The Philosophy of Mysticism

In relation to a blog I did recently, of the three things I wanted to address. The first was the Ryan Gable video, which I handled yesterday. Today I wanted to talk about the Stefan Molyneux podcast I mentioned:

Free Domain Podcasts, 6451: Do Not Fuck With Mysticism, X/ Twitter Space: July 16th 2026:

https://fdpodcasts.com/6451/do-not-f-with-mysticism-xtwitter-space

Here we are starting to get to the meat of philosophical and mystical concepts. Stefans points here are very good and they are ones I share. While I am a person who does have mystical beliefs. Which I am willing to defend and probably will in this blog. Through trial and error, I have found that I have had to disbelieve and discard a lot of mystical concepts. I also got taken in by David Wilcock. 

Recently, this might be only a "me" thing. But I have found that I am simply unable to engage in a lot of visualisation. Which I have tried various times. Law of Attraction, energy work (which I do believe in), and even, I think, 'Internal Family Systems' does not work for me. 

Have you ever had an experience where you have tried to tell someone something and they have just ignored you and given you the most basic instruction on how to do that thing. This is what happens when you tell anyone new age that visualisation doesn't work for you. They give you the most basic instructions. Insulting your intelligence as though you had not tried that before. I have tried energy work on myself many times, it has never worked. The other day I was visualising and talked to people within that visualisation and a bit later. I just knew it was wrong. It does not work. It is maddening for me specifically as many of my forays into energy healing have been. 

What works for me internally is a kind of reliance on sound. I feel like I process a lot internally by sound more than images. 

Anyway, down to this podcast by Stefan. The caller he is talking to, started first off with strange troll questions, this moved onto the caller talking about being in a mental institution and infering that he believed his mother could cast magic spells on him when he ran away, then it became a discussion on God. Which the caller kind of said was an Infinite Mind, I believe. The caller said something like if you don't believe in God, you don't exist. Then Stefan asked the caller to prove his belief in God. He did not say 'via first principles', but that was, in practice, what was required. The caller was unable to do so. He just kept on making statements that God is this or that. 

In one way I very much agree with Stefan. In another way I do not. Firstly, he states outrightly that a lot of things that people believe have no proof so they don't exist. Things like ghosts. I think this is reasonable and it is a good standard that I have not applied previously in my life with people like David Wilcock. He had no proof, and none of his sources existed - or they did exist but they were con men. Believing in that kind of thing is indeed very destructive. 

Nevertheless, I want to make a point about skepticism, "doubt" in general. It just generally seems to me that if someone decides to. They can poke holes in literally anything. No matter how legitimate it is. If someone really wants to doubt something then they can do it. I might say this is a feature of free will.

For instance, the caller made general statements about collective hallucinations actually being unacknowledged supernatural events. To which Stefan made the point that a lot of our memories are subject to modification. If you return to somewhere that you knew as a child, the proportions are different, as an example. 

For proof to stand up to this standard, i.e. the claimed fallibility of memory. Does not seem like something that any situation can stand up to in my view. What did you have for breakfast this morning? Was it porridge? Are you sure it was porridge? You know, a lot of people have faulty memories? You could have had porridge yesterday and not recalled it accurately? 

How do we know that we are not having supernatural experiences every day and forgetting them under this standard? These examples are silly. They have escalated the example to prove a point. But I think it makes the point. 

A few further things to say. 

One is that, there is philosophical subtext that was missing here due to Stefans focus on mysticism. One of the things Stefan says is 'the root of evil is the desire for the unearned'. I would say there is different shades and flavours of mysticism. Meditation is a form of mysticism, or at least it can be - it is strongly linked to pretty much every new age belief system there is. But meditation, is proven as positive and effective in multiple scientific studies. 

Meditation is work though. It requires discipline. I would say that one of the issues that characterises the more negative forms of delusional mysticism. Is that it confers onto the "experiencer" a great deal of status. The only benefit from meditation we tend to get is how it actually improves our lives. Say, our intuition is 10% more effective. A largely, outwardly invisible change. (There are some people that try to make it into something supernatural and run classes on it but they are a fringe). An example with witchcraft or ghosts is that the person talking about it gains status through that manner. 

I actually had a mystical experience when I was younger. I thought again and again, wondering if psychic abilities existed. Then I got a strong precognitive experience in dreams. I did not follow up with the whole precognitive experiences interest. I did not try and become a psychic. But that experience did mature into what I experience today. Partly from reading the Law of One I now do prayer, meditation and affirmations etc. 

