The exhausting game of spiritual teachings.

Writing another post, the last one was just a few hours ago.

I have been writing a lot slower for a while. Perhaps I am making up for that. Also, the sun is out, and it unbalances my medical condition. I have already had inconveniences. That combined with collapse at the gym at roughly the same time means this week will probably be spent doing very little so that means, I will likely prioritise spirituality a great deal this week. With spirituality comes the outlet of said spirituality in the form of this blog. I have trouble at about 26 degrees. It will be 31 later this week. 

Youtube: Melissa Dougherty: Bizarre Channeled Spirits, Jesus & Truth: May 6th 2025:

https://youtu.be/StGJwBNybjo?si=zP-ycDpD9xQeMevv

To me, this is an extremely annoying and incoherent video. Perhaps that is not the fault of the woman making it. Perhaps it is. 

The first part that is annoying. Not wrong necessarily. Is her characterisation of new age teaching, including the Law of One. There is a problem I have started to perceive out there in the world. That is, that nobody is really teaching the Law of One, what I would consider... "properly". When I say properly, I do not mean like the people at llresearch where if you bring up an argument against forgiveness without contrition. Reference session 34.6, and things like the Law of Free Will. They ignore you. Just ignore you. Don't engage with the material. 

This is not a person that can teach the material then. 

I have searched far and wide for teachers in this area. Probably not that far and wide since I would prefer to just read the book. But I remember going through llresearch's links page and finding a few people. The last one I went on there was an article something like: "Charlie Kirks subtle and dangerous demonisation of minorities". 

The Law of One reddit was practically orgasmic when Charlie was shot. Not the main people perhaps. And everyone can go on a reddit sub. But I thought that was interesting all the same. There was no one defending Charlie. There were pro him getting shot and neutral. So Llresearch attracts leftists clearly. 

Aaron Abke isn't much of an exception to this in my view. Firstly, Aaron doesn't actually teach the Law of One, not at all. He teaches veganism, and the Law of One did not support that. He is quoted in this video talking about having to 'destroy the ego' and all that:

Questioner: Can you tell me how you balance the ego?

Ra: I am Ra. We cannot work with this concept as it is misapplied and understanding cannot come from it.

The problem with the Law of One is that NO ONE is getting it right. Llresearch teaches forgiveness without contrition. I have found enough Q'uo readings, and got enough refusal to discuss the issue from the people there to know that. There are many other points they would not like to be challenged on. Many things they just stop speaking if you bring up the subject. 

So yes, Melissa summarises what she thinks new age beliefs are in this area and gets it wrong. Is that her fault? or is it because no one is coherently teaching it? Aaron is teaching what he believes, not what the Law of One teaches. At least, not exactly. 

Another issue I have with her video is that there are really a lot of claims in Aaron Abke's works. Like, videos and videos of them. That she goes nowhere near addressing. I suppose you can't do that in a one hour video. But the points she replaced these with were not particularly compelling.

For instance, one thing Aaron talks about is that when Paul met Jesus on the road to Damascus. What he claims was Jesus. When Paul had his vision. He was blinded by Jesus. Does that sound like Jesus? Jesus was a healer of the sick and the blind in many cases. Does it seem like Jesus would do that?

Also, in one of the biblical books. A woman possessed by a demon followed Paul and two friends for three days espousing the greatness of Pauls message. 

I am not saying these things are correct. I have myself not been able to go all the way with Aarons teachings. As I have talked about recently. But to push back against a spiritual teacher. Does it not seem at least polite to push back on his technical points? Aaron has laid out a powerful and highly technical argument. Does it seem fair. Does it seem 'good faith'. To just ignore all those points and then write a video repeating the mainstream Christian points with only one biblical quote?

Anyway, it did suddenly make me wonder what I thought of all this? Where I put myself if any of these incredibly mind numbing points were to come up in conversation.  

For anyone here that followed me due to the Law of One and has any loyalty to its material. I think you would likely share my understanding that Carla being so incredibly Christian has leant credence to Christianity and perhaps set her up as an idol in that manner? Also, it seems to have been given a subtle nod by the contact itself. As though looking at the books beckons you on the path of Christianity. When I found it I was an atheist. 

Carla, had faith, real faith. Carla used her faith to get through the whole thing with daily arthritis. But... well I don't have that same faith. My faith, my ideas and thoughts and things, come with a lot of questions. 

