Closure.

I am holding off on a blog post. A certain subject. It is something I have posted before, changed my mind on, and deleted. Something that is very important. But because I have made the decision and changed my mind before. I do not want to write about it and commit to it, because I do not want to change my mind and delete it. I want to flesh out the experience of this change. Get more data. Make a better case. Hopefully it will only take one more full day. 

I do like to post everyday though. Else why make this post? 

So I will lay to rest a kind of boring subject. I have realised I don't care a great deal about David Wilcock and what was going on with him. Yes, it was a shock, and yes, it gave me a little bit of insight ref my predator/ victim post. (This has reflected into other people).

When I was young I attached to him a lot. When I grew older and realised he was a fraud (whether legitimate or pathologically naive). It essentially set up two different people. Two different people in a sense that related to him from myself. One was the young and naive person. Then was the freshly skeptical adult. 

I had some feeling for him left over from my childhood. You could kind of feel his desire for things to change positively and I wondered how he would be in that world if it did happen. (Him being a criminal). 

Despite him being connected to the Law of One. Despite him having opened my eyes to a lot of those things. He went from fraud to fraud to fraud. There is a kind of law that Stefan Molyneux discovered. "Love is our involuntary response to virtue, if we are virtuous". I don't really feel like I can have any particular positive feelings for someone that engaged in all that fraud. 

Synchronistically perhaps. I was watching one of the last season of one of the best shows I have ever seen today. Person of Interest. This will be a spoiler. But not of any overarching plot. Just of one episode. In it a conspiracy theorist, who is actively searching and runs a radio show. Stumbles on real evidence of something powerful/ supernatural. The evidence is not conclusive though. It is a strong and significant clue in the right direction. 

The protagonists try to explain to him, after he is nearly gunned down a few times. That he cannot reveal this information. Which the conspiracy theorist agrees to. Then changes his mind. 

But when he puts it all on the air, there is a different response than what was expected. The first person that phones in wants to talk about his own abduction experience. He isn't engaging with the material. The second one is bringing in some ridiculous idea. Some wacko idea not at all correct. It becomes immediately clear that even though the conspiracy theorist radio host really cares about the subject matter. His audience do not really. They are just wackos.  

Learning and book four of the Law of One.

I'm in a bit of a change period. Where I am trying to apply a concept. A spiritual concept. One that I have applied before and has not been successful. To see if I can gain information. To understand things. So I'll make this entry simple. 

So, reading the Law of One then.

In book 4. The Contact talks to the group that it will instruct them on the tarot. The major arcana. This is a teaching process. Not a lecture. So the contact instructs Don to look into the tarot and ask questions based on what he thinks they are trying to express. 

I have often wondered about this. That the readers, have likely not done that same amount of introspection. So what of free will. Are we not having our free will violated by reading the book?

This is not the case. For some reason. I do not know why. But in reading the book the contact is clearly aware of the situation. It states that Don's job is not to create an infallible set of images. But to generally introduce people to the material. Something like that, in session 93 or 94 I think. 

But there may be another way that this works. A theory I was working on, trying to think through a few weeks ago. That I may have hinted to here but I don't think I came out and stated. Is that there is something about the negative that is more objective in a kind of callous way than the positive. The negative, simply adapts in opposition to the positive. Like I previously discussed. If just lies to sabotage the positive. An example is that the liberals used to say for years "keep religion out of schools". Then when that was done. They are adding Islam into schools. Prayer days and such in UK schools. 

The negative is also very grounded. Very obsessed with the result in the physical world. It appears in many ways to be able to give the best result. Whereas, the positive often has to explain a whole lot of abstract and long term thinking in order to make its case.  

I played with the idea, but like I said. Can't really do anything with it. It is kind of vague. There is no POINT to it. In a sense. But then I saw this quote:

Questioner: There seems to be no large hint of polarity in this drawing except for the possible coloration of the many cups in the wheel. Part of them are colored black and part of the cup is white. Would this indicate that each experience has within it a possible negative or positive use of that experience that is randomly generated by this seeming wheel of fortune?

Ra: I am Ra. Your supposition is thoughtful. However, it is based upon an addition to the concept complex which is astrological in origin. Therefore, we request that you retain the concept of polarity but release the cups from their strictured form. The element you deal with is not in motion in its original form but is indeed the abiding sun which, from the spirit, shines in protection over all catalyst available from the beginning of complexity to the discerning mind/body/spirit complex.

Indeed you may, rather, find polarity expressed, firstly, by the many opportunities offered in the material illusion which is imaged by the not-white and not-dark square upon which the entity of the image is seated, secondly, upon the position of that seated entity. It does not meet opportunity straight on but glances off to one side or another. In the image you will note a suggestion that the offering of the illusion will often seem to suggest the opportunities lying upon the left-hand path or, as you might refer to it more simply, the service-to-self path. This is a portion of the nature of the Catalyst of the Mind.

My emphasis. 

It really gives me a place to put that insight. In a sense.  

This answer here, also seems to feed a little into the post I had two days ago. Not conclusively. But it is interesting:

Questioner: I was just wondering if the transparency of the garment on the third card indicates the semi-permeable nature of the veil between conscious and subconscious?

Ra: I am Ra. This is a thoughtful perception and cannot be said to be incorrect. However, the intended suggestion, in general, is an echo of our earlier suggestion that the nature of catalyst is that of the unconscious; that is, outward catalyst comes through the veil.

All that you perceive seems to be consciously perceived. This is not the correct supposition. All that you perceive is perceived as catalyst unconsciously. By the, shall we say, time that the mind begins its appreciation of catalyst, that catalyst has been filtered through the veil and in some cases much is veiled in the most apparently clear perception.

To me. I am wondering if I am thinking these things over. So in a sense. I have requested the teaching. It also makes me wonder about my thinking in general. This whole thing was semi profound, religious even. My thoughts came first and the quotes came afterward. I have read these books fully when I was younger, about twenty years ago. So it can be explained by the subconscious. 

But if thoughts are kind of structured or guided like that. A lot of my thoughts might be relevant. Leading somewhere. So to speak.

Bringing powerful metaphysical knowledge to real life.

So, to buffer against the fact I am doing a boring first section to this article. I will explain it's trajectory. I want to summarise my own personal situation. Then highlight some pieces of information I have gleaned from dream guidance, which links into the Human Design Chart. 

So your pal No Name Here (I've never been able to change that! I assumed I could when I started.) Is getting FAT. It has come from bad choices on my behalf. Namely, for about six months I have been stuck in a loop of being extremely afraid of constipation. The only thing that worked was chocolate. So, rather than do the sensible thing and go to the doctor for something that is stronger than what was already prescribed. I got stuck in an anxiety loop where it was the only thing I thought about. But the chocolate, sorted me out for the day, and I steadily gained weight from around 82 kg to 92 kg (I am 5'10"). Making my BMI now 29.7. I have never been fat before. Before about 2020 I never had an issue with weight and was steadily about 23.7.

I now have better medication for the constipation. Am meditating daily. Have been to the gym once but plan to go regularly. Things are moving but, there is a lot that needs be retraced, so to speak. It will take a huge effort to move in the right direction in reference to weight. The second I stopped caffeine, my weight was 92.8, 92.6, 92.4, 92.2, 92.0. Sounds good though. And then, unexpectedly, somehow, the following day, I was 93.6.

The point is now to take as much information as possible. Learn the precise thing that created that specific raise. Weight every day, precise food records. Etc. 

This is a model I put together from a long time of dream interpretation. The input is the general stuff of life, but there is a central spiritual thing, usually an injustice, that a person is focused on. The Good Light is all the good things a person motivates towards. Spirituality etc. The bad light is the stuff that is changeable within us but is kind of dark. All the stuff you can psychotherapy out. 

The Bad Darkness is things that you can't change. Like, a genetic thing. Tik Tok autism type of stuff. Things that will not fix via psychotherapy. Good Darkness is the things that are good, and that might be side effects of Good Light. But in the environment that we live in, they might not be good. An example is having a fairly high expectation of good behaviour in a fairly low status job. The negative side of a good self worth, and spiritual concepts that we are all One. 

The output is how all the real, gritty world problems are created. Things like narcissistic tendencies or whatever. 

When looking at the next part of the dream after this. I feel a complete sense of endless confusion. Even when looking at previous dreams where I apparently got this information. I can't remember how I did so. 

I have tried many times to interpret the dreams that followed these insights. To no avail. It's like something has been switched off. So I went back to what has already been gained to see if the energy blockage is coming because I have not yet applied what I have been given properly. 

There is more to say here, more insights I have already gained from this. But the point is, is that the many tools I use and talk about on this blog. They have to have real world relevance and application. 

When I look at this model. Including some of the things I have already found out about it. I feel intimidated. I feel small. That I am really putting together new knowledge from the depths. But in order for this information to be relevant. To be needed. It would have to apply to a problem that seems insurmountable almost. And I am in that. The health issues are not the only issue. I am also unemployed. Getting way to old with not enough experience dating for that to ever work out. Etc. 

Predators. Victims. Things to think over.

Some conflicting viewpoints going around in my mind. As with most conflicting viewpoints. The answer is probably exasperatingly in the middle. The eternal "balancing" and all that.