For me though, what is my justification for my belief in God? The person phoning into Stefans show had to justify them because it is a philosophy show. I do not have to technically. But I still will explain my perspective. 

For me, it is not from an objective, first principles place that I believe that. it is from my everyday experience and trial and error. The Law of One has made a case. It is an intellectually satisfying set of books. I believe what it says on archetypes and various other things. I am willing to take it on faith that a claimed channeled source was in fact telling the truth on such matters including God. I also, have tended to have health complications when I have not kept up with these spiritual practices. 

Another point: Stefan says that mystical beliefs isolate us from others. I will have more to say on this at a later date. When I talk about how destructive David Wilcocks narrative was. I am starting to see there are kind of two sides to mysticism. A kind of positive and a negative and I think the positive things. Meditation, prayer etc. Do not effect other people in a negative way. Whereas the negative things. The evangelical beliefs in ghosts or conspiracy types of things which also includes with it an evangelism about a lot of different things. This does isolate people I think. Like I say I have more to say on this. It is kind of like when you practice the negative version you become unrefined and less respecting of free will. 

I do have more points on all of this but for the moment I will leave it here.  

A quick look at a Law of One criticism.

So, I am, as I stated in the last article. Going to look at this video:

Youtube: Ryan Gable: Live, Law of One: RA, Love, Light and Litigation:

https://www.youtube.com/live/-zGwBzFPDnA?si=FYBw7odBi0N7tGb4

I must admit, that I started off really excited about this video. I wanted him to bring some sort of philosophical/ theological "meat" to the discussion. And me, being extremely well acquainted with the Law of One. Would be able to do that if I so chose.

I was disappointed though. Ryan gets hung up on something he reads in the Law of One session one with the contacts signature of "We are not of the love, we are not of the light, we are of the Law of One". 

Understanding the material: 

I know... EXACTLY what that means. David Wilcock once discussed it. It was taken out of the early books I believe. The three who were involved in it. Don, Carla and Jim, knew that this line could be incendiary. 

I won't go into what that means. It is kind of nuanced. It requires an explanation of their paradigm. I will say that my "signature" if I were to speak like this, in my view, would be "I am not of the Love, I am of the Light, I am not of the Law of One". People can only be one of the three. 

I went up to 56 minutes. But it just got too whiny for me to continue. And it seems like the entire foundation of his argument is built on this single, incorrect, point. (Although, as the Law of One says, there are no mistakes!)

I have several points here. One is that, yes, the people that follow the Law of One in a lot of cases cannot have these discussions. They cannot discuss or defend their points. It is apparently human nature that people have a kind of... I don't quite know how to describe it... Passivity. An inflexibility to even follow the guidance they have, in some cases, devoted their life to,  When I was trying to talk on the Law of One forums a few times in the last year. I wanted to make a passionate case against forgiveness without contrition. Making the case it is against free will. The Law of One's most prized law. And that the Law of One discussed the process including "Understanding, acceptance and forgiveness". That understanding alone can take more than a decade. Loads of specific arguments on this point. Some I have made elsewhere on this blog. 

I have also made arguments against leftism being legitimate under the Law of One. The idea of funding infinite migrants, which one of the women was putting to me as the more 'compassionate' choice. Is against the Law of One to not consider the places the taxes are coming from. Because are they also not 'One'?

Regardless of what you think about my specific arguments. My overall point is that the people in the Law of One forums and communities. Very rarely have any awareness of... well, any of it really. As far as I can tell. I posted about Law of One quotes all the time and people would argue against them. On reddit of course. The god is whatever that particular redditor feels is "fair". 

There are of course some people there that can quote the Law of One. Some that are following it in some small way and whose opinion I sometimes respect. But to make the argument that these followers are an indictment of the material does not track for me. Most Christians do not even slightly follow their own teachings and would be shocked by them. Very few atheists follow evolutionary psychology to any of it's natural conclusions. That are all opposite most of the leftist tenets. 

Most people, I would argue. Are just trying to find the best excuse for their own emotional preference. It's a kind of 'narcissism' to not have any values above oneself and ones own emotional preference. 

