"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" - Part One

3년 전

This will be the last time I ever speculate on the future in a negative light. After this, I will be focusing my writing towards fiction mostly, with the occasional philosophical piece or satire.

Before I dive into my novel series, I feel compelled to share a potential future which has been looking like a possibility to me for quite some time now. I have not spoken in detail about this theory in any length, mostly because I know how fantastical it would sound to most people.

Nevertheless, I have throughout the past year made several observations that seem to give a little credence to the prediction, and so while I may feel that it is more unlikely to occur than likely, the possibility of it coming to pass seems significant enough to me that I must share.

Before I explain what I believe may come to pass if we continue to do nothing to prevent it, I first want you to watch this 90 second video for a new company that makes smart appliances.

The first thing you might ask is; how the fuck is this an advert for smart appliances? Well, the answer is simple; it's not. You see, we all clicked "yes I agree to your terms and services" so many times that our data has become the primary means of introducing consumers to products they are likely to buy. And yet we still see an ungodly amount of advertisements on YouTube and TV- and very often they seem to be taking an abstract approach to marketing their products or services. It is my belief that, for the most part, television and YouTube advertisement has become more about controlling the mind of the viewer than about selling.

I do not want to spend much time decoding this video, for I have already done so with a video that was telling an unsurprisingly similar story. But, I would like to offer my interpretation of the very first six seconds of this video. It is going to be pretty fucking crazy, and moderately mature in the context of content(not really), but I have little doubt that this interpretation is very close to the mark. My hope is that if I can convince you of this small, insane thing first, then you might take my larger prediction seriously- for I feel this may be one of the most important things I will ever write. I feel that way now, at least. Anyway, prepare for weirdness.

This is the opening scene. I am making the claim that this path represents the shaft of a penis and the building a vagina. The car park then we can see is the tip of that penis. An added factor that I have noticed, is that depending on what you are viewing this on, and depending on how you are sitting, lying or holding your phone is watching it one, then to a male viewer, this could look to the subconscious mind like their own penis penetrating a vagina- the trees even seem to be indicating a bush. Lol. I am quite serious though, i believe that for some unlucky male viewers who are situated in such a way as so the path is aligned with where their penis would be if it were erect, then the psychological effect of this could be far more powerful.

So, now we have established the penis, we might note that the woman - a powerful looking woman who appears to be very wealthy - steps out of the car and onto the car park head of the (or your?) penis - with her high heels! Straight after it changes to a feminized man surrounded by smiling women.

Now, here is my very serious interpretation of these first few seconds. The subconscious mind catches sight of what looks like a penis penetrating a vagina- or if we are in the right position, our own penis or a representation of it. Next, a rich and powerful woman steps out of the car and stamps on the head of the penis, or on the head of your penis if you are in one of the aforementioned positions. So, it was a tease, and a rough one at that with the stamping. There is no sex on offer here, mate. But wait - right after the stamping we see a man with four women around him, he looks like he can get sex any time he wants with four women around him like that.

Now, this may look like nothing to you, but I think that for many men who watch this video, especially those who watch it in a half zombie state unaware of its nefarious intent to fuck with their minds, they will learn the unconscious lesson that you no longer win a woman by buying her things or protecting her, you do it by being more like her.

Now, either that made a lot of sense to you, and perhaps even explained somewhat of your environment to know they are up shit like this, and if so, perhaps now you will take what I have to say seriously, for it will sound far crazier by the end of this than what I just said.

Or, perhaps you now think I am mentally ill, a sexual deviant who sees cocks and fannies everywhere, or just someone with a really active imagination. If either of these is the case, then I would have to say that all three of them sound like something that would result in a fairly interesting read, so you might as well just continue on.

The future that I keep trying to persuade myself is never going to happen, but that I am repeatedly observing signs that it may, is a future where the people finally have freedom.