Youtube: Royal City Church: Exposed: The Sin Behind Your Morality: Pastor Andrew Carter. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaGSLLYi8Uc

The world is full of a lot of different theories. With my very non traditional beliefs. From people like Paul Wallis and Aaron Abke. I don't believe in some of the fundamentals of current Christian thought. Some of the things that are very fundamental.

But, as I mature, I feel I am starting to grip a makeshift tolerance. In the world, I have observed that people that have beliefs that do not make sense to me. Like deep skepticism of new age thought. Or mainstream Christianity. Nevertheless provide a lot of "Service to Others". 

To me, the way it seems to work. Is that people grip some kind of belief system that is service to others. And then, they add their intention to it to do good. And basically twist most of the belief system to legitimate service to others.

The Protestant (unlike the Catholic) religion is strongly anti any kind of salvation by works doctrine. It is purely salvation by faith which means technically, a purely technical argument. Is that you could murder in cold blood and for not good reason every single day, but as long as you believe, or claim to believe, you have given your heart to Jesus. You are all good. But even in this video Andrew does not hold a line as hard as that. 

The point that I wanted to gain from this and that I am thinking over. Is that it summarises a belief that we can never really know what is going on inside another. The example given was that there was a very charismatic character in a town at one point. People trusted him with their kids. His name was John Wayne Gacie. A prolific serial killer. 

Youtube: Pearl Davis: Betrayal is Internal and Has Nothing to do With You. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mb2UfCnbqRE

I've talked about this woman before. I have heard a lot of very profound things from her. Her platform really seeks to, in humorous fashion sometimes including ridicule. Really show up a lot of female manipulation and such. The trouble is, with all female creators in this kind of area. Is often their very presence goes against their own argument. Pearls wisdom in a lot of these videos, I think, is quite good. 

But this is the other perspective to take here. In this video. She talks about dealing with people and some patterns she has observed in the real world. 

A lot of the time we just have to observe the way people are in the real world. 

Real experience: 

One thing I have gained from Davids recent behaviour. Is that, as the stories come out about what he was living through. He really was a victim.

I spent a lot of my young life obsessed with his narrative and his materials. I wondered today if, on the subconscious level, I had perceived that this had threatened my friendships when young and if I was angry about that. It is a strange thing to consider having had a completely subconscious insight that I have not been aware of before, and having some emotion around that. 

I still feel rage that I was lied to. Which is something I obviously need to come to terms with. I believed he had real insiders. He did not have real insiders. So that is a kind of aggressive act against me. 

But as the stories come out. It shows that David does seem to have been a victim. He spent ten hours on the phone a lot of days with a friend of his. He lost absolutely millions to Stavatti. And as Jay Weidner is apparently about to chronical, Corey Goode also had a lot of psychological hold over him. 

It is an important thing to have a concept for dealing with manipulators and seriously toxic individuals. But it seems to me possible that there are legitimate victims who do appear like predators. 

It is not clear whether the whole area is more complex than can be understood, and is only really up to God to understand. Like the Christian view I talked about. Or if the continual processing of catalyst, can lead to some sort of understanding beyond my initial understanding. 

Just stuff to think over.  

Experiences with suicidal people.

I realise, the way my emotions are going. I'm probably going to be talking about David a little. I feel that this is boring to readers. But the thing is with writing. Is that if you sit down to write a blog and only one subject is in your mind. You can't write anything else. There is a bottleneck effect in many things in this way. 

I suppose the only other option is to not post. 

When are you going to get the money? 

I read from John Christian Spadavecchia (impossible name to spell, that!) That a percentage of Davids income from both any courses he did, went to Chris Beskar. 

When David made his last call to the police department. One of the things that he said is that he was living in poverty and could not eat. 

So effectively what was happening was that every bit of money David had was going to Chris. But that also means that if any of his friends and family gave him money, or even food. They would be indirectly funding Chris Beskar.

It seems to me that David died from a pure stubborn refusal to stop giving his money to that parasite. There can't have been any compelling legal reason for David to give money to Beskar. Since David was not getting anything back from Stavatti despite investing millions of dollars. That means that any contract that the two had, Beskar was in default. Beskars position could be legally challenged. But it doesn't sound like there was a legal situation like that because David had given a whole bunch of money up until that point without any such agreement. 

Comparison to personal situation. 

It brings up memories an older, very similar situation in my personal life. 

I became very close friends with a woman over lockdown. She had serious mental health issues. She had a lot of trouble sleeping. I would talk to her everyday and see her physically a lot. 

A lot of her friends had flatly abandoned her. People that she had thought her friends. That had been friends over decades. Had suddenly stopped seeing her. People over that period, who obeyed authority completely and stopped seeing others, obviously believe there will be no karmic consequence for that. According to the outward evidence, I cannot yet disagree with that. 

She was effectively all alone, but I did see her. Why did I see her? Because I don't have the same political beliefs as all those people. I didn't slightly care about any of the COVID restrictions. The only ones I did pay attention to were the ones that I had to. Like, I had to have a mask. Just to make my life easier. But the second the all seeing eyes was off me I just did what I wanted. It was not a serious thing to me. 

This put her in a bit of a bind as lockdown ended. I was very vocal about my political beliefs at the time. Which I attribute partly to my medical condition. But I was not cool in that sense. I was someone that was inconvenient to hang around. Because she did not like those political beliefs. She liked leftist political beliefs more and was angry I had those. And would specifically mention that her friends had discussed this and disliked my political beliefs. 

I intended to go into this more deeply. But I realised I can summarise it more here. Her decision at this point was to jump into the arms of these friends. The kinds of people that would ignore her in lockdown. Some that did, some that she had not known before lockdown, but would do. And she got nasty/ passive aggressive with me. 

This very much cornered her. Because some of those leftists that she began hanging around with. Were abusive. And she was in an extremely fragile state. I don't know the half of it but suspect this was pretty bad. Including emotional blackmail. She got nastier and nastier with me and... literally... why would I put up with that? Seriously, even if I had known the eventual result. I would not have stayed friends with her. The connection seemed to have no healthy parts of a friendship left. She had sided, conclusively, with people that were open enemies to me.

To be clear, I don't even think being super loyal to me would have been her way out of the situation. She probably needed to go live home with her mother since she couldn't do basic things. She disliked living with her mother because her mother lived too far away from Beachy Head. But in the lack of showing the integrity of some sort of loyalty to me. She, of her own volition, got involved with abusive people. That was her choice and not one she needed to make. Since me and her had no problem that was initiated from my side.  

Free will. 

You know. People have free will. I'm sure if David had said to anyone around him. "You know what, I don't think Stavatti is on the level. I used my great detective skills and super intelligent mind to discern that". I'm sure the many people giving him advice would have said. "You know what, you're probably right!" In a far more emphatic way. "This is how you exit this situation now!"

It is hard to sympathise with these people when they are making such clear decisions in self destructive directions. 

When someone dies in this way. There is often some sort of effort to promote the idea of them as a completely innocent victim. Perhaps this is partly a 'don't speak ill of the dead' thing. But, in life we need to recognise patterns and use what we experience to avoid future dangers and problems. We cannot do that if we are not analysing, with a critical mind, situations like this. 

The fact is, that David made these decisions. I'm sure, being in a room with Chris. Is an extremely frightening thing. There is a certain fear that happens in the presence of sociopaths and malicious intent, that you don't get with even life threatening things that do not have any particular intent. It is a deep and unpleasant fear. 

Maybe my viewpoint here is uninformed. One of the not inconsiderable benefits of not having high status is not having to deal with people out to screw you for whatever benefit comes with high status. People intending to prey on whatever psychological weakness a person happens to have. 

Deeper demonic things.

This though, is what I attribute Davids problems to. It is quite clear from a lot that was said about him that, for a long time, he was coming apart psychologically. It is from a Reddit post I wrote. And explains to me, why Wynn Free, also died at the same time:

For me, the way I look at it is that he was probably influenced by something very negative very early on. I think his forays into the positive protected him a little. But eventually the negative won out. From my experience having a "compulsive" belief I was Don Elkins in a past life (and later on a schizophrenic break and suicide attempt). I think how this happens is that the negative can lay the foundation for that kind of belief, through a lot of stress, and then when the person believes that they were the relevant past life character. They set up an internalised object (from Internal Family Systems) of that character. That can then speak to the person from the negative entity whenever it wants. This then feeds into the subconscious and creates a lot of the things David described. Like having strong dreams that he should be part of Stavatti.

It's "very clever". Because it all feels rather compulsive, positive and internal once the person is hooked in.

But more to your point. From a Law of One perspective obviously, there is a certain charge to doing things like reading the entire Law of One, then committing wholesale to "transcient" subject. Which yes David could very well have drawn afoul of; and is all part of the same story obviously. He could have taken a very different route early on if he had studied the Law of One more seriously.

But had he done that, he would not have associated with Corey either. "As above so below".

I recall there was one moment where he went on holiday and had a dream that people were robbing him. He seemed just close to getting it but then he goes: "Anyway, Stavatti will be getting the money soon". He missed very obvious sign posts. So he was obviously getting a consequence to requesting the information. Talking and teaching on it. But not paying attention to his own dream guidance and such.