For me, it is all more of a trial and error thing. I pray, it works well, stop praying, get ill. I do communion, it works well, stop communion. Get ill. Have a whole spiritual crisis and dissociation. 

When I had a serious schizophrenic break (as serious as it gets!) I felt my mind unravelling, and I felt 'Jesus' holding me together after I prayed to him. So it feels a little dishonest to not identify myself as at least 'kind of' Christian. 

This same thing works with all the things I currently use. Meditation. Dream Interpretation etc.  

But even engaging with any of these people simply sounds so completely exhausting! The bible is one book that has had many different political events surrounding it. It has been copied and screwed with many times. I just... find it very unsatisfying to even look at it that much. For me, it was convincing that Paul was the one that started off Communion and it wasn't necessarily a Jesus thing. I tried to stop Communion, and it did not go well at all! So trying to understand the bible and its meaning. While everything practically useful comes from the Law of One itself! 

It's honestly all just so exhausting.

I also wanted to end with a little joke as well. This women defines truth at the end as something that is objective. Like, the sky is blue because we can see its blue kind of thing. This is a person that believes that a mythical figure from the distant past takes away all her sin if she does something wrong. That that figure actually experiences her sin. Or did in one powerful moment about 2000 years ago. 

That is just not objective at all.  

Judging mental health, and the perversion of spiritual energy.

Second post for today.

Went for a bit of a walk and even though it is not exactly 'gym' kind of stuff (I so so so want to go back there but I got indications I should take a longer break this time). A walk does get rid of that kind of "angsty" energy. Maybe like ten minute aerobic I will do next.

There are two completely separate points I want to make here. One that I might have made before. But I want to say it again, just because it is becoming relevant in my life. The other is, I think a kind of new point where I talk about the damage that David Wilcocks kind of material does to a person. And about growing up as well. 

Firstly, I want to state what I have discerned about dealing with people that might be genuinely sick. But might be lying (as many do) when it comes to mental health disorders and ideological madness. (Like, are they fooled by the arguments or are they actually committed to negative ideals?)

This video has informed me on this. I like this girl a lot. I admire her passion on a subject I also have passion on. The correctness of right wing beliefs and the madness of left wing beliefs. And the importance of a commitment to spiritual ideals. She's also very pretty. Actually pretty facially not just a good body. This helps with spreading such a message I think:

Youtube: TaylorIsOnline0: Degeneracy and leftism#: January 27th 2026:

https://youtube.com/shorts/CV_h4Bs4WU8?si=Kgoo02lz3iCfr_TX 

This is a good example of someone that made a choice to be ill in a sense. Not like the case of someone that pretends to be ill to gain resources. But someone for whom mental health was not a legitimate thing. That the mental health issue was a cover for a disturbed conscience.

I think many issues like this are contained within these two Law of One quotes:

Questioner: I am interested in how the first distortion applies to the negatively polarized entity misplacing the mind/body/spirit complex. Why is the negatively polarized entity followed to the place of negative time/space? Why would one of us freely follow the entity?

Ra: I am Ra. The positive polarity sees love in all things. The negative polarity is clever.

This is where I sometimes place it when say, someone you know personally and is not overly intellectual commits to left wing beliefs. Left wing beliefs, which are of course, completely malevolent. But this is how I justify that they do not deserve in the deeper sense. The natural consequence of their actions. Which would be to be violated by one of the refugees they are so desperate to bring into the country. (Which has happened to other individuals because of their wilful blindness and voting choices).

This is the second quote that might apply to these situations though:

Questioner: Can you tell me what bias creates their momentum toward the chosen path of service to self?

Ra: I am Ra. We can speak only in metaphor. Some love the light. Some love the darkness. It is a matter of the unique and infinitely various Creator choosing and playing among its experiences as a child upon a picnic. Some enjoy the picnic and find the sun beautiful, the food delicious, the games refreshing, and glow with the joy of creation. Some find the night delicious, their picnic being pain, difficulty, sufferings of others, and the examination of the perversities of nature. These enjoy a different picnic.

All these experiences are available. It is free will of each entity which chooses the form of play, the form of pleasure.

When I talked about this before, the example I gave before was from the dark recesses of reddit. On a reddit sub where women talk about cheating and making it as cruel as possible to their husbands to get off on it. This is a clear example of something that isn't something they are fooled into. Sex is very much a choice. I would argue. These are behaviours taken on for hedonistic pleasure. With awareness of their consequences. 