I know that many might argue that's a good thing, but do we really understand what freedom is? I have considered it in depth three times. The first time I left thinking that freedom means to be beholden to no one's rules but your own. The second time, I arrived at the opinion that freedom means to have no obstacle in life but your own conscience and will. The third time, however, I thought deeper about it and came to the realisation that freedom is an impossibility - at least within this material realm. Even if there were no governments, no forceful humans attempting to exact their will on you, what freedom would you truly possess? You'd still be beholden to the necessities of the flesh, to the availability of nutrition and refreshment, and to the wildlife that also inhabits the Earth. You would not be truly free.

They will have us believe that freedom means "to be free from dominating forces." That's what the implication seems to be when looking at the word. But, does it truly look like it means that to you? Let's consider the words "freestyle," "freefall," or "freethinker." "Freestyle" does not mean "free from style." "Freefall" certainly does not mean "free from falling." And "freethinking" certainly does not speak to someone who is "free from thought". So, should we take freedom to mean free from domination, or much like the other words, does it not suggest that freedom means "free to dominate others" or perhaps even more appropriately, "free to forge our own dominions?" This definition would fit the freedom I see on the horizon.

In the video I shared, it shows the crown going up in flames, followed by the words, "and from the ashes... comes freedom." If the crown represents authority, and if the burning represents the destruction of authority as we know it, then what type of freedom will be left?

I have spoken many times of how I believe that "anarchy" is an agenda. People are being conditioned to hate their governments and authority in general. Now this could just be a means of driving people towards decentralization, but these fuckers are far smarter than I am, and if I can think of many ways to do that without cultivating anti-establishment sentiment within the masses, then I am positive they could have too. So, the anarchistic programming seems to be serving another agenda to me - the incitement of a revolution, and controlled leaks such as pizzagate appear to be stepping stones towards that goal.

So if a revolution does happen in a number of countries around the world - I have seen far more evidence that this could be in store for the UK than anywhere else, but I am sure it will happen in more than one country if it happens at all - then what sort of freedom do you think will be left for the population? It will be a freedom akin to Alistair Crowley's law of Thelema - do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.


I have been working on this for an embarrasingly long time considering how few words I have written, so I am going to wrap this up here and start on the next part later tonight. In the following installment I will discuss how the law of Thelema might look in practice, and how Steemit is potentially an experiment - funded by an anonymous third party - to observe how such an anarchistic blockchain society might operate.



Thanks for reading.


If you are reading from off Steemit and would like to reward my work to make my life a little easier, you can donate some BTC here: 1G9of7ha1zazxSp2s9fCbfVDPHccPqmc61


Some recent writings on vaccination: Satire / Psychology

Find out about the latest global epidemic here

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
STEEMKR.COM IS SPONSORED BY
ADVERTISEMENT
Sort Order:  trending

The original law of Thelema came from Rabelais book—Gargantua and of Pantagruel.

·

I didn't know this. Thanks. Though, I only used that for the title because it sounds fitting in regards to the freedom I suspect they have in store for us. I don't intend to mention Crowley or Thelema again in any larger context than I already have.

·
·

Interesting, I feel we live in similar times as when Rabelais wrote that book.

·
·
·

I just looked into the series. Certainly sounds interesting to me, and apparently heavily satirical too, which sounds a bonus. I have very little time on my hands right now, but if I ever do, this series has been added to the list of books I would like to read. So again, thanks for the information.

People have the wrong interpretation of "Do What Thou Wilt."

Life is a flower, wilt thyself. Meaning life is what you make of it. The Buddhist would say, "All life is suffering." So if we are all slowly dying then we need to be having the best most greatest time of our lives while we are alive on this planet.

The meaning of life is to have a life of meaning. I say, "life begins with an empty canvas. So paint you a good life."

·

While I love your theory, it doesn't sound like it would be one shared with Crowley, who I now know adopted this from an earlier story. I hope to read the series in future, and perhaps in that one it will mean yours, and we will find that it was simply Crowley who perverted it. But, based on what I read about the novel series on wikipedia, it sounds unlikely at this point.