For me the original trigger was probably bad health (a serious health condition) pressing on my brain in a way that I was not aware of. For David, it might have been that he got involved in strong psychedelics when he was very young. Like, completely zoned out on mushrooms as a teenager because he stole those drugs from his parents.

This post is marked down to -1 on Reddit. Another one discussing similar powerful inner dynamics is at -7. People on the Law of One reddit keep marking down my posts and then getting upset when I say I do not intend to post there a lot. I only went back to the Law of One Reddit forum to post on David and will not post on any new threads there. Only respond if I have posted on one already made. 

Short ramble.

Just at this moment. My mind has stopped being able to do the things I usually like doing. Because of this David Wilcock thing.

I can't consciously access any particular thoughts on him. But I know that my mind is working on him. So I can't do the normal things I do. Like read the Law of One, the 48 Laws of Power, or another book on Jupiter I have by Liz Greene. I have an instinct that I can get back into that kind of thinking through the right route. Perhaps Human Design. (Perhaps because I can also work on Davids chart, and my own chart, with the emotional elements) But getting back to that kind of thinking of having insights is not as clear as it was before. 

My "internal image" of David has to be updated.  

Also, at the moment, I am feeling a vague kind of frustration. I am close to the end of watching one of the best shows I have ever seen in my life. Person of Interest. The storyline focuses on an AI and it is very intellectual, powerful, adult and layered. 

But reading up on it. I find that like almost every show I have ever watched and enjoyed. It was stopped prematurely for money reasons. It feels a little frustrating. Fiction and science fiction books have been nuked by DEI. Straight white men cannot write books anymore due to Karens in the publishing houses. So any book you see will be written by women. Who have not deserved the place. They are "DEI hires". And women usually write smut anyway. Science fiction now has way more smut in it.

TV shows have this issue. Where because of the demands of the money people. Shows are chopped and changed around and the writers are given contradictory messages. Told there will be six seasons more, then ending it after two seasons (Last two seasons of Stargate SG-1). Fringe had a similar story. It is a similar story with virtually every show.  

I have done well though, with daily meditation and prayer, and some medication. Also, coming off caffeine. To be in a constantly kind of clear state. Which leads me to the question of what exactly can be done with my intellect? 

I think, for me, David's Q- positive narrative meant that I believed the main real world will sort itself out and I do not have to bother with that so much. But his death has meant that suddenly I am not seeing it like that and suddenly I am thinking through ways I could have or should impact the world. This will probably lead to a lot of personal insight. 

Wilcock bites the dust.

So, David Wilcock is reported to have taken his life by shooting himself in the head on the 20th of April. The news has just filtered through to X. 

The type of readers that MAY follow me, from places like the Law of One forum. Even going back a few years. But also might not. Would be interested in that. 

For me, a lot of people are saying how tragic this is. I don't know if I agree with that. I do not think it is explicitly not tragic. But, at the same time. The guy was a bit of a mess, and he had taken a lot of decisions that harmed others. Like financial fraud. 

Even though we don't like to hear of someone doing that when we think they could have gotten out of it another way. It is also true that we live in a world of consequences. Many, many of us want people to experience consequences for their actions. And sometimes this is what that looks like. People have free will, and they can choose to not face consequences, whatever that looks like, when those consequences come knocking. 

David could have removed from Stavatti, sold his house, paid the IRS. But he did not want to do that. We do not know if he ever faced the fact Chris Beskar and Stavatti were lying to him. But he did not want to face those consequences. Did not want to admit that he was wrong. That he had been channeling something nonsensical of even negative. 

He could, of course, not have been in a good frame of mind. He had become extremely schizophrenic. We do not, as a society, actually have resources to help people in that position. I had a family member temporarily committed and he had to pull a patient off an unconscious nurse whom he had just hit and wanted to finish the job, and that was not the only problem. 

I did not know David personally. But I have had the suicide of someone I have known personally. And what I have learned from that situation is that there are never any good, satisfying answers. The people that have the answers, if there are any, will probably not share them. The person doing the suicide, doesn't think their thoughts are interesting enough for anyone to listen to, and they are not always that coherent anyway. Plus, real life is quite complicated. There might be several different reasons. Like, when you are stressed in life you often can't see the real problem, but with hindsight it becomes very obvious. Even if we knew the reason given it would not necessarily satisfy the part of us that questions. 

It is still a bit of a shock though. I had followed David when I was young and that kind of familiarity never goes away completely. I found him before I found the Law of One, I think around when I was 14 years old. When my brain was still forming. More recently, when I would feel myself falling back into his crazy orbit I would go on his detractors a lot. To re- remind myself of the world as it really is. 

Maybe karma.

When I find my microphone. I will do a youtube video on my thoughts on the archetypes. Focusing on how, before the veil, the 9 archetypes were only Matrix, Potentiator and Significator. Now we have the 21, and what the change, what the added extra archetypes, mean. What we can draw from the veiled situation creating those additional archetypes. 

But like I said, I will keep a lot of that away from the blog. Too in depth. 

For me, my health is in a good place from medication that I can finally come off caffeine and oh my god I am tired. I am tired all day. BUT, for the first time in months I am able to sleep AT NIGHT. It seems like the caffeine really was screwing with my circadian rhythm. I need a few days of sleeping at night. At the moment I sleep but I still feel tired in the day. 

There is a strange thing that has happened in England recently. Something that part of me does not want to really talk about. Since, as I have clearly stated, I am not a left wing person. I do not believe in the centralisation of state power and such. I do think Stefan Molyneux, who does not believe in government at all, has got it all right in terms of philosophy. 

However, in the UK there is now a renters bill. During my time I have seen quite disgusting behaviour from landlords. Charging people for things they did not do. Raising rent on people that can't afford it. Allowing problems like mold to stay in houses. A lot of houses have a real attitude about people on 'welfare'. Or who have pets. - I have seen a lot of cases where people had to throw out pets because a new landlord would not have them. 

Rather like how the tech bros in California, who had been promoting leftism for decades. Suddenly got upset when they were getting taxed huge rates. Some pushback on the constant behaviour of landlords is welcome in my view. 

I am not saying I agree with it. Or that I have looked carefully at the other side. I am just saying, that from a lot of individual cases I have seen. It is really highly positive. So many animals will no longer be put to death because of this. And animals, pets, can really add a lot of peoples lives. They can alleviate the most crushing loneliness and misery.  

Luckily, I personally am not a philosopher. Philosophy DOES have to have some sort of opinion on things like property rights. So it's just one of those interesting things I observe as I get on with the rest of my life.  

Piercing archetypes.

I have moved on a bit with my understanding, from the Law of One, on archetypes. It is hard work, I would say. It is hard mental work. Some of the lines I read I'm like... "Ah... I'll need a day to absorb that." In the later sessions, the insights like that would be almost every line. I can see why Don might have had trouble integrating all of that learning. 

But there is a problem with this. I am worrying a little about free will all of a sudden. I do not want to express many of my thoughts on it here. I might carry on with a few youtube videos on the Law of One and major arcana. But videos can only convey basic information - and they make things seem simple. The kind of information that could be conveyed via blogging, which includes a deeper emotional communication. I don't think would be OK to explain at this moment. 

There is a line in the Law of One that says something like if you study the archetypes you can really screw with peoples free will. Because of this, when I am out walking, I am starting to flip between different archetypes. But when I am with someone, I don't even allow my thoughts to go there. I think I am in the Significator most of the time. But I get moments and insights from the other two I have thought over (Matrix and Potentiator). How all these link together can also be run via the Human Design in general, and mine or others human design. So I had an insight yesterday about how one of the hexagrams from the Matrix of the Mind, gate 21, feeds directly into the Significator of the mind gate 45. 

It kind of makes sense how you can mess with someones free will with this. Because if my human design links with someone elses human design. Then if I move into a new archetype and emphasize something different. This can then link to their human design. A lot of these connections are kind of compulsive. 

But, the real world is also a thing. These concepts are interesting. But the real world is... also important. 

I do not know yet what real world application this information will have. But one thing I have brought recently is "The 48 Laws of Power."  

When I first learned about this book I had the assumption that it was like "service to self" guidebook. But there are a lot of books that are dressed up in that kind of language that are not really that. The real service to self books. Like Saul Aulinsky's "Rules for Radicals". Are not that. 

Anything politically left is the service to self, and I believe it to be the first stop for students of that polarity. Pol Pot, the leader of the Khmer Rouge. Studied at the Frankfurt school; and used explicitly that wisdom in his genocides.

What I think the book is, is that a lot of generally positive people are out there swimming with the sharks. A lot of times, nothing other than that kind of wisdom and tactics is useful. 

The strictly positive, Law of One linked wisdom. Seems to have pretty much no tactics against things such as social sabotage. 

Law 2: Never put too much trust in friends, learn to use your enemies: I have been so screwed over by people close to me, for perhaps jealousy based reasons as is discussed. 

Law 10: Infection, avoid the unhappy, and the unlucky: This talks about how people who are kind of downers should be avoided. It is reflected in Stefan Molyneux's narrative. Avoid the divorced because they are a negativity that creates more divorces. 

Law 40: Despise the free lunch: I once heard a woman tell me how she never let a man pay for the first date because then if she decided to sleep with him, she knew it was for herself not a sense of obligation. This is a practical step known in the middle class. 