There are other points here I could make. I did go through making detailed notes on Ryans video. I could, I suppose, if I desired, attack his points more. But he wasn't really making strong points to my mind. Even though I don't like arguments along the lines of "Their heart was in the right place". I don't feel a bad intention here from Ryan. Even though I am very pro Law of One, I feel a little that Ryan is closer to my viewpoint on reality than a lot of people that investigate these things less. That ask no questions and have no skepticism. 

Final points: 

I will end on some final points though.

One: Many, many, many of Ryans repeated points seems to have come from David Wilcock. I might do additional blogs about how this one person has had a destructive effect by so brazenly attempting to take the Law of One for his own ends. While in practice ignoring it's teachings (like those on "transcience").

Two: One of these points is that at the end of book 5. The source is very specific that even people we are opposed to and might be negative in some manner. We are to see them in a compassionate light. Even sending love to such beings. This is very specifically stated at a few different points. Namely, session 67 and one of the last few fragments in book 5. But at many other points as well (once when Don asked where negative ET's came from the source answered "They come from the Creator, in the more shallow sense that you mean... ). It is something I have recently realised I need to learn because it is not something I have previously committed to. Despite familiarity with this material. 

I suppose I am happy that this post turned out less attacking than I had originally planned it!  

Three: I have some very practical benefits from the Law of One I wanted to highlight. Prayer, meditation, dream interpretation and affirmations are all things I use. All practical real world things. That massively improve my life. There are additional things as well.  

I don't intend to look any further into this guy. 

3 ideas for other blog entries.

At the moment. I am not able to get my energy back to where it was. To consistently put out things like, insights on the Law of One etc. It is just not coming. 

To that end, I have a thought about something I have wanted to do for a while but just didn't feel quite right. But now it might work. There was a guy called Ryan Gable who made a youtube video against the Law of One. I watched 20 minutes and it was humorously bad. A lot of what he said was "If you asked followers of the Law of One what they think about x they would say..."... Followed by something I have never heard in my life. 

The benefit of this is that I am kind of drawing off his energy, rather than using my own.  

A second video that might do with a bit of analysis or "take down" even is that Stefan Molyneux has recently done a take down of mysticism as a concept in an X space. I could do an analysis of that. Since it is Stefan Molyneux, it is highly likely he has basically done a positive narrative. But the show is entitled "Do not F with Mysticism", so might be worth a look. 

I realised recently that the experience that eventually got me to look into the Law of One could be described as "mystical".  

I do have other things to talk about such as holes I have now poked in Aaron Abke's narrative. I watched, only a ten minute youtube where a guy pokes very meaningful holes in something Aaron Abke said. Poked holes in one of Aarons videos I really enjoyed and remembered well. And it just took actually properly reading the bible passage Aaron had selectively quoted to reveal a completely different story. It was shocking. 

But yeah, a lot of the time I have wanted to say something based on a subject and the energy has just abandoned me. I keep on thinking if I sleep the next idea will form and yet it doesn't come. But these are some ideas I have.  

To Communion or not Communion?

One of these issues I am suddenly thinking about a lot. Therefore, this is going to be a long blog post. 

To repeat previous things I have said. I decided not to do Communion after I found out it was likely something that Paul pushed. He came out with it in Corinthians 1:17 in 50 AD, and the gospels were written from 70 AD onwards. 

It was quite clear to me when I stopped doing it that I should stop doing it. 

Since then though. I have struggled with this decision a bit. There seems to be clear benefits to stopping it that I will mention. But it is not clear if these benefits are real or kind of illusory. 

I get up, absolutely sure I should go back to it. Then get on with things and am absolutely sure that I should not do it. I pick up a guitar book and play something and I know that this is what I should put my energy into instead. I note health difficulties and hope to improve these in the best way possible. Via the gym and via just 'pushing through' in a way to a better result. 

Which is what I feel now. Perhaps some analysis here will lead to some sort of answer?

So to start with. Where did the idea of Paul is a false Prophet come from. Aaron Abke? Do I like Aaron Abke? Not really. While I liked him and admired him a great deal to begin with. This is a person that is obsessed with a very destructive diet. A vegan diet. There are a lot of horrible health problems that come with a vegan diet. He has kids, and someone with that fanaticism I don't think will be giving meat to their kids. Even if it is illegal not to do so and babies have died from vegan diets before (and vegan parents jailed, as they should be!)

He also support forgiveness without contrition. This is his answer to all things. Which is just a purely evil idea. He is not someone anyone should be following as any kind of status of a wise person. 

But I said there were positive changes since I have stopped Communion. Haven't I?