The word was more popular in his day and seems to be gaining traction again. Probably because of everyone talking about this phrase though. Lol.

Very interesting advertisement, full of subliminal messaging, for sure. Appreciate this post, and some very deep thoughts here. I'm intrigued by your thoughts as I sense an undercurrent of thought that appeals to my own perceptions and impressions of the man-made world we live in.

Maybe it is how far you have let your mind go that is a little stunning to me. There's a few observations and reactions I had that I'd like to share in this regard, that my own mind may be expanded.

Churchill had an interesting saying that has always stuck with me : "Democracy is the worst system, except for all the others."

I think that meme has stuck in many of our minds particularly in the West, but as I've been considering this New World Order quite deeply (I live in China as an expat where I see all kinds of interesting technocratic solutions being implemented where cities with populations the size of European countries are slowly but surely becoming quite controlled)

Anarchy in the animal realm precedes all forms of social cohesion. Anarchy (as opposed to anarchism) in its purest sense is nature. As far as I can tell, Anarchy does not mean "no rules", rather it means a "lack of a leader", such as in Athens, used in the Year of Thirty Tyrants, 404 B.C., when there was no "archon";

What it means is "the state of people without a government".

Government is the "act of governing or ruling;" (attested by 1550s), "system by which a thing is governed" (especially a state), from Old French governement "control, direction, administration".

So anarchy simply denotes the absence or lack of a system by which a thing is governed. It means the absence of control, direction, administration.

If you subscribe to Darwin's theory of evolution, I think you would find nature really does seem to exemplify this quite well. Yet I wouldn't confound and confuse the absence of control, direction and administration with the absence of order and harmony.

Actually, there's quite a bit of evidence that nature is incredibly ordered and harmonious, at least from what I understand about evolutionary biology, natural selection, and the like.

So my question for you is, would a system of global anarchy, where human beings returned to what philosophers (like Rousseau and others) called "The State of Nature", be possible? Advisable? Desirable? Feasible?

That's where Anarchism comes in. Anarchist philosophers believe so. And they also believe this would create much more order and harmony in the world.

But why then did human beings abandon anarchy and seek to control, dominate, administer, direct and all the like?

I see a variety of answers to such a question. Personally, in my conception of anarchy, just because we would abandon human authority does not mean we would be "left to our own devices".

Though I'm not a religious person, my view of a supernatural power is unflinching. I believe that order and harmony are created in a separate realm, a realm of forms, of ideas... The biologist Rupert Sheldrake speaks of "Morphic Resonance"; which I believe goes a long way in describing why certain behaviors, characteristics, drives, desires and the such do seem to do all the "governing" and "directing" for us, without the need for artificial intervention.

I'm really not against moving away from Judeo-Christian normative values and their inspired philosophical doctrines that have shaped the vision of the just society.

I believe all forms of just societies could exist, with many different modalities of behavior, where a variety of characteristics, drives and desires could survive, self-perpetuate and thrive.

But I cannot make any pronouncement on what those would be. What I am fairly confident of is that either they would fit the eternal, divine forms that the Universe / Divine Intelligence / Creation can tolerate, or sustain; or they would not.

So in my view, the "Brave New World" that you describe, the one we are entering in, if it has inherent and innate contradictions that it cannot resolve, it will disintegrate as the forces of entropy cause them to die-out.

What I'm trying to say and it's quite late and I may be too tired to articulate it with any justice is that there's nothing new under the sun. Either we will intuitively create something that is good, and can sustain itself and last; or we will create something that sucks, that's no good and that will destroy itself.

The game that the elite play, and I use the term elite specifically to denote people who seek to control, administer, direct (and not just to designate people of incredible talent, skill and intelligence, which could be another way of defining the elite of our species) is to try and "Play God".

