But it is amazing, the amount of substructure of reasoning which would have to go into this repudiation --successfully-- of the world thus exposing the divine. One would have to separate god the creator from God the True Father. As long as God is assumed to be creator, one could not conceptually divide him from the world, and thus affirm him in the act of denying the world. This is why all natural theology has failed. God cannot be discerned from nature; the argument from design back to designer is specious. What I saw that I term VALIS or Zebra must then not have been immanent deity at all, but, as I later realized, a mimicking entity not rising up from within but descending into objects and processes from above or, better, outside. It had, so to speak, landed here. As with Runciter's words in UBIK, it was penetrating through from --this is best formulation of all: from behind. Reality is constructed like a ham sandwich: man is one slice of the bread, then comes the slice of ham which is the world, then the second slice of bread which is God. The words in UBIK pierced or filtered through from the other slice, through *to man, to us, the this slice. It's funny that I could read the E of Philo about the world being "an alienating, divisive agency that separates man from God" and not instantly perceive the value --perhaps the ultimate value-- of my writing & its preoccupation. In point of fact, such novels as UBIK, MAZE, STIGMATA, etc., tend to dissolve away the world -- and, if the Gnostics' 3-elements situation-view is a correct view, God should be reunited with us thereby.
Now the incredible accuracy of UBIK can be appreciated. The world is not merely counterfeit (as in STIGMATA and all the others)x; there is more: it is counterfeit, but under it lies another world, and it is this other world, this Logos world, which filters or breaks through. UBIK, then, is a step up from MAZE and STIGMATA is presenting this. It presents a triune situation, which evidently is the actual one, whereas the other novels & stories present only the aspect of world as hallucination, without disclosing that another, actual one lies beyond, below or beneath.* It is God who, as the far bread slice, takes the initiative toward us, as Runciter does toward Joe Chip and the other inertials. This is what I saw in (3-74), when, under the power of the Holy Spirit, I read the dream section in TEARS and found a latent or crypte message embedded in the text. My experience and view, then, are not only Gnostic but what is more tend to prove the correctness of the triune Gnostic division, in particular their view of the world as alienating and divisive between man and God (Joe Chip & Runciter). Had the Gnostic view been wrong, when I "abolished" the world (suddenly withdrew assent from it) I would have exposed nothing, no sublime, sacred, divine reality beyond; a religious experience would have turned out to be nothing but a psychotic break.
Were the Gnostic triune division wrong, my writing would serve a malign, sick purpose: leading the reader away from reality and toward autism. But the Gnostic triune division is correct; otherwise I could not, would not, have had my 2-74 and 3-74 et al experiences. As the
*This is incorrect. MAZE shows another, actual reality lying below the hallucinated one, but it wrongly shows it as bad. It is this world which is bad, is the prison; beyond or below it lies the divine. In fact there seem to be 3 levels: hallucinated good; prison below, which is real, but not the final layer, and then the wonderous divine ground of being below.