OK, let's examine that. 

The insights into things. 

Two that I can think of. When I started Communion. I was embroiled in a very self destructive woman who was involved with someone else I know that is... dangerous to my mind. Like, my best understanding of them is that they are dangerous. The dream I got following doing Communion was of being protected from something demonic in relation to this whole situation, and I immediately disconnected from her mind games and shortly after (six weeks or so) she killed herself. 

The insights I had as soon as I stopped Communion was that her decision to be with this person wasn't a "mistake". "There are no mistakes" as the Law of One says. But it was a legitimate choice. To accept this choice. It seemed to create shifts. 

The second insight I have had recently that I don't think I would have had without the Communion. I have a friend, of a sorts. Who I recently re-contacted. We talked a bit about his life and such and I mentioned my own spiritual beliefs a few times. Then later, I was spending time with him again. He received important news and I had a lot of insight into what his internal world is like. I journalled a bit about what I perceived the cause and effect in his life is (having listened to Stefan Molyneux and such), how he was addressing things and such like that.

Both felt like they could be important insights. But then, from another perspective. They might not be. 

Both of these issues are kind of irrelevant to my life. 

The lessons. 

Reading the Law of One recently I learned, in the very last few sessions Carla's lesson seemed to be that any kind of disharmony. Any kind of viewing of others, even those being obviously manipulative. As other than 'The One Infinite Creator'. Was a blockage of her energy field. Like I said, my communion dream was "This thing here is demonic, get it out of your life". It was very powerful and positive at the time. 

But I wondered, going on the previous Communion thoughts I had (blood magic being black magick as an example!) That what if, based on the above example. The Communion dream had made me see others as separate from myself? It had identified others as demonic as an example. 

This, I think, is a specious argument. While yes, it does add in some information about others having not exactly positive intentions. Possibly being aligned with the negative. The girl killed herself at the end of the day. She was not right in the head, and this is not the actions of someone in contact with positive entities. The balance here is an issue I am not sure about. 

The second example. The friend who had personal issues. Now, my input was to take interest in things like Stefan Molyneux and spiritual things. He was not interested in that. He has... everything mapped out as to how he is going to handle everything. 

In essence. I don't know the value of my journal entry looking into this and the tools that I generally have to meet this. Since coming away from Communion these kinds of thoughts and analysis' have seemed more important to me. What I THINK the Communion would have done is to remove my focus so this guys issues would fall into the background and not be relevant. Just because, like I said, that kind of analysis wasn't so important when I was doing the Communion.

Even though I have previously seen some value in these kinds of analysis. To my mind. Drinking a glass of grape juice and some bread as a ritual that increases the power of my heart chakra. Makes these things fall into the distance and be forgotten and turns my attention more towards the future. Would be a positive thing. 

Music.

I remember various Christians, such as Mike Cernovich, saying that music like Metallica is evil. That it links us subconsciously with demonic things.

I thought that was crap. It happens with a lot of different Christians. Mike Cernovich, the first time I saw him was when he was talking to Stefan Molyneux about his book 'Gorilla Mindset'.  

I disagree with this. Consider this fantastic piece of music. Metallica is amazing. As was Hotel California. This is good music that enriches life:

Youtube: lissiemusic: Lissie - Nothing Else Matters (Metallica Live Cover) - Jan 15th 2011. 

https://youtu.be/0Ia9N9MdSa0?si=qsLUrVRT1qM7ahfh

That is not demonic. But THIS is, in my view:

Youtube: The Axis of Awesome: 4 Chords. Music Videos. The Axis of Awesome: June 20th 2011. 

https://youtu.be/oOlDewpCfZQ?si=5Yy_uLodk60reciR

There is just hypnotic and wrong. It trashes, it devalues, what music is. And pretty much every song that I have heard with these four chords has FELT wrong. It is very popular so I'm sure there are some I still like with this chord progression. But a lot of the main songs. I.e. Journey, have always just felt wrong. 

One of the very concrete benefits I have gotten since stopping the communion is an improvement in my music. This will be something I will be sad to give up. Something that is important to me. 

I started making music which I have not done in a while. I also started working on more guitar techniques which is enjoyable. When I was doing the communion. I didn't do any of that. My ability to make music was stunted. And the thing I enjoyed doing, way more than I enjoy doing now, is playing scales. 

Which is why I bring up that Axis of Awesome video. The massive homogenisation of music. I have made songs with those chords without knowing it. Including some that I value greatly and have powerful meaning. 