I think "Playing God" generally tends to fail, because as humans we simply lack the fundamental perception of the 4th dimensions. We cannot see with much clarity how current forms in the present look like when we take into account their genesis and their conclusion.

That's the classic "Was what Hitler did right or wrong" question. In 1940 it looked like it was right, then it started looking like it was wrong. But maybe if he had not done it, something worse would have happened down the line (when we had nukes), so maybe in a way it was good.

My point is we don't know whether things are good or bad when they are happening, all we have is a residual intuitive feeling which emanates from the 4th dimension (which is the form that 3 dimensional reality looks like over time). This is the "Divine Within", the "Timeless" part of our being.

That's really all we can trust on any matter, because reason and logic fail us because our minds cannot possibly compute the vast amount of factors and variables at play in a dynamic universe like our own, specifically given our biology and the complexity of our world.

It's quite easy for us to play God on 2nd dimensional creatures, but it's impossible for us to play God in this 3 dimensional reality. We can program sim-like characters to have fully developed lives, complete with emotion and trial and tribulation and failure and redemption and all of these things.

But we cannot predict what will happen tomorrow.

It's interesting.

I assume that above is a power much like us sitting behind a computer screen dictating what characters do. At least in my view the Universe is a kind of engine that sustains realities from all different kinds of angles or "doors" of perception. I believe the intelligence behind (or above or below or however one wishes to simplify it) our own reality much have the final word on any and all human matters.

And I'm okay with that.

So for me, it's like, I take this view that biological life is about the purification of consciousness. Our consciousness is what is important. The material universe is quite secondary to this. What's important is how we feel, the quality of our thoughts, of our relationships with each other. It's the choices we make. It's the challenges we take on, and the adversity we overcome.

That's what pushes the envelope ever further in terms of our own evolution, collective and personal. That's what is rewarded by the Universe / God / whatever one wishes to name it.

Anarchy and black magic Crowley shit don't seem to be mutually-exclusive any more than they are mutually-reinforcing. I think anarchy is just nature as it is, without us trying to make it behave a different way than it would; and black magic is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Lust for power, lust for domination; lust for instant gratification, and "Sin" in general (behaviors, characteristics, drives and desires that are self-destructive) do not seem to do well in the 4th dimensional view.

So if our world blindly fell into a kind of false-awakening, where people thought "Oh my God, because we no longer have any social taboos, because the morals, ethics and social mores of past eras have fizzled out because they are no longer applicable in our scientifically and technologically advanced global society, I can now go running around behaving like an evil and deranged monkey and living with all kinds of sin"; I do not think those with this view of consciousness would do well in the long-run.

Sure, in the short-term it might be like Dorian Gray. All the sex, drugs, and instant gratification my little heart can handle. But ultimately, having eyes bigger than the stomach, we will corrupt the balance, harmony and order of our subtle bodies.

We would stop dreaming. We would experience new kinds of neurosis, dis-ease, anxiety, trauma, and other forms of ailment. Eventually, we could go so insane, we would deviate so far from nature, that would start to disconnect from what spawned us in the first place: Nature.

So we would fail in this endeavor.

That's what we should all be mindful of going forward into these new technological and scientific societies.

We can't just forsake our root because our lifeline to this Universe will become very unstable, very shaky... We'll be in dangerous ground, and it will all come crashing down, if it must.

Well, that's my 2 cents. How do you feel about any of this? Is it re-assuring? Or grossly naive? I'd really enjoy hearing any future thoughts you might have on the subject, before you turn to fiction and the occasional satire. Still, always keep enjoying philosophizing.

Love of wisdom sustains us as a species :)

·

If you subscribe to Darwin's theory of evolution, I think you would find nature really does seem to exemplify this quite well. Yet I wouldn't confound and confuse the absence of control, direction and administration with the absence of order and harmony.

I do not entirely rule out evolution, but the possibility of it being true for me seems at lower than 2%, but, I do agree with your second sentence nevertheless.