A lot of the laws sound far more "Machiavellian". To use a probably misunderstood term. But the entire thought process. If you are not familiar with it. Can also link you in to what might be going on around you in day to day office running. 

Anyway, weird times for me. Medication and health success. But intensely so.  

Learning the lessons.

I have been having successes. In my spiritual life. 

One insight I have been having for a while. Is that when you are kind of stuck. When you can't seem to move to improve anything because a movement in one direction. Will seem to get a response from the Universe to immediately prevent that improvement. A good thing to do is just to focus on one thing.

When there is a lot that needs to be improved. It is very easy to think you can do about five different things daily to improve it. However, generally if you do those five things. You will get overwhelmed and not do any of them. It will all get too intense. 

Also, almost the same thing but just a little different. When you do do something that is working. Say, meditation is working. Then it is easy to start to feel better, think you have a bit more energy, and want to add another additional improvement. Which is part of the same trap. An additional improvement will come. But it won't be added on as a thing just to improve some outcome. It will tend to come as a deep, spiritual realisation that a thing obviously needs to be changed and should have been changed for a long time. 

That's where I am. Meditation is the single thing I am doing every day. The second thing I think will improve a lot of different life outcomes is: coming off caffeine, completely.

I have had a long set of problems coming off caffeine previously. When I was in my twenties. I used to drink a 2 litre bottle or more, of diet coke every day. I would read a book by Stephen Cherniske. Caffeine Blues. Which went through a lot of studies to explain peoples physiological response to caffeine, and that it is actually a serious drug.

I did come off it. But as I have learned more about my health and improved said health. Including putting less pressure on my liver (through technological health improvements). I have thought that maybe it would be OK to go back on it. Maybe my previous bad reaction was part of my general ill health.

But now, I do not think this is the right choice for me:

My Personality Chiron placement in the Human Design: 12.5: The Success of Restraint lies in not abandoning the lessons learnt when the phase ends. 

My personality Saturn placement: 5.4. This will need a bit more explaining because I'm still not quite sure what it means. I'll also quote more. The blue line: Waiting as a guarantee of survival. Exalted: The power to make the best of ones fixed rhythms. Detriment: The drive to deny one's own fixed rhythm with predictable costs.

In general, the entirety of gate 5 is about that. About rhythms and such. 

I do not know precisely what this could be. But the way that caffeine is messing with my rhythms at the moment. I think at least. Is that it is easier to ignore your light/ dark circadian rhythm, if you have a chemical to help you do that. What is indicated to be about will power is actually to do with material substances potentially. 

I don't know of course that is it. It might be that my fixed rhythm is the eccentric rhythm of not sleeping at a normal time. I don't know what my sleep pattern is without caffeine. But I suspect, that I am using caffeine in order to DENY my own fixed rhythm. Which is the detriment of this. 

We all have similar demons of course. I am an unbelievably sensitive person when it comes to any drug. I used to know a guy that, when I slept around his house, he would drink a tea before bed, and sleep like a baby. The guy can take pretty much anything including pharmaceuticals and not have much effect from it. Perhaps some sort of "warrior gene". 

But I am not like that. We all have personal limits we have to deal with. 

When I stopped chocolate I went back to dreaming that had stopped for a long time. When I had chocolate and coffee recently I woke up with a painful heart that was pumping too hard. Coming off caffeine will be hard, especially in the first few days. And I do have it sometimes for medical reasons. But I think I will get the spiritual rewards if I do. And that's what it's about!

It's annoying. I've had two bars of chocolate and two coffees. One of them really strong. I am in such a good mood now. Really have to deal with moodiness when I don't have caffeine. But then I suppose that's the catalyst I work with.  

End of article. IQ and Grok. 

Just at the end here, I wanted to add a more playful bit. 

Recently, I found out that Grok can estimate a persons IQ. It estimated my IQ. To the same number, exactly. That I got in the MENSA test that I took once. I am referring to the percentage number of the population. Which is the number that matters. The actual number doesn't. Because it is different in each test. If anyone doesn't mention this while talking about IQ. In an other than casual way. Then they do not know what they are talking about. I've never seen anyone discuss it! 

Anyway. My IQ percentage is not a round number. It is not 40 or 45. It is an unpredictable number like 42. 

Anyway. That. Was AMAZING to me. For it to get my exact percentage like that. To use an analogy not real numbers. 42, not 41, not 43. Was just... Wow.

So I started doing it with other people. It was humbling. Especially, the women. There was a women I did it for that is not famous. Not well known on twitter. Higher than me. A LOT higher than me. I can't imagine talking with a woman whose IQ is higher than mine - that I know about. Who talks like that. 

A problem came though when I posted this on reddit and people came in with vitriol that I would even consider IQ to be a relevant concept. I got voted down by the leftists, and the halfway sane people making comments like "reddit doesn't like IQ discussions". Did not upvote me. This was a weird concept to me. If it has the same result that I got on MENSA, that should be pretty amazing no? Even if you don't agree with IQ. It got the same as the Mensa test! That. Is. Cool. 

It shows a difference with me and those sorts of people. I hear about something like IQ and I am excited. The first persons IQ I did was Stefan Molyneux and it is indeed a lot higher than mine. It is interesting. Someone like me sees a concept like this and tries to get something good from it. 

What is the mindset of a person that just avoids any mention of IQ like it is some sort of heretical text? How can you go through life not learning things from basic everyday tools?

Madness I tell you!

Anyway, so that's all I have for today. My caffeine come down will be HEAVY. But rewarding.  

When theory replaces experience. Part 2.

I like to do a blog a day. There are other things I do daily as well. Like meditation, prayer, etc. I have a big check list of things and if I did them. That I mark off daily. For that checklist. There has to be a cut off point. So at 0:00 it is a new day. It is not the old day. I can't do another prayer and mark it onto yesterday, even though, strictly in thought terms, until I go to sleep. It is technically the old day. 

If you understand what I mean.

So technically I did one blog yesterday and one today. Even though practically, they are only about an hour apart. 

Meandering or important?

I feel two things about what I am about to write. It includes a LOT of personal information. Some of it, like the last post. Even whiny personal information. But it is also very important to me. I am trying to capture a pattern that may be relevant to my physical health. Offering potential insight that might solve a physical health problem and helping me towards the paradigm that physical health can be improved by improving psychological health. I am also running my real experience through Law of One quotes. This is meaning of life stuff. It also brings in previous things I have expressed and how it might relate to health. How it might relate to psychological health. In real terms. So that is also important to me. Using the kind of information I produce in real help terms. 

The part I would like to discuss, and how it relates to my health and the Law of One. Is this quote from my previous blog. 

I worked at an office once where I was bullied by women. They made sure that they were having social events every week and inviting everyone to them except me. And any woman I interacted with there stopped talking to me after the first time. I would talk to them. Everything would be fine. Then the next time they would sit next to me. They would not say a word. Even to respond to hello.

This made me feel like I was actually going mad. I suppose I was. That would be the effect of this kind of long term gaslighting. (There were other things that happened at this office). I worked there for two years.

I was not able to effect them in any way. They usually left pretty quickly. I doubt any of them (there are about twenty names behind this, I still remember first and second names of many of them) will ever see any bad consequences from this. The anger from this expressed itself in ways that have undermined my psychology (found indirect expressions) and it's just now I am starting to grip this. It's been 8 years.  

I copy everything into One Note, and that is the formatting in One Note. 

I wanted to talk about then, what thoughts came out of those experiences that were so poisonous that 8 years later I am still working on them. 

I was in my late twenties/ early thirties in this job. My sex drive was high. Even though it is kind of reduced because of my bad health. I recall at one point, I think it was in my early thirties. Trying to prevent myself masturbating for three hours and losing. 

The experiences I had, as I have just summarised in this passage. But to just repeat and expand. I would be sitting in a place. A girl would come and sit next to me. I would start up a discussion. Nothing big. Just what are you studying? Spiritual stuff. Music etc. It would go fine and they would be positive and warm. Then next time I would sit next to them. I would say hello. Just hello. They would not even look at me. As happened with Hazel. And many others. 

I often go walking up the mountains with a dog and my mother. A dog that is hard to control because she is very strong and kind of hysterical. Whenever a male jogger comes past. 90% of the time they wave or say hello or something positive and I do back. Whenever a girl comes past. Less female joggers more women walking with one other woman or their dog. They do not say hello. I wave casually, say hello to them. I am not likely a threat with an elderly mother in tow. And 90% of time they DO NOT say hello. 

What Jesus would possibly call a "trespass". Too small of a deal to get worked up about. But, would it be "hateful" if I then, as is logical, said hello to men but not women? Just as it seems logical for me to adapt to the way women behave in the workplace.

If I had any power at all and there were any specific advantage that men had over women from dealing with them. This would be classed as "sexist". 

Anyway, I do not have a lot of experience with women. Not 'no' experience but barely any. Spent not much of my life with a girlfriend. So what do I do with my sex drive? This from two entries ago:

I am not able to write stories. I have tried and tried again. I had this idea a while back, based on the Law of One, session 18.5 I believe. That says if you have sexual desires not consonant with the Law of One to play them out in your head. I thought I could write stories with weird sexual things happening. Again and again I tried, and I have tried real stories. It never comes together. It never feels right because I can't see into the characters. 