The idea of playing scales might be something I am using subconsciously to break out of that four chord pattern. It might be, in a way, increasing my musical talent. Slowly learning keys and such to overcome the tendency towards stupid chord playing. Whereas, cashing out now, making music at the level of skill I am on now. Might be less preferable to me. 

Other effects.

There are other general effects I am experiencing that seem to me to be due to this. I do not think I would recover more quickly from surgery if I were doing Communion. But I do feel a sense of not being able to "fill myself up" with energy again. 

I feel a sense of boredom in a lot of the things I used to find interesting. This may be health related. I am more tired than normal. But it feels like there is an element of energetics too. 

The Law of One gave information about Communion in Session 64.4. I am not ultimately sure about Jesus, Paul, or Communion itself. But I do feel that now the Law of One has justified Communion as a legitimate white magick ritual. That it comes under a different 'purview' of sorts. Blood magick being negative and such. Well this isn't blood. It is not draining a sheep like some sort of halal ritual. It is literally just bread and grape juice. 

So, I'm probably going to go back to it now. I do not have a clear idea on this yet. But I am going to buy some grape juice today. 

In my Communion, I sit there with bread and juice and light a candle. I open a word document. A journal I use for this moment. And I note down things that come to me. In my last Communion, which I was looking at in thinking all this through. I did something I have never done before. I wrote random words that didn't make sense to me. One of them on searching was German, the other two were highly relevant, specific and significant. 

I also feel a sense of headiness. A sense of my energy being higher in my body. There is more I have to say on this. More thoughts I have. But for the moment that's where I'll leave it. 

Vexing spiritual issues.

At the moment. I have had a surgical procedure. I thought it would be a normal procedure. I imagined it as being fairly easy. Like, they would put a tube in me and I would be upright and chatting fine, but the actual procedure itself was more serious than that.

For this reason. I am low on energy. Sleeping 12 hours and even outside of that, on top of the 12 hours; laying about, and not even watching TV sometimes. 

I just watched a livestream by Bryson Grey. In which he is discussing his faith and what he has discerned from the bible. It made the case that a problem during the time after Jesus' time. Expressed in Romans 1-4. Was that the Jews of the time were trying to make the case that only Jews had received the blessings of God through Jesus. And Paul was trying to make the case his words applied to everyone. Also, quite explicitly. Paul talking about salvation through works. Not faith. 

Throws a bit of a spanner in the works. It doubts the idea I have had thus far as Paul being a false prophet. If Paul was responding to unhealthy ideologies amongst Jesus' followers... Then it puts him in a more positive light. I still have the information from what I have absorbed via Aaron Abke. But it is interesting nonetheless. And it casts a bit of doubt on the idea that it is best to stop communion. 

I am vexed. 

I wonder if the best way to actually understand this all is to actually read the bible and see what I think. I have read parts. I remember reading Acts. That I thought was hysterical. Because it basically involved the Disciples setting up a kind of Commune and... I kid you not... Killing people in a kind of Darth Vader fashion that didn't donate enough to it. This is directly in the text. I didn't get it off a youtuber. But perhaps reading a larger part of it. Corinthians. Romans etc. To see what general message I get from these things. Would solve some of these issues. 

I am in a slump. Perhaps this theological slump has arrived at the same time as the energy one for a reason. That I can think these things through. I am not praying. I need a bit of energy to pray. I am enjoying the gym far less. Which is annoying. Meditation feels great. It feels like I am getting a bit of energy back slowly. But like I said, I am in a "slump". The surgery felt like a bit of a "violation", and I feel I have picked up a kind of sadness. 

What the Law of One really means?

From the Law of One book 5. Fragment 55:

Apparently, if Carla had chosen to meet difficulties in
completing our lease agreement with our landlord by allowing a feeling of
separation from him to occur or had allowed this same feeling of separation
to grow for Don as he hemmed and hawed about what house to choose in
Atlanta, that allowing of separation of self from other-self could have been
energized by our negative friend until her self was separated from her
physical vehicle, and her incarnation would have been at its end. She had to
deal with our landlord, who had numerous requirements for our leaving
that he felt justified in making, and with Don’s mental condition, which
was beginning to show further signs of the long-term stress to mind and
body that commuting and worrying about his job had brought about.

So here we get to the very end. The Penultimate "Fragment" in the last book of the Law of One. And we finally get a direct understanding of what the Law of One actually means in the real world. We finally get a real definition relevant to the real world. 