So my question for you is, would a system of global anarchy, where human beings returned to what philosophers (like Rousseau and others) called "The State of Nature", be possible? Advisable? Desirable? Feasible?

I had to google the state of nature to clarify, and having done so, I have to wonder if there ever could have been a time before society. Once there is a certain amount of any given species in an area, especially when said species is of a high intelligence, a society forms out of necessity to help one another survive. So in my eyes, it is not society per se that is the problem, but modern society.

With that said, I believe a true utopia could be established on this Earth, and whether that would be a world with leaders or one without, I do not know, but it would certainly be one where we loved one another. If we tried now we would certainly fail. But, I believe that if we first phased out modern language and then brought the world to a point where we are all speaking a language that emphasizes our responsibility to one another rather than distancing us from it, shaped us to see one another as family rather than adversaries, and instilled within us a sense of teamwork rather than competition, then I truly believe that such a population would quite natural and instinctively create a world wide utopia.

But why then did human beings abandon anarchy and seek to control, dominate, administer, direct and all the like?

This is the question really isn't it? Where did we go wrong? I can't help but feel that a devil of sorts was involved, when observing the world. But beyond that I really don't know.

I see a variety of answers to such a question. Personally, in my conception of anarchy, just because we would abandon human authority does not mean we would be "left to our own devices".

I agree that I do not think the natural response to the end of government to be for the citizens to embark in a game of real life monopoly. But, if such a time arises, I suspect their will be influences on the ground pushing for a particular reaction from key members of society and from the people. I do aim to talk in far more depth about that reaction in the next post, but for now just consider the fact that police forces in the UK are becoming gangs for hire rather than governmental forces, and consider how that could become relevant in a "free" land.

I'm really not against moving away from Judeo-Christian normative values and their inspired philosophical doctrines that have shaped the vision of the just society.

I wouldn't be against that either, but I do not think we really are. We are just moving towards the values of different character in their play- Satan. I recently noticed that Satan sounds like sate in, which is too perfect a fit to be coincidence. For satisfying the desires of the flesh that lie within; giving into temptation, is what we attribute to Satan and satanic virtues.

So in my view, the "Brave New World" that you describe, the one we are entering in, if it has inherent and innate contradictions that it cannot resolve, it will disintegrate as the forces of entropy cause them to die-out.

I do not think, if what I have said happens, that all the world will be effected. I think many countries that are already well under control will simply transition onto the new Global system. But, countries such as the UK, would certainly be at risk. But I do not expect it to be a permanent thing, it would likely last but a few years before a solution was offered - to join the GU, Global Union. And of course, things would be likely to be shitty enough that we might be forced to say yes. Especially if you throw in some biological disease that only the Global Union happen to have the treatment for.(Yes, my mind is fucked up)

I think "Playing God" generally tends to fail, because as humans we simply lack the fundamental perception of the 4th dimensions

I think government - as we know it - is a perverted imitation of god, and I do not think it a coincidence that they begin with the same two letters. Consider the extreme push for maximum surveillance, an attempt to replicate God's omnipresence. Or their laws which are rules we are commanded to follow; or the judgement they give us if we do not follow those rules. I would love to believe they could never succeed, but I think if we allow this new world order to come about, they will indeed be god's of this Earth, for we will be powerless to undo it.

You said a lot more that I have not addressed but it is because tomorrow's post will contain what I would have said anyway. But, in regards to your closing paragraph, I meant only that I was done posting about such predictions because by doing so I am giving energy to it, and so is anyone who I convince(probably no one). But I cannot turn my eyes off, so I do not doubt for a second that I will still continuously have new information about the world I would like to share. It's just specifically the prediction of awful futures I would like to put an end to. So do not worry, I shall still be more than open to further philosophical discussions.