I don't have the option for sex. So I would make these stories. I remember one time there was a very attractive blond girl that came to this office. She saw me, looked over, and arched her body forward. Caitlyn. So, out of a kind of conscious rage. I tried writing stories with these women. And them doing specifically sociopathic things. Really unpleasant things. 

As things have gone on though, this tendency I think may have lead to an energy blockage. 

Working from the LoO quotes:

From Session 18.5

Ra: I am Ra. The proper role of the entity is in this density to experience all things desired, to then analyze, understand, and accept these experiences, distilling from them the love/light within them. Nothing shall be overcome. That which is not needed falls away. 

"All things desired" is a bit of a vague point to me. I take it that what is meant is that we should go out and pursue what we want? All things desired might be money, might be having a good intimate partner. Etc. "All things desired" is a sticking point. 

Nevertheless then, what we are to do with the experience we have is to analyze, understand and accept them?

I have had many other difficult discussions. People that have screwed me over and things. I had a close female friend that killed herself. Male friends, as I mentioned in my last blog, turn on me because their girlfriends gossiped. 

All of this rage. All of this stuff. Has kind of combined. These stories with girls from the office that I mentioned. Combined with friends and stuff I have fallen out with. Have all been featured. 

Creating these stories has meant that I keep alive the image I have of a person. Rather than just letting them go and motivating towards a new "good" thing. 

The health implications:

Constipation. That is my health problem. Serious. Like, needing medication for it. It happening for months. Causing a lot of discomfort.  

When seen in the terms of a spiritual situation. Having an experience, a "catalyst". Should be understood and accepted. Analyzed. This means it has to be remembered. Maintained. This is the general frame I have used. 

But what if, what if, as I have discussed in "The problem of evil (Parts 1- 3)." There are things in our lives that can't be processed? Because they are part of a kind of disconnected evil that we can't really understand. A truly alien type of thing?

I am wondering, if the frame of the meaning of life linking to maintaining past situations like this. Past not particularly positive situations. Is linked here? What if, we are meant to take some stuff and analyse it. But some of it cannot be used so has to be gotten rid of? Like the body. It digests food but it ALSO throws out a whole bunch that it doesn't need! It has a load of fecal matter we get rid of every day. 

More theorising on forgiveness. 

I have talked before, a few times. Of my utter hatred for the theory that we are meant to forgive others without contrition. All the many reasons, including Law of One quotes. Why I do not think it is correct. 

This is talked about in the therapy community. Ad verbatim. There are a lot of people, and a lot of comments on youtube videos of people that have been through real abuse. Often from their parents. Saying how much they do not find this to be true. How it has reopened abusive situations. Perhaps how it is a violation for people to even say that. 

Somewhere, I am not sure where right at this moment. I will take more notes on my next reading through. The Law of One states that in the negative polarity. I think this was from a negative planet. People that have lost polarity by being dominated. Also gain the desire for negative polarity. 

The way I understand that. Is that when an evil person dominates another. The other person is angry and hates them a great deal. So they desire to get above the evil person and dominate them. 

I wonder if this is avoidable at all? The negative has a way of moving everything into its frame. It is harder to be positively polarised when a gun is pointing in your face. 

If there is a negative person who does something negative to you. Do you have any other choice but to hate them and want to dominate them back? Is this just a natural, animalistic response to that?

This is the reason, I think, that people that have been told to do forgiveness without contrition, rebel against this. Forgiveness without contrition is the teaching of the abuser and enabler. They never focus on the abuser needing to forgive. It feels like the person abused is being made to "forgive" for the benefit of the abuser. To keep the abuse going (Which... They are! That is the result hence revealed preference).

So, if you think like that. If forgiveness without contrition is just abusers insisting on their way. Then it becomes hard to let things go in general. It feels like you have to fight for the right to hold your own feelings and memories. 

For me, justifying like this. Letting go of things. Because some things are evil and can't be processed. Kind of squares that circle. 

Conclusion:

I... do not have a lot of faith that things like this can actually influence the physical. Nothing I have been aware of has changed anything physical. But, it is worth thinking about. It organically came together. 

I can feel the part of my body that is preventing things moving properly. It is in my large intestine at the lowers part. Roughly between the sacral and root chakras. Which also kind of fits.  

When theory replaces experience.

Brothers and sisters. Meditation is really the bomb! Meditating daily with the Law of One book next to me like I have discussed is having very positive effects on my psyche.

I wanted to talk about this womans work today. As I write, I am not sure what I am going to say about it. But I am sure it will come together. I wanted to write something about it for a long time. Starting with  this video.

I have made big insights into the Law of One recently. But I think, the insights are reaching the level where they would threaten the Law of Free will to reveal. Many of the quotes are different when discussed from a different angle, and when logical questions are asked of them. I say different. I don't mean false or fraudulent. I mean, they reveal even more powerful truths.

Much of this material has to be applied in real life. Used. To see what fruit it produces I think. Rather than directly revealed.  

So anyway, this is the first video I wanted to discuss:

Youtube: Pearl Davis: High status vs low status in the woman's world. [March 28th 2026]. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwqM5SKhypI&t=53s 

This woman is kind of a mutant. I don't know precisely why her output is so different. But it feels as though she is just super intelligent. It might be the same thoughts other women have and don't reveal. It might be that other women apply their intelligence in different ways. But, the output that Pearl puts out feels like a brain upgrade pretty much every time. 

She does protest that she is not unlike other women though. Which is what someone would say if they were legit. 

It is an interesting question she has asked. When I see a question on a youtube video. When a creator asks me a question. I do, in fact, want to answer that question. It might sometimes be a ploy to get more engagement and work the algorithm. My brain, nevertheless, does start whirring. 

It is raw truth the things she has talked about here. Raw truth of the kind that is taboo. Discussions on status. Discussions on womens psychology. Are things you don't talk about. I recall in my last job. Where I was seen as someone slightly autistic (Tik Tok autistic, not real autistic!). because I was. My physical health was undermining me a great deal. Pushing on my brain. I remember buying a book on how the female brain works. Written by a woman. And if I mentioned that's what I was reading any guy I was talking to got very stressed. The women, however, did not realise there was a problem. In that small way, I understood the female language more than the men did. 

The question here though, from Pearl, was about status. She asks what is the perspective of low status men on the kind of issues she was talking about. Does it make us angry?

My answer is, that the frame that she is using to discuss this is one that I cannot even enter. Women, as a whole, have become an alien type of being to me. I do have a mother. But the psychology that is relevant to any guy is women that are his peers. They simply do inhabit a different world. 

There are so many issues to bring to bear when considering issues relating to status. It is kind of breathtaking. It feels a little draining to even consider it. Like trying to pull out of my subconscious how I would articulate such a thing. 

So, say we start with a clear status difference between men and women. Where women are a lot higher. I won't name a specific example. But let's say there is one. Now add in the idea that even hinting at that being true, when everyone can plainly see that it is true. Can bring a thousand protests down upon you with the vicious, emotional, obsessive insistence that it is not true. 

This is the situation. It... boggles the mind it really does. The idea of obsessively insisting that something that is plainly true, is not true. Is not something I can comprehend. I cannot comprehend going through a process of pretending the truth is not the truth. On an intellectual level. But I also cannot comprehend insisting on something with no evidence. Or even strongly insisting someone else change their mind about something... That is those peoples own thoughts. That exist inside their own mind. 

My answer is that women do not have higher status. Women have a status of aristocratic privilege that I cannot understand. Do not want to understand. Can't even consider. And consider it to my benefit to not interact with because I know, right down to my bones. That that cannot last. That it creates a toxicity. Like the status gained having been gifted from the devil. Of a great deal of destruction. I can feel that it is spiritually wrong. 

I have figured out a way to express this actually. I cannot go with the mental and emotional elements. They cannot be articulated. But I can mention experiences I have had. Just go with what is objective. 

I remember once on bitchute making a video. Not relating to this topic. I had a throwaway line about female psychology in it. I think women I had actually dealt with. And someone put a comment that included a quote of that specific statement and wanted to shame me on it. I simply stated that yes. That statement was an objective description of my experience. 

I remember being at a bus stop. A young girl sat next to me and was on the phone. She said that she had gone into a pub with her friends and one of the guys had come out and said whenever they all went there in the future him and the other cooks would allow them to eat there for free. I remember this girl seemed to want my attention and I had the distinct impression that she had had enough attention. 

I worked at an office once where I was bullied by women. They made sure that they were having social events every week and inviting everyone to them except me. And any woman I interacted with there stopped talking to me after the first time. I would talk to them. Everything would be fine. Then the next time they would sit next to me. They would not say a word. Even to respond to hello.

This made me feel like I was actually going mad. I suppose I was. That would be the effect of this kind of long term gaslighting. (There were other things that happened at this office). I worked there for two years.

I was not able to effect them in any way. They usually left pretty quickly. I doubt any of them (there are about twenty names behind this, I still remember first and second names of many of them) will ever see any bad consequences from this. The anger from this expressed itself in ways that have undermined my psychology (found indirect expressions) and it's just now I am starting to grip this. It's been 8 years.  

This, is a small sliver of my experiences with women. A tiny sliver. Friends have turned against me on the gossip of women (their girlfriends). Trial by gossip. No evidence or rational needed to be provided. Many additional experiences. Such as being on Quora. Repeating experiences like the ones mentioned above, and being censored. 

