- you just need to sort of “re-focus.”

6. Ideas do grow and reproduce if you nourish them – if you keep playing in their vicinity…

7. And hopefully, you’ll suddenly see the 3-D Christmas tree, and get the sense of your own transcendence.

8. Otherwise, hopefully, you will accept that science has a serious mathematical problem with its conception of our existence, and that we probably are immortal. Hopefully, you will see that we are SURELY immortal.

9. But moving right along, there’s a lot more.


10. At least many of us humans do possess a “sense” of “transcendence.”

11. We sense an apparently non-physical quality of reality.

12. At least many of us humans sense a dimension of reality that somehow lies beyond -- or outside of -- time, space, cause and effect.

13. A dimension that seems to lie outside the realm of science.

14. A dimension, or set of dimensions, that cannot be dealt with by science.

15. In this dimension lies such things as “meaning,” “right and wrong,” “true love” and our kids…

16. Transcendence is not the same as “supernatural” (more about this later).

17. Some of us “sense” this quality much more than do others of us. Perhaps some of us do not sense it at all. And what's worse, it's impossible to know when someone else is sensing it -- except perhaps by electronic meters. And you, the reader, may not know whether you sense it or not...

18. Importantly, this sense may, or may not, actually denote anything. It may represent a “null class.”

19. This “sense” may simply be an evolutional artifact – a “hallucination” in our collective unconscious or racial memory -- “naturally selected” for its survival benefit – and not reflecting any “greater reality” at all.

20. Whatever, the sense, itself, is real; we didn’t have to make it up; this potential experience was given to us by either G-d or evolution. It lies in our neurology. Just that it may be a sense that signifies nothing – except our own needs…

21. But, then again, it may be our very own eye onto a real, parallel, and “magical,” universe... A universe that we normally look right through and take for granted – and of which, we would otherwise never notice the implications were it not for this other sense.

22. Interestingly enough, whichever it is, it is a real experience, in that it is carried by, or reflected in, our neurology.

23. And whichever it is, it does allow us to “rise above” the adversity around us, and to sense a part of ourselves that is “real,” and therefore, invulnerable. That which is transcendent is real and cannot be threatened – and, we are transcendent.

24. In addition, it allows us to experience a joy -- that seems to underlie all life (with all its adversity) but -- that otherwise goes unnoticed…

25. The stronger our sense of transcendence, and the easier we recall it, the less we can be threatened – and, the more we can enjoy life (the more we will enjoy life).

26. So somehow, it appears that through our sense of transcendence, we can rise above the adversity of the world while still basking in the glow of the world... Remember John Travolta in Michael?

27. So, rightly or wrongly, whether “transcendence” is actually a null class or not, many of us perceive the universe as having this “transcendent” nature. To us, the universe is magical, living, loving, personal, timeless. Or at least, it has a side to it that is all these things. There seems to be a transcendent dimension to reality.

28. Next, all these transcendent ‘things’ seem to require some sort of connection, some sort of … “unity” – there has to be a sort of transcendent “principal” or “whole” or “source” or “dimension.”

29. And what’s more, this transcendent whole has to be “personal,” “alive” and timeless, itself (because we are) – in fact, it has to be the epitome of personal, alive and timeless. This idea is the source of our notion of “G-d.” See what I mean?

30. And, this “G-d” loves us with a perfect love (cause love is the core of good). Or, at least, many of us sense that it is -- and ‘He’ does -- which also, is only natural.

31. Also, if there are such things as “right and wrong,” there has to be a G-d. If there are such things as right and wrong, the universe cares…

32. At this point, I should probably explain the distinction I make between “supernatural” (or “paranormal”) and transcendent.

33. There is the possibility of telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition and telekinesis. Then, there may be ghosts, spells and exorcism. Reincarnation could be a fact. We may think of G-d as a supernatural being.

34. What I want to point out, however, is that these ideas are somehow of a different ‘caliber’ than are the ideas I’m calling transcendent -- though we tend to lump them all together.

35. It could be that reality “goes from” transcendent to supernatural (or paranormal) to natural… So in "transcendence," I’m talking about something that is even more magical than "supernatural."

36. As you can see, this stuff is difficult to convey effectively.

37. Now, the concept of transcendence cannot be conveyed “directly” – it can only be conveyed indirectly through a kind of “osmosis.”

38. Telling you that “transcendence” refers to something outside of time, space, cause and effect won’t do it for you unless you’ve recognized the concept already.

39. These are the words evoked by the concept, but these words do not evoke the concept in people who have not already experienced the concept.

40. But then, what we call “stories” seem to communicate through osmosis. Stories seem to speak directly to our right hemispheres…

41. ? (Act 4)