·
·

Really cool reply @son-of-satire :)

I like it a lot because I can tell you really are a deep-thinker. I too have sensed on numerous occasions the influence of a world-ruling "demiurge", a devil if you will, poisoning our world.

It's the reason pot-brownies are illegal while additive-enriched tobacco sticks are sold on every street corner... The reason why psychedelic mushrooms are off-the-table while alcohol can be found in nearly every establishment on the globe.

I guess for me, what's so fun about the information age, is that we can really define ourselves and our views in almost any way we see fit.

I believe if somebody unquestioningly believed everything they got from CNN, they would be horribly misled. However, if somebody took the completely contrarian point of view, and decided to believe the opposite of everything they got from CNN, they'd also be so easily manipulable.

I see a lot of child psychology in our world of control, from a Bush Sr. holding up a back of crack cocaine on national television saying "this incredibly cheap and profitable drug with an amazing high... don't sell it! It's bad!" to a disenfranchised post-civil rights black youth (when CIA is dumping cocaine in the ghetto to fight communism around the world) to an Obama joking about Predator Drones ("Don't get any ideas "Jonas Brothers"... Wink wink. You will never see them coming...")

And now like you even said lately, with the weaponization of political satire taking place to enforce conformation and doctrinairianism...

So I suppose the best is to tune out of it as much as humanly possible. Because it's seriously agitating, aggravating, provocative, and genuinely nefarious in many ways as, like you pointed out, it targets the subconscious mind... It's very difficult to mount any coherent and effective conscious defense to such subtle programming, no matter how bright, intelligent or clued in we may be.

And what does come our way, we just have to be very rational, and very vigilant... Not just take it in, but examine it, look at it, analyze it.
The voice of reason (though heavily suppressed in this day and age) does still stand to reason, it protects us...

Reject what is preposterous, acknowledge what we can empirically-verify, call a spade a spade, that kind of stuff :3

Walk the fine line between dogmatic subservitude to the system and psychotic denial of reality and navigate the world according to our own inner light's guidance :)

Looking forward to next post x

·
·

As for evolution, I'm just talking about vertical and horizontal gene transfer as two mechanisms of "change" (Origin of Species + Stoned Aped Theory type shit)

I give it a bit more than 2% haha - I think fossils at least support it up to 25%. My problem for classical evolutionary thought is the apparition of man. It's not with hominids (flat-land walking apes) that I have a problem. I just think there were a number of complicated factors present when hominids turned into modern humans... Factors that haven't all been accounted for.

But I could see mermen and mermaids(aquatic apes) living in the ocean, so I don't have a big problem with coming from apes. It's just the explanation of how that I'm not quite content with (yet)...

As far as I can tell, the fossil evidence is specifically thin when it comes to the transition of hominid to man. Far as I understand, there's also "junk" non-coding DNA not found in any ancestor's genomes, so that needs to be explained and figured out and I'm sure the truth about that would shed a great deal of light as to how we really got here.

The quasi-identical genome we share with chimps is interesting though. Doesn't mean we descend them from, but it does mean that we share the same DNA. Whether DNA was transferred vertically, or horizontally, that DNA modulation spread around in the way that it did, creating life that could stand on two feet, think, grow big brains, problem solve. All that monkey-business lol

·

I hope you don't mind if I respond to this a bit later. It's a long one and I have a few more things to do. But, I want to say now that I am glad my post inspired so many words from you. I have read most of it now and already know a lot of what I will have to say, but I will check out the rest later, as it will be needing a second read by then anyway.

·
·

All good man ! Thanks x

Well, lets start unpacking this thing.

You are correct, that advertising is not about selling things. No one above the mid levels of the big advertising firms works on selling. Mid level works on making sure that certain brands do not cross. Such as McDs and any advertisement for drugs.

You also have to go a step further. All the news, TV, magazines are all part of the advertisement. 90% of what you see and hear, is no joke.