Every job I have worked except fast food I have been bullied there by the women via gossip (I worked two fast food places: One of those fast food was all guys. The other was immigrants working 60 hours that barely spoke English). A few times the men too (less than half). But always the women. 

There is another aspect of this that makes it messed up. I have aged out now. I have aged out of having positive social experiences with women. I always wanted, when I was in my twenties. To go out with a mixed gender group. To have social experiences with 20 year old blonde girls being part of that group. I did not (consciously) want sex. And I did not want the group to be exclusively women (Like... how would I handle that?). I just wanted that experience. To gain a footing of their psychology. To understand why... they are meant to be so desireable. So I could, in turn, desire and pursue them. 

I am in my late thirties now. I am at the age where spending time with that age group is "weird". I also don't have the energy for that age group. I am also at the age where I would find it hard to carry out a conversation with that age group most of the time. By the time girls get to thirty they are usually very experienced and bitter - women start nagging sometime in their mid twenties I have observed. It only gets worse after that. Wanting their prospects to jump through hoops ("Boundaries" they call them) set up by their previous dating experiences. With guys they chose. And guys I did not choose.

So yeah, after all that, the girls are "inaccessible". They are not able to be accessed. Understood. I did not go through the formative experience of socialising with them in my twenties to have any understanding with them. Or inclination to socialise with them. I can observe the easy ways they have things. The amount of friends they have. The amount of resources they gain without effort. And I can't have anything to do with them. In any way. I can't imagine their lives. I can't imagine how they think. 

Second video:

Youtube: Why Can't Lauren Southern Just Take The L?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOs2LQOLDGA

I have way more to say about Pearl. A lot of positive things. I am going to wrap up shortly though because I have to fit my meditation in for the day. Getting momentum on the meditation!

What do women require from me in general? What women require, most, is my anonymity. To not exist around them. 

There are so many things that Pearl has said that remove my attention from women. That remove me from getting attached to them.

Lauren Southern is a good example of a bad behaviour. Lauren Southern back in the day, as Brexit was happening and such. Felt to me like a saviour in a sense. When the right was growing and still had a fight against relative anonymity. The left had monopolised everything truly at that point. Lauren was there. I remember when she knelt down at a headline of Brexit and did the OK or good sign or something. She was attaching her hotness (which is real power) to increase the power of the right wing movement and it meant a lot to me. Now, I realise, it meant nothing. But at that time, I was emotional. And it was important. 

Coming off schizophrenia I had in 2014. I attached a lot to politics. I had to stop meditating and used politics and conspiracy information to suppress the madness. I could not allow what was inside to come out. 

What Pearl talks about though, just having general truthful knowledge of female tendencies and behaviour. Generally stops this tendency within myself. A similar thing might have happened at one time with women that promote Christianity. Pearl has explained the true mechanics behind that. 

Not only is there truthful things on female behaviour. But Pearl has talked about some things that are legitimate spiritual lessons. In this video. She talks about at some point. You just have to take responsibility or "Eat the L" as she calls it. This discussion allows me to recognise this in the real world. She also did a long speech in a video about Andrew Tate and Bonnie Blue (I think it was Part 2 and going from 27 minutes) Where she talked about free will really, in it's most basic form. That you have to let people have their own hell. Even Jesus could not change peoples minds... Who are you?

As I have gotten into meditation. I have started coming down to earth a bit, and it has struck me how important this kind of information is. Anyway, that's enough for the moment. Off to meditate!  

The beauty of understanding the Law of One.

I say understanding. But I'm not sure to what extent anyone can really understand it. 

One of my strong beliefs, one of the beliefs I had absorbed and had become solid without my conscious awareness. Was "overruled" by the Law of One a few days ago. I had had a bit of an anti Darwinist attitude that I had mentioned a few times on this blog. I had given my reasoning for that. Then in the Law of One. Session 90 I think. It talked about how important the physical evolution of the body complex is. So, it validated the Darwinist concept. Quite a shift for me. As many other small statements in these books. 

There has though, for me, been an even more profound shift for me. In session 91 the contact asks the individuals involved to repeat a magical ritual and when asked why. They talk about a silver cord being disrupted that is to do with Carla's energy field. 

I realise, as I read this. That I do not have any conception or understanding. Not only of the metaphysics and rituals involved. (I have heard vaguely of a silver cord previously. But even that, I have not seen it. Do not really understand what it means! Even if I knew more about it theoretically I would not understand it in any real way!) But I also don't understand. Any of it really. I do not understand the world when things of this kind of paradigm are integrated into it. 

I also think there are many traps and false beliefs that can come off here as a conclusion. The idea that God is so large and mysterious that we are worms in a sense. I don't think that is a good way to think about it. The idea that the world is as it is and we should not question 'God' I also do not think really expresses what I am trying to say.  

The point is, to just really grip that I don't understand this. As a practical thing. Like, I don't understand how a nuclear reactor works either. If I were to engage with healing. I don't know what life kind of... is. Without some knowledge of these metaphysics. I have some ideas, have had some additional insights about why so much of this is all veiled behind the "Law of Free Will". But I don't know enough about this to justify it philosophically, to explain it as a coherent concept. Or to have the insight about how to influence it. 

It... is a little nice this insight in a way. Because it relaxes the need to use this information in a sense. Like, I would like to use metaphysics in healing. I wonder why this is not possible. 

In reading the Law of One. In contemplating that I am currently in a part of the Law of One book 4 where I am questioning how much I understand all of it. I feel I should re read the books again (before reading further) because I just haven't formed a coherent understanding in my mind of the whole thing. It is also all incredibly advanced. I feel like reading these books re- orients me towards some sort of connection or understanding with this entity. But I also... don't understand that either. 

There is a line in Session 67 question 27 which says 'Glory in the strength of your polarisation [the positive] and allow others of the opposite polarity [negative] to do so.'   

It is one of those "what?" Kind of lines for me. It seems to be an indication that there should be a certain positive feeling, a joy, a philosophical satisfaction in just saying: "Yep, those evil people over there LOOOVE being evil. Good on them!" Doesn't feel right to me. To have a dispassionate perspective about this, like reading "Tyger Tyger" to explain the philosophy of evil while a genocide happens outside the window. But, then, it is the kind of perspective that a higher being might share. It is one of those alien things they might understand. 

In all, I don't know what I am really saying. Nevertheless, this all does lead into a somewhat positive subjective feeling. We will see if I can translate this to useable wisdom. We will see how it goes.  

All gifts have to be used.

I have just started watching Farscape. What I was not prepared for is that it is actually good. I don't know why it is good. I cannot define why. But I imagine there is some politically correct or algorithmically correct thing that was not done in Farscape. Writers and actors organic tendencies to create a story have come together. I do notice there is pretty much none of the hostility between the characters that you get in most shows. I think there is some sort of formula where there has to be a certain amount of conflict per scene in modern shows.

As I said, I have stopped paying attention to Stefan Molyneux after his opinions that you should not listen to him if you spend time with leftists. 

I have read or listened to (audiobook) a few of his books. One, "The Future". Was unbelievably good. Like, a profound experience. The characters had similarities to people I have known in place. Intense similarities - healing similarities even. There were also a fair amount of differences as well. Acquiantance with a culture I have no experience in. Pretty fascinating. 

One of the features of some of his fiction though, is that sometimes he has a line that says something like "Then this character looked at this character and correctly summarised the programming that lead them to this decision". 

Stefan... Actually does this in his shows. He mind read me in a way I thought was wrong one time and it had an uncomfortable effect of me of partially breaking a kind of idealism I had for him at the time. I am very unusual. Very hard to predict. A lot of people in my life have struggled with that. I wouldn't be writing this blog if I didn't think really different.  

But with a lot of other people. Many, many times in his shows. He is correct. Because people tell him he is correct. They respond in surprise when he guesses their internal workings. Sometimes are gushing in positivity. 

Reading one of his books though, and comparing it to another one that I like. The Expanse series. The way he writes is that the characters, just in general, like I said. Guess correctly other peoples internal workings. In a book series like the Expanse. People do not do this. In fact, they miss almost all of what is said sometimes. Based on their own character.

The Expanse has a psychopathic character who misses a news broadcast that asteroids have hit planet earth and there is mass death. He just isn't interested. Many of the characters miss very obvious things. Many of the characters also catch things but we do not go into their thought process that much. 

I am not able to write stories. I have tried and tried again. I had this idea a while back, based on the Law of One, session 18.5 I believe. That says if you have sexual desires not consonant with the Law of One to play them out in your head. I thought I could write stories with weird sexual things happening. Again and again I tried, and I have tried real stories. It never comes together. It never feels right because I can't see into the characters. 

For me, the energy of looking into others isn't there in my life. I do have a fair amount of insight. I am very good at body language reading and such. That kind of pattern recognition. But there isn't that sense of looking into others. The overall stories based on emotions etc. 

Stefan I think, is a kind of modern day Sherlock Holmes. If you have an ability. You have to use it. Rather than using that in an exciting way such as crime. If someone is really born with the ability to look into others. Then it gets used in service. As Stefan has, in fact, used it. 

For me, it is different things that I have that still need to be used every day. As someone that is very physical has to express a lot of physical energy per day. A lot of women that work in offices and didn't have kids. Still have a need to express emotional energy that comes out in gossip.  

