Noel Gallagher, Kurt Cobain and conspiracy theories

Noel Gallagher of Oasis fame once was asked in a filmed interview, whether he would be interested in watching a documentary called "Soaked in Bleach", and he asked whether the documentary was "conspiracy stuff".

It's a documentary which deals with the final days of Kurt Cobain's life, including his death, with most of it based on tape recordings made by a private investigator hired by Courtney Love, Kurt's wife, to find her husband (who was clearly avoiding her) after he had gone missing for a short period of time after leaving a detox centre in Los Angeles for heroin addiction.

When Noel was told the film was "conspiracy stuff", Noel said he hated conspiracy stuff and that was that.

For a guy who seems quite intelligent, that is a strange thing to say, considering his interest in Kurt and appreciation of his music, and how common conspiracies are in this world and how important historical events can only be understood through the conspiratorial lens.

It showed a lack of curiosity on Noel's part that I find unusual, considering Noel seems like someone who values knowledge, particularly about musicians he admires, like the Beatles and Nirvana, for example.

But there you go. Was Noel one of those people brainwashed to think conspiracy = nonsense, which is a very childish notion and which helps keep the lid on subjects where the truth being widely shared and understood may not only advance justice in the world, it would bring forward the understanding of the human race of what forces are at play in the world. Which is absolutely essential if we are to progress as  race.

If that's not interesting, then I don't know what is. Maybe just some banal nonsense on the TV or in a newspaper, that he perhaps reads, often designed to manipulate the viewer's emotions and to mislead them.

But that's life. Some people like to wear blinders and put limits on their search for truth. As a result, they often end up far less knowledgeable than they could be and far more  easy to mislead, due to an intentional lack of understanding of how the world really works, behind the illusions designed to fool us.

Consciousness and philosophy

(A response to a Facebook post denying the existence of mind.)

Is mind being confused with consciousness, here? 

In the Vedas, and many other spiritual teachings, consciousness is the one thing we cannot deny. 

Everything else, such as thoughts and sensations, are objects in consciousness, which would either not exist, or not be known about, were it not for consciousness. 

This is the primary philosophical teaching. 

Western philosophy seems to largely ignore this primary truth, which is why much or all of it will eventually evaporate into the winds.

God and the existence of evil

There is a lot of confusion about evil. 

Some deny it exists and others believe it is a creation of God to test us and to educate and strengthen us.

My own understanding is that neither of these viewpoints are true.

As soon as a being is created with free will the potential for using that will destructively exists.

So evil, from this perspective, is a choice made by a free will being to act destructively, individually or en masse, towards other beings.

Why a being would choose to attempt to control and damage other beings is a big question which requires a detailed answer.

I recommend Kim Michael's books and his website articles for that.

It's been a fascination of his for some time, and his books are very detailed and are the consequence of inspiration, like many writings in the Bible.

To summarise what I'm saying here:

1. God did not create evil, but he created beings with free will that could choose an upward path  or a downward path in evolution.

2. Whether God foresaw how some free will beings would use that free will destructively is beyond my knowledge base. 

I don't necessarily believe God is all knowing, or at least able to predict the outcome of free will choices with certainty. 

That's the whole point of having free will. 

If behaviour could be accurately predicted 100% ahead of time it wouldn't be free will, it would be determinism, which would be like creating an army of robots. 

And that would be boring and pointless.

Without the unexpected there would be very little point to life.

3. By the respecting of free will, even what we would call "evil actions" must be allowed. 

In fact, there may be no way to stop such actions without harming every living thing on the planet.

For example, the great flood in which Noah and his family and a selection of animals (and plants?) survived. 

This was to wipe out the evil (which can mean humankind becoming deeply mired in materialism) which had become out of control and was causing souls to sink into the abyss.

Such circumstances may require the overriding of free will so that a new "playing board" can be created to allow upward spritual growth to happen once again.

Fearing God and cause and effect

I often hear the quote "fear God", but I don't believe it's God we need to fear.

After all, God is all love and mercy.

Instead, what we need to be concerned about is cause and effect. 

This is how we learn. 

There is no punishment, per se, just the outcome of our actions, experienced both here and in the next world. 

How else could we learn, if we never reaped what we sowed? 

In that case we would be able to get away with murder, and this creation would be a madhouse, with no effective governing rules.

Thankfully, that's not how it works, but this fact will upset some, who have acted as if there will be no consequence to what they have done during their lifetime.