You'd still be beholden to the necessities of the flesh, to the availability of nutrition and refreshment, and to the wildlife that also inhabits the Earth. You would not be truly free.

Well, this is false. But, how to explain it.
You can transcend the physical. Many Buddhists have done it.
There are breathairians who do not eat.
Most of the energy to drive our bodies comes from the universe, or, it supplies the energy for 6/7ths of our body. Only the physical layer needs physical food. And it really depends on how much universal energy you can digest / turn into physical energy.

The Buddhist philosophy is about becoming more free.
However, the 8 fold path leaves very little wiggle room.
Right speech, as an example means that you cannot lie. Not, should not, can not. I guess you could, but its like sticking your hand on a hot stove. It hurts, and you realize it hurts. So, you try to be concise and truthful with all your words, especially those in your head.


Now, anarchy is just stupid.
Men are social animals.
There are two kinds of people, those who want to be left alone, and those that won't leave you alone.

The future will see a government... (but it will not be called government, the name has to be changed. Mind-control is not an entity you want around) The group structures of the future will be very different. They will be opt-in, and they will be direct democracies... as long as you consider 100% quorum and 100% vote as a democracy.

The future comes about by evolution.

Yes, the globalist control structure is sewing anarchy. Because they are going to try to set the two against each other, to prove to the world that they need the global govern-cement.

There are many things coming that will make the invention of the internet seem merely trifling. And many of these things will be in the area of governance. And many will be built along side the old, like cryptos, and will just take over because they are that much better/efficient.


Do What Thou Wilt - is half of the law. Harm none, is the other half.

·

First of all, great to see someone taking the time for such a lengthy response.

You mentioned monks transcending physical limitiations and breatharians, I would like to know more about these topics and your opinions and experiences regarding these topics.

·
·

That is something i am not able to do.
I have to know where you are coming from...
99% of everything you were taught in school is wrong, and thus, all i do is sound like a crackpot.

But, in Tibet and India, there are a few people, each year, who ascend. Like Elijah in his fiery chariot. Wheels within wheels in the Bible.

Breathairians exist all over the world. But, they do not publish much because people do not believe them, and if they do, they send police to knock down their doors and drag them to a hospital where they are forced to eat (and eat really bad food).

A breathairian i know about says that she no longer has to use her kitchen, but she still uses her bathroom. She says she is still so full of shit. (as you would use the word in detoxing, purifying, cleansing)

·
·
·

I did my fair share of 3 day dry fasts, so I am not an entire novice to these kinds of things. Not super spiritual though, but let us put that to the side.

I can agree with you on hospital food being horrible though.

·

Well, this is false.

I thought we discussed this a couple times now. You don't have the authority to say this is false. You can say "I disagree," and that is totally acceptable. The only thing you know - that I know of - is that you think, and therefore you are.

That aside, even if you had said you disagree rather than say it is false, I would have to disagree with your disagreement. I am familiar with the breatharians, and while - if true - they do not need to eat to survive, they still have to practice a discipline to a ridiculous degree in order to avoid eating food. Where is the freedom in having to practice discipline for x amount of hours a day? That is not freedom. It is simply spiritual chores.

The future will see a government... (but it will not be called government, the name has to be changed. Mind-control is not an entity you want around) The group structures of the future will be very different. They will be opt-in, and they will be direct democracies... as long as you consider 100% quorum and 100% vote as a democracy.

I certainly do not mean that there will never be a government again. In fact, I believe the only reason the government will have to go is so that when things get very, very bad for most of us, we will jump enthusiastically towards the solution, which I would expect to be a Global Union- also known as the New World Order. I will expand upon that in the next part though rather than here in the comments sections.

Do What Thou Wilt - is half of the law. Harm none, is the other half.

Also, this sounds more like an interpretation. The law of Thelema is, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Love is the law, love under will."

·
·

When discussing spiritual laws i use definitive terms, because they are laws of the universe.
It is like discussing 1 + 1 = 2.