I had not completely understood or known what it meant and in truth. I read the Law of One because of all it's wisdom. Not because I am consciously trying to learn the Law of One per sey. But in thinking through what it meant, I did not have a clear idea. I did wonder if Stefan Molyneux's Universally Preferable Behaviour. Which relies on Universality, and kind of "is" the Law of One might be relevant. As though it was not a 'felt' thing, but a kind of guideline to start off theoretical, philosophical and theological concerns. But that's not what this line is saying. 

Jims casual description of "that he felt justified in making". Makes me think that the requirements were not justified. That they were dealing with someone that was quite unpleasant. I have always felt very strongly, as I am sure that most of us do. That people that do negative things, that I define as negative of course. Deserve pushback, and that this is a good thing. 

It is probably the same situation for most people. It is probably a single learning. But it is not completely clear that say... Don would have experienced the 'lesson' in the same way. We learned from the moment that Don and Carla swapped energies temporarily. That Don did contain a whole lot of energy that was a lot tougher that he just generally carried. Don was also referenced as getting in arguments a bit more without suffering health problems at the same time. So it could be that because Carla is a 'love' person, that she experienced this, but Don as a 'wisdom' person, would experience the whole thing differently?

Nevertheless, these sessions are still giving me things to think over. 

Questioner: What would that be?

Ra: I am Ra. Firstly, we would suggest that possibility/probability vortices include those in which the entity known as Gandalf has a lengthier incarnation. Secondly, we would suggest that this entity goes to a graduation if it desires. Otherwise, it may choose to reincarnate to be with those companions it has loved. Thirdly, the entity known to you as Betty has the means of making the entity more distorted towards comfort/discomfort.

Carla mentions this in the write up before. She states that her new cat she feels is the reincarnation of the last one. The Law of One contact would seemed to have confirmed that. I have seen someone else mention this on the forum. That her new dog seemed to recognise her and have the same habits as a previous dog. 

My family dog. We have had three. The first was a female Staffy. English Staffy. The second was a kind of wolf. The third is an American Staffy. 

I had dreams. Very specific dreams about something the American Staffy had experienced and how it effected her before she came to the family. I was quite interested that the forces behind the dream. The higher forces of some description. Actually cared about the psychology of a dog. The Law of One does make small references to higher entities caring about this. 

I believe, since we can't really understand what goes on in the life between lives. Time/ space, as the Law of One calls it. That it is very unhealthy to make defined statements about it. There is no grounding in saying that someone was this or that past life. It also leads the door open to people that would attempt to use that kind of mystical thinking for fraudulent means. Rather like David Wilcock. Who told everyone about frequent mystical experiences to prove any particular thing he wanted to prove. Such as that he was a messiah or that Corey Goode was legit. 

Staring at the dog the other day I contemplated how someone would know such a thing. How they would experience the world if they could perceive such a thing.

Specific insights. 

Anyway, the particular insight I had, the particular part of my life where I was like "I should think of this person in a more service to others manner". It directly, directly opposed the insight I had from strong dreams when I started Communion about four years ago. I have talked recently about this. The Communion insight I had came from a kind of dream I have identified as perhaps negative. Altogether too clear. Altogether too direct. It fed into the worst instincts that I took from reading the Law of One. The idea that this or that negative thing is destroying a situation. That it (as well as people) needs to be guarded against. 

It also fed directly into the delusions David Wilcock was spouting at the time about being abducted by Reptilians. 

I have a continued question, and that question is this: In relation to all these spiritual things. I am really waiting, wanting one that feeds directly into the real world. Just a thing, where there is some sort of click and it effects the real world. 

The Law of Attraction makes this claim. I have never really liked the Law of Attraction. These insights are doing that in a way. But I wonder if that is the thing that creates a click into the real world. The insight I have just had into my relationships. Does that feed meaningfully into future ones? I think it probably does. 

Law of One learning. The messiness of life.

At the moment. A big part of my spiritual path is fairly simple. I read the Law of One. Then when I am finished with reading the Law of One. I read it again! 

I went through it a few months ago on www.lawofone.info. I am reading it via the books at the moment. Reading the Law of One book 5 and the commentary is very useful. Very powerful. Then I will read it again when I am done with the last two 'fragments' in book 5. On the third go through I will read it via www.llresearch.org. Apparently the most updated reading. And I will write a bit, probably personally in a kind of journal. So I can think over and learn slowly each session. 