I suppose now I have said it it is not that profound. But I think, that there is a lot to be said for the limitations in NOT having certain things. When we do not have a certain thing. We also don't have the vulnerability of it's downside. For instance, people that don't believe in any of the spiritual stuff on this blog, are not troubled by feeling that negative entities are speaking to them when they meditate. 

It explains to some extent. The positive side of people sometimes having belief systems we don't agree with. A person here doing service of some sort but who is an atheist is free from a lot of spiritual attacks. A person here that has a fixed religious perspective, is free from many of the nuances of the new age and channeled types of materials. 

Meditation insight.

Truth is a difficult thing I believe. It is one of the things I have learned to understand since reading the Law of One. As I referred to in the last few posts. I think people are kind of mission focused. That life is so complex. There is so much of it. That people kind of pick, on some deep level, the area they want to focus on. And truth becomes relevant to that. 

The Law of One says people are one of three elements. Power, Wisdom or Love. This has become deeply relevant to me. It is something I understand in the world. 

I believe we have one of these three elements and the second two follow on. In a very positive environment, we would have them all (because other people give them to us partly!). In a negative environment, we would have just our element, and we would use that to fight with. In our current lightly positive environment, we have our one element, and we can kind of get a handle on the others. But not completely. It is hard work. When you are young you are purely your own element. Ideally, as you have become a 'realised' person, an adult with a career, a message, a family, a worked out life; you have all three. 

If you have Wisdom. You do not have Power or Love.

If you have Power. You do not have Wisdom or Love.

If you have Love. You do not have Wisdom or Power.  

Power takes a small piece of Wisdom and properly uses it. It can increase the good in the world through this. It can directly help. It can apply in a world changing way what it knows. If you have wisdom. You have the overview. You have an integrated bit of everything. But you have nothing that you can do with that overview. Q is very like this. It is powerful, but also, powerless. If you have Love. It is highly likely you will have to prioritise social concerns and not know about either of those. 

So back to where I started with. Truth is different to people. For some people. Power people. Truth is these few things applied, and it does not take in things that ultimately don't help a person. For Wisdom people, The truth is the truth and all of it. the unuseable truth of the isolated eccentric genius. For Love people. The truth is... perhaps; that people all have these mystical and high minded concepts they attach to. But what is real truth? The real truth is that the thing that matters is our every day interactions. The things right infront of us. How to cook. How to support people. Etc. 

So truth to people is what matters for their own path. Someones highest truth, the truth they are here to be, might be something that someone else can disprove. 

This meander on truth, is that I am thinking over how something I have determined not to be true, is kind of useable wisdom.

After listening to Aaron Abke, and hearing all about how Jesus was not teaching salvation by faith, but salvation by works. I am still thinking about how there is a kind of beneficial element to the salvation by faith narrative. 

The salvation by faith narrative is virtue signalling at its worst. If you say these words you can walk around without any virtue and be thought of as a good person. 

But, I have found something that really helps me. That really seems to be that "click" I have been looking for my whole life. That thing that sorts my life into flow. It has come about since I wrote those articles about how David Wilcock is not following the Law of One properly. Or not quoting it properly. And I felt like I was visited by something when I meditated. 

Because of that, the thing that meant I no longer felt that negative presence when I meditated. The thing that has worked, the thing I found. Was meditating with the Law of One book next to me. It is definitely a different feel to meditating without that book next to me and previously, it has been quite conclusive for me to not have it next to me. The reason being, is that the sense of enlightenment and 'love' I get from it. It is not as pure as meditating without it. Not as pure for wisdom. Meditating without the book there I feel like I reach vibrant, raw, heights.

Meditating with the book gives me a real world connection. A real world, good, everyday, loving feeling. Like, the feeling of a social event or something. But, it does slightly dull the 'raw wisdom' element.

So linking this together then. Previously I would meditate with the Law of One book 2 next to me and it overwhelmed me with enlightened feelings. So I stopped. But now that I have a reason to use the book, and a practical (to me) reason that I should always use it. There is now no excuse to stop using it. I have become aware that part of the reason that I am resisting using the Law of One as I meditate. Is that I fundamentally don't feel worthy of it. The loving positive feelings feel wrong. The raw wisdom and colder feeling feels right. It feels more like what I should be. 

It is one of the things I have thought a bit about the salvation by faith narrative. Salvation by faith, the way a lot of people use it. The entire saved humanity by crucifixion narrative. Is a very good pushback against a feeling of unworthiness. And you have to feel at least a little bit worthy to consider yourself worthy of the efforts of the positive spirits and angels and such.   

Random notes on the Law of One.

Been struggling a bit with health so another probably short entry. 

Personal irrelevance. 

I have experienced some psychological stress, and some physiological discomfort (but also some physiological success in health matters!)

My recent physiological stresses are doing two things. Firstly, stunting my spirituality slightly. When I experienced some pain a few days ago, I stopped praying. It sounds like physical discomfort like that would INCREASE seeking and prayer in general. But for me, it tends to make me lose faith. Feel that life is kind of crap and have less tendency towards prayer. 

I reflect a little on Carla keeping faith through all her pains. Perhaps to improve my spiritual path I should be able to continue spiritual practices like prayer and meditation even through these pains. Meditation provides a practical benefit of increasing intuition, just slightly. Just slightly better judgement. And that 5% or whatever it is, often makes all the difference. 

Psychological stress however, makes me increase by many times my zeal towards prayer. Which I did do a great deal yesterday, and now I feel very inspired. Swimming in inspiration. 

The style of the source. 

One thing I have noticed about the positive sources I look at. Is that the act of engaging with them improves the way you see the world. This reverse might also be true of more negative sources. 

Let's compare two things. Reading the Law of One. Or absorbing conspiracy information on say... Child torture. 

To read the Law of One. It is hard to understand. You go over and over it again, and you feel good. Reading once feels good, you might have an insight. But... in the grand scheme of things... Not much of one. You can turn the quotes over in your mind again and again. 

What I am saying is the WAY this happens, improves you. It trains you to read something deep and absorb it properly. You could transfer this to reading classic literature or philosophy. To think things over. It increases the sacredness and joy in life. 

Now consider the opposite. Conspiracy information or perhaps dry bureaucratic info that is not useful. You don't really want to absorb that info. It stimulates your anger and fight or flight. It inspires you to want to find real world tools. To increase violence and such. To condescend to people that refuse to fight with you. It decreases attention span in that you want to pay just enough attention to get the information, but not so much that you actually absorb its sickness. 

The style of the Law of One. 

A correlation I notice with the Law of One and a philosophy like Stefan Molyneux's philosophy. Is that when you start looking at it. You start from its real outer covering. A lot of the earlier books were concerned with the path of the ultimate spiritual person. The ultimate spiritual path. Healing. Famous people. Etc. 

As the books go on though they discuss things like chakras, and archetypes. Once you get into the archetypes. You get into more concrete advice in a sense. It's not advice. But it is advising on the way things are in a close enough way that advice can be drawn from it. 

With Stefans philosophy. You start off with listening to his conclusions. But the more you get into it. The more you get into his ideas from first principles. Which is what you do with every philosopher. 

A similar deepening happens I think with Christianity.

Specifically, I have read and re- read this session:

Questioner: Thank you. I have a question here from Jim that I will read verbatim: “Much of the mystic tradition of seeking on Earth holds that belief that the individual self must be erased or obliterated and the material world ignored for an entity to reach ‘nirvana,’ as it’s called, or enlightenment. What is the proper role of the individual self and its worldly activities in aiding an entity to grow more into the Law of One?”

Ra: I am Ra. The proper role of the entity is in this density to experience all things desired, to then analyze, understand, and accept these experiences, distilling from them the love/light within them. Nothing shall be overcome. That which is not needed falls away.

The orientation develops due to analysis of desire. These desires become more and more distorted towards conscious application of love/light as the entity furnishes itself with distilled experience. We have found it to be inappropriate in the extreme to encourage the overcoming of any desires, except to suggest the imagination rather than the carrying out in the physical plane, as you call it, of those desires not consonant with the Law of One; this preserving the primal distortion of free will.

The reason it is unwise to overcome is that overcoming is an unbalanced action creating difficulties in balancing in the time/space continuum. Overcoming thus creates the further environment for holding onto that which apparently has been overcome.

All things are acceptable in the proper time for each entity, and in experiencing, in understanding, in accepting, in then sharing with other-selves, the appropriate description shall be moving away from distortions of one kind to distortions of another which may be more consonant with the Law of One.

It is, shall we say, a shortcut to simply ignore or overcome any desire. It must instead be understood and accepted. This takes patience and experience which can be analyzed with care, with compassion for self and for other-self.

But while this is relevant, important, in a larger context. It is also confusing and brings more questions than it answers. It is the larger picture in a way that is a little unhelpful in a sense.  

The chakras however. They do seem to offer a framework to understanding things. Archetypes also do. We learn very specific things about how the archetypes operate. How the polarities operate. 

Fear.

I am experiencing fear recently, in the face of my health issues. Deep. Definitely powerless. 

I have come up against the medical establishment. I had thought they were the solution. But they do not appear to be the solution. They are actually helpful in some capacities. But in others I feel somewhat powerless. So metaphysical healing elements remain an interest for me. 