Everyone who has sought has found the same thing.
You can to, if you choose a path to find out.

So, i can say "maybe and sorta" to all kinds of things, especially materialistic modern science, but in the area of universal truths, i can only describe them as universal truths.
I am sorry that you do not know them. I am sorry everyone doesn't know them.

It is the most evil thing the evil controlling people of this planet has done. Hiding the truth about universal laws.


You can become more and more free. You can transcend this universe and all of its limitations.
In fact, that is what life is about. Becoming more free. It is a mental, physical and spiritual process.

·
·
·

When discussing spiritual laws i use definitive terms, because they are laws of the universe.
It is like discussing 1 + 1 = 2.

I tried to explain to you once before that there is no such thing as a universal law, a natural law, a physical or spiritual law. These laws exist only in our mind and are essentially a reflection of our own lack of understanding. Our existence on this Earth is far too short for us to be making claims of immutable laws that have always been here and always will. On the fundamental level, any law - in the context you speak of them - is simply a very strong belief- one might even call them the pillars of our paradigms.

Everyone who has sought has found the same thing.
You can to, if you choose a path to find out.

I have sought, and I arrived somewhere else. So this is not true.

So, i can say "maybe and sorta" to all kinds of things, especially materialistic modern science, but in the area of universal truths, i can only describe them as universal truths.
I am sorry that you do not know them. I am sorry everyone doesn't know them.

You needn't be sorry that I do not know something that's unknowable. You simply need to realise that you do not know what you think you know- you believe it. If you give me your most trusted universal law I will happily explain to you right now why it is not something you can be certain of.

You can become more and more free. You can transcend this universe and all of its limitations.

Now we are talking the same language again. I said in my post that I do not think freedom is possible in this material realm. But sure, through ascension, into a different realm, I can believe in the possibility of freedom somewhere else. But your use of the words "more free" doesn't sit with me too well. I tend to think of freedom as absolute or non-existent.

In fact, that is what life is about. Becoming more free. It is a mental, physical and spiritual process.

And now you are back to telling me what the meaning of life is as if you are actually God. This is why it is difficult to talk to you sometimes, which is irritating, because I do know that you have a lot in your mind I'd like to talk about it. But not while you have such an immovable stance.

·
·
·
·

How long do you meditate?
How long can you quiet your mind?

·
·
·
·
·

I do not see this question as relevant to the discussion, and I am reluctant to answer it because it seems like it would be reducing ourselves to measuring spiritual cock lengths.

Are your universal truths the product of channeling experiences? If so, this does not make them truthful. In my honest opinion, it makes it more likely to be bullshit.

I only asked that because I was thinking about what source of information could one consider to be so reliable that it could lead one to say as you have done. Only the word of God could be so infallible, and so I wonder if it was directly from God that you believe you acquired these universal truths?

·
·
·
·
·
·

I suggest you go talk to God yourself.
Then, you will know.

Its like gravity.
Everyone knows and feels its existence.
But, try to prove it in materialistic science, and everyone has failed.
So, where does that leave you?

Anyway, in your writings you show many mischaracterizations of Buddhist, Zen, and Tao philosophies. The thing about these... they are not religions, they are practices. So, when you practice them, you get certain understandings. You get experiences. And once you have had the experiences, it is almost impossible to state things the way you have.

However, if you are trying to analyze your way to enlightenment, you do get to the reasoning that your writing details.

So, i asked a simple question, "have you begun on the path?"
Then i could ask you, "have you had this experience?"
To which i could discern which level you were at and talk to you at that level.
I really do not care how long your spiritual cock is.

My path is Dzogchen.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Your path is Dzogchen. My path is perhaps arrogantly believing that I can figure out everything myself without any help from religious or spiritual doctrines. The experiences I have .. experienced, have led me to believe that there is nothing I cannot learn from paying close attention to all aspects of myself and to the world, and then reflecting on it.