After that, I will be able to put together a concise view of what the Law of One actually advises people to be doing in the real world. I already have meditation and affirmations, and, secondarily, in a Law of One telling. Prayer. But precisely what is advised and where in the book that is said. Advising on where my own interpretation is. I think would be useful. 

At the moment, I am, in line with other things I have talked about here. Other 'learnings'. Learning to relax a lot of the ideas of self defence, and which kind of jump off into illusion.

Two ways this has been happening. One is that, I got an idea from session 25. That when I feel screwed over by something. When I feel there is something negative. I can send love and this will work against the person doing the thing against me. Like a kind of karma.

I realise though, that this is kind of delusional. The discussion of the spiritual "war" in session 25. There just isn't enough to go on. Yesterday, I was in a situation that annoyed me and I felt like I should use a tool such as that. But I realised it was kind of crap. It is not quite clear what reality things such as 'sending love' has. In either a positive or more conflict based application. But there is not a lot of objective evidence for it. So for me, actually accepting my powerlessness in that moment. It really seems to work a lot better. Things 'flow' from that place. 

Also, another thing came up. I have worn this pendant for about five years:

Prosteel 7 Archangels Pendant. If you are interested. 

I looked it up. That is Hebrew writing, not Arabic. I am pretty sure there are no errors on this pendant to the effect of naming a negative entity or anything like that. But all the same. It is something that I am slightly worried about. 

I also wear an Ankh that I will keep wearing.

The point is is that since I have read the Law of One. I have felt more and more, that the protective positive energy that I am seeking is felt inside me. Not so much in these outer types of things:

Like in this tarot image how, earlier ones had a bird in the outer sense. But when you get to the experience. The outer bird changes to part of the persons clothing. As though it became inner. I take the cat in the box to be something like this is where the need for animalistic power becomes acknowledged. Rather like all the Neitzsche ideas. Although animalistic power is more relevant in real terms to the archetypes of the body, in my view (the body equivalent of this archetype is literally "strength"). This is where it gets cognitively acknowledged. 

The only other thing that strikes me. Is that, while a lot of this is a very powerful and interesting 'background'. One of the really powerful places to get insights... "Next level" insights. Is the human design. Where a lot of this kind of stuff gets dumped right into the messy reality of everyday life. You can see peoples flaws in the human design. Peoples contradiction. I have a whole section of a little book of mine acknowledging interesting hexagrams, which talk about things that just sound terrible. But if they are part of the design then they are nevertheless part of Gods plan. I.e. David Wilcocks Sun, Gate 22.2: The tendency of the self to delude oneself and others. 

But, looking through peoples designs when they behave in certain ways does bring a whole lot of clarity. here is mine with the planets taken out (I have an instinct towards privacy):

I have had an insight into my human design, and how it relates to the conflict I have experienced in my life. 

In my conscious Jupiter. Which is kind of like our spiritual message to the world. Is in gate 3.4. What I do here is a lot to do with gate 3. Gate 3 is a 'mutation'. It is called 'difficulty at the beginning'. Because it takes a long time to learn an entirely new way of thinking. 

It responds to gate 60. Which is 'limitation'. Gate 60 is a real thorn in peoples side and anyone that has it, has a chip on their shoulder. In my experience.

The thing with the gate 60 is that it DOESN'T have the answer. So if someone has the whole channel. Gate 60-3. They might experience the problem and slowly find an answer. But if someone has gate 60 hanging, then they have the problem, and no answer. 

Then there is me, that has the gate 3 hanging. I have the answers. But these are not answers that a lot of people want to hear. Meditation. The Law of One. And especially philosophy and where this relates to political ideas. These are inconvenient things for people. 

This explains a great deal of things that have happened in my life. I am not saying that my expression of gate 3 is "perfect". I would say that it was probably overly politicised and had a tendency towards 'transcient' information. Picked up when transiting Uranus went over my conscious Jupiter. 

Adding this all together makes a real life confusing mix. But you can have people with gate 60 hanging that want to monopolise what they think the answer should be. Or two people with the hanging gate 3 where there is some sort of subtle conflict about something to do with said answer. Or someone with the entire channel that just won't co operate. They are still in their 'difficulty at the beginning', phase. 

It brings a far more useable paradigm I think. With potential actual answers. Than terms like "narcissist" or anything like that.