It is part of why I reach for the Law of One. Putting life into context in relation to chakras is one thing the contact advised. There are other things in it that advise on psychological elements. Maintaining polarity against difficult catalyst. 

It is one of those questions for that earlier quote? When it says our mission is to "experience everything that is desired", would that be this? Or is that a negative infringement not included? Is my deeper desire to experience some sort of spiritual path from this? 

The Problem of Evil (Part 3)

I am hopeful I can get to the main point I wanted to get to in this post. Do I have the energy to lay out a proper case. When I studied at University, they always said that in essays, you lay out what you are going to say in the introduction. Perhaps that makes it easier and better to read. 

The case I hope to make in this post. Is that evil is a thing that is very foreign to those who think more positively. True evil. That it can only ever be partially integrated into many philosophies. But it is a thing onto itself that can't be encapsulated by them. Because of this, when it is removed from society, the results will be utterly unpredictable and will change many things that we assume to be real from our everyday experience. That we have taken from objective reality, everyday, observable, objective, reality. But which conclusions might not serve us later. 

That is a bad introduction. But it is at least an introduction. There is far more to go into this. 

Previous parts. 

In the two previous parts, I summarised some thoughts. The red people analogy/ metaphor. And x + y = z. In relation to how the negative have to have perceived positive consequences to their actions in order to maintain their perspectives. That is unfortunately required reading. What I am trying to explain here is too complex to have to also go over those again in this article. 

In relation to the red people analogy. This is the analogy I would like to use in order to discuss the limitations of many positive philosophies in addressing evil. 

I am a true QAnon believer. I say QAnon even though QAnon is the wrong term. But language is meant to explain what people mean. It is Q because there is Q and there are Anons. There is also the term "Q - tard". Which the Qommunity hasn't done enough to make our own in my opinion. 

I believe Q is real. I have had semi religious experiences to this effect. Honestly, the Qommunity is not made up of weirdos. Some of the identified people are extremely intelligent. Such as Martin Geddes, that worked in some sort of computer - data - analytics field. Many of them are like that. 

But there is something alien about Q as well. Something almost negative in a sense. Something semi mystical and not easily understood. It is not completely healthy perhaps, for everyone to attach to a weird military project that drops in secret codes on a forum (hosted by the military btw!) It is not necessarily a healthy way to think to put a power like that outside of you. To rely on something you can't understand. There is a point where the truth is not the truth for everyone. 

This might also be the case with something like atheism. Consider the red people analogy. If atheism is dressing in red, and you will simply be ignored if you don't dress in red. Then people whose priority is helping others might dress in red. 

Pressure of the positive. 

Some of these concepts, of considering the negative directly. I think can only be done with a certain kind of thought process. Or they can with me.

What I talked about in part 2. x + y = z. The wisdom of separation. Is something that can be back tracked and a lot of thoughts can come from it. But it is a negative wisdom. It makes sense. It is information that can create conclusions. I realised it is actually x - y = z and x + y = z is the positive. But I will follow up with that elsewhere. 

The information that people are going around with the "wisdom of separation" in their head that if they don't feed it in a sense, will mess them up. Backtracks a lot of very negative conclusions, very power mechanic based. That will make someone think negative. 

The positive, as in, really the power variety more. Has to follow up with each thing that they think up. I think. They are binded into the positive a great deal. Or they kind of go a bit nuts if they do attempt to integrate things that are too negative. 

Wisdom however, I think, can consider something as a kind of position that does not need to be followed up on. 

The take away. 

In the planning of this article. In the thoughts of this kind of thing in general. I had wanted to excerpt a tweet that was so unbelievably malevolent that it made me paranoid at the time I read it. 

This, along with the woman that tweeted it, seemed to have disappeared. I remembered her name and the spelling. I have key terms to search my bookmarks from the quote. 

Pehraps that's for the best. Negative wisdom like that seems to have a kind of energy of it's own. It utterly swallows everything around it. 

But my take aways putting everything together. 

The red people:- This analogy speaks to the point that a good deal of how people think the world works cannot be integrated and with the sudden movement on the "negative" front. May need to re- evaluate some of their ideas. 

x - y = z:- Many people that are working on the brainwashing that we have been subjected to. Will lose polarity on these principles for the first time. The brainwashing and propaganda has always been there. For the entire time that we have lived. If the value of z suddenly changes, the value of -y, even though we don't know what precisely it is. Will suddenly go through a change. 

Conclusion on the human design. 

I am starting to put together a bit of a description on what this whole process is. The process of living a life is. From the perspective of the human design. My understanding. 

My chart is similar to Ra Uru Hu's. I had an insight the other day of how similar my process is to what he has described. I wrote to two human design people in an attempt to gain information on a new theory I had. But they did not respond. So I am not sure on this. 

A lot of the emotional shifts we have is when something kind of 'not self' comes up. We have an idea in one of our defined centres. For me, one of those centres is the sacral. In order to get rid of the 'not self' thoughts in the undefined centres. Meditation, Prayer, etc. This is the point of these tools I believe. 

So I experience sacral chakra thoughts, that are kind of unproductive. And then are just completely deleted as unproductive. I know what a good place is for me. A not self sacral thought includes a lot of thought about how one relates to others in a kind of social heirarchy. This is shown very strongly, and in a raw way, by the 34-20. (Which Neitzsche had! And did he not talk in a very raw way about such heirarchies?) 

But in moving from confused to normal. I know that all those animalistic, animal heirarchy thoughts. Just get deleted. Just disappear. My focus is purely on the kind of "moment". It is kind of more mystical. More aligned with the Law of One tracts on everything being a mystery. It is rather like Ra Uru Hu describes the world and the deconditioning.

I imagine people try to condition people to their own charts as a matter of course. I wonder if some of what Ra Uru Hu talked about was that. That his expressions of how things are, should be, is what HE experiences.

But if someone has a defined sacral. Then their expressions do have a reference to our animalistic connections. 

There is more on this, the energies they hold, and the things they express. But not for now. I'll leave it there though. 

The Problem of Evil (Part 2).

Not well today. So I will have to make this shorter than I would prefer. I've realised I am making a different argument than what I intended. I will follow up on my theme of "The problem of evil". But I will use this as a potential nudge to differences in how people see the world in relation to their human design. Differences in how the sacral and splenic authority process things. 

I just wanted to repeat a point I had made recently though. With the full quote. A more full explanation of what I referred to earlier. After re reading previous blogs. I have realised that actually quoting the Law of One is probably better than just referring to a session in brackets (I.e. this point is in 85.4). It just reads better. It feels warmer and more pleasant. 

So I wanted to make a point about negativity: 

Questioner: What is the nature of this crisis?

Ra: I am Ra. The nature of this crisis is the determination of the relative polarity of your companion and yourselves. You are in the position of being in the third-density illusion and consequently having the conscious collective magical ability of the neophyte, whereas your companion is most adept. However, the faculties of will and faith and the calling to the light have been used by this group to the exclusion of any significant depolarization from the service-to-others path.

If your companion can possibly depolarize this group it must do so and that quickly, for in this unsuccessful attempt at exploring the wisdom of separation it is encountering some depolarization. This shall continue. Therefore, the efforts of your companion are pronounced at this space/time and time/space nexus.

This is talking about a negative entity that was psychicly pressurising everyone linked to the Law of One and the contact. Because it was unable to stop them doing so. It faced a kind of crisis. It was having a kind of melt down. 

It gives me a lot of insight into how the negative functions. The negative has it's "negative wisdom". I assume there is some relevance here to a kind of simple equation. x + y = z. X is the negatively polarised self. Y is the negative wisdom and Z = a successful result.

Let's not think about what the negative wisdom is. Because that would be unpleasant and maddening. But we could make simpler analogies. Which is the point of this. 

Let us say that someone is following an insane political or religious tract. One that legitimates that theft from that person is good. That he is allowed to steal and no one else is. x + y = z indicates that this person would have to be fairly successful at this endeavour. They would have to gain something palpable back. Otherwise, they would "lose polarity". 

If they are prevented from stealing, if it goes badly wrong, then they should, theoretically, go into the same kind of crisis. 

This is relevant because, the world has been very deliberately set out a certain way. Very deliberately so that if people behave in a certain bad way, they get a good result, and they get very little consequence. 

The world is basically unchanging in this capacity. Take for instance, the general punishing of high performers in a lot of jobs. Where they don't get paid more than anyone else and just get overloaded with work while lazy people take it easy. This gets a good result from the managers and staff exploiting the situation. From the lazy people.  

But if the world were to change. If some free market ideology was to become successful and that high performer could go off to another better job, and also, that that company would start doing better than the first company. Then it would give less palpable benefits to the people following those strategies. Presumably, potentially, they would start losing polarity. 

When you think about this, it justifies something that didn't really make sense to me previously. The idea that 'the best revenge is to live well'. In general, it seems that if the right things are put into place, and the people that are determined to succeed do succeed. And the more envious, loserish people are not able to stop them. Then they would lose polarity. Which would be very unpleasant for them indeed. 

This puts the end to the fantasy of actually following up in the real world on revenge against evil doers. It seems to me. It doesn't mandate forgiveness without contrition and general soft heartedness either though.