I have been asked many times as to why, in my opinion, the Eternal Return Model as elucidated in ITLAD has a greater evolutionary and developmental logic than the classic model of reincarnation. These are my thoughts on this important issue
If no knowledge of the previous life is carried forward then there is no evolution just unlearning repetition. However, in ITLAD/CTF the Daemon is introduced into the equation. The Daemon is not “weak”, far from it. It carries all the knowledge gleaned from all the re-runs of the BIMAX (“Samsara”). This knowledge is similar to the “game player” in an RPG. The only difference is that in an RPG the Game Player-Daemon can physically move the body of the Avatar-Eidolon on the screen.
In ITLAD/CTF the usual motive force in the body is dominated by the Eidolon (although under certain neurological circumstances, such as the “alien-hand syndrome” of split-brain patients). As such the Daemon can only control its motivations in the BIMAX by influencing the Eidolon by the various tools available to it (depending upon how wide the “Doors of Perception” are open). For example the classic movie example of this model is “Groundhog Day”. In this Phil Conner’s Daemon and Eidolon have totally merged into what I term a “Dyad” – a unitary being in which the Daemon and the Eidolon are one. In this case the Daemon can totally control the body (“soma”). Indeed I have often speculated whether as more and more “successful” BIMAXs are encountered the Daemon gradually becomes more immanent in the world of the Eidolon. If this is the case then the merging into a Dyad takes place gradually with the Daemon having more and more control. This parallels certain Eastern traditions whereby the aim of many-lives, the process of “Samsara” is to become a perfectly evolved being, and in doing so to move out of the state of samsara into Nirvana which is unification with the “Godhead” … what in English we call “Bliss”.
In itladian terms this nirvana state is the unification of the Daemon and Eidolon into a Dyad … a perfectly evolved being that becomes one with the Ultimate Source. Things can become confusing here in that the word “Avatar” is used to mean a computer-based image of the game-player located within the cyber-reality of the game environment. But it also means the embodiment of deity on Earth …. this is why the movie “avatar” has caused confusion in certain circles as “Jake” is not an embodied deity but he is somebody who is a human “embodied” in the soma of a Na’Vi. In itladian terms an “Avatar”, using the Buddhist or Hindu definition, is a Dyad who decides to not move on to Samsara but to return back into the BIMAX to help his or her fellow human beings.
Again this has amazing parallels with Eastern philosophies. Indeed I will be moving the model on in my next book when I will be introducing a new aspect to the philosophy, and this a refinement of the “Uber-Daemon” concept that has been discussed many times in Walker Group meetings. This will apply the Spinozerian model of God with the modern concept of Pandeism of Bernard Haisch, James Oroc and Martin W Ball.
I am aware that this is taking ITLAD/CTF into a whole new area but I feel that this is where it has to go. We have done the ontology and now we need to move to the teleology…..
Subscribe To The Newsletter
Join the mailing list to receive the latest news and updates from Anthony Peake.