Bear in mind this kind of behaviours 'karma' in a sense, might reach into another part of their lives. Say their husband, being unsupported, had something negative happen that the woman then complains about but had she not been like this, he would have had the energy to maintain a positive life?

There are hundreds of deliberate little choices people can make which are choices. A lot of ways their own negative choices which they will never reveal would impact them negatively. To which they would then play victim. But also times when good people fall on hard times. 

This is where I put these kinds of moral decisions. There are both people that genuinely have mental health disorders (I have a best friend I knew since I was about 4 and I have seen that he was genuinely very off when he was young, none of it came along due to problems with his conscience and he was committed to therapy from an early age). There are also many whom do not, some of which convince themselves they do. For their own personal convenience. 

When you add it all up it comes to a kind of selfishness, I think. You cannot know what is going on inside someone else if you have known them for less than about a decade. So not knowing, it is hard to judge. And we do need to judge in this life I think. But for me personally, it is also good to realise that there are things that cannot be known.

Bearing in mind, the people that are lying about this kind of thing are the ones most fanatically committed to the lie. They will never admit they are making it up for their benefit. 

Thoughts on transcient material. 

I mentioned a friend I have had since I was young. I reconnected with him recently. It added to thoughts I have already built on. Since I can see how I have changed.

This is my human design chart:

When I am showing people that are new to the chart the human design. I show them that the whole thing adds up to something very intuitively correct. People with energy higher in their centres are focused on higher energy things, the same with lower energy. My father, who was sex obsessed, a very grounded person, has the five lower centres defined. 

With my chart you can see that there is a lot in the higher energy centres. Perhaps not as much as say, a mental projector. But quite high. 

This means that my energy is keyed to thinking of and discussing the kinds of concepts I discuss here. Cerebral things. 

What this comes with, what that kind of awareness also comes with. Is a need to understand free will. Since most people are not interested in such things and it would even be a violation of the law of free will in a lot of cases to tell them. 

In the positive, let's say this is a commitment, as it is with me to music, spirituality and philosophy.

To hold this energy, like I have said, requires a certain awareness of free will. It means, that if I am thinking of a dream interpretation or a quote from Nietzsche; that I do need to keep that to myself, no matter how fantastic I think that is (I do also have "censorship", 26.4, in my unconscious Saturn!)

This is the pattern of energy then. Having energy to focus on this kind of stuff, and with the Law of One. The pressure to bring in an entire paradigm that is otherwordly. Which the everyday world argues against. In a way by it's very existence. But it is all deeply positive and loving. Praying every day, meditating, and knowing that philosophy and ethics are important. Are deeply enriching to life. 

The perversion of the energy. 

But what David Wilcock did. Is he took the bones of the Law of One. But then added in a lot of 'wordly' things to add legitimacy to it. He said he had a secret insider that told him about Roswell. A secret insider that told him that soon enough, the Alliance was going to take over and we would all live in paradise. That David Wilcock alone had the science to create anti gravity hover cars etc. 

What I think this does, is it speaks to a persons desire to overcome free will. Which I think we all constantly desire. The One Infinite Creator laid down free will, and none of us have really accepted it. We all look at the world and want to reorder it in our own image. 

It converts the spiritual energy that invests in things like the Law of One and says: "Look, you do not have to be the only one paying attention to this. The only one that believes this. There is real world evidence it is going to be relevant to the real world soon. It is only fair you warn others".

It brings up in people the conversion of that spiritual energy into a kind of real world material energy that can be used as a weapon in our fight against... reality, in a sense. The world that will not let its secret be known and stubbornly insists that the way of matter is the truth. 

Maturation.

It also prevents the naturally positive and maturing aspects of the energy when it was still positive. For me, philosophy and these kinds of things are interesting. I want to be able to look at the world and understand it through a lens that adds benefit to me psychologically, spiritually etc. This, I would say, is a fairly mature instinct. 

When you are talking about David Wilcock stuff and the more mad parts of the Law of One. It does not have that maturing effect. It is essentially stuff that is not relevant to anything and can be, and perhaps needs to be, written off as crazy. It is a separate part of a persons being. 

What I have noticed as I have met up with old friends again. Is that the conversion of that David Wilcock kind of thinking, into a more philosophical kind of thinking. Means that the positive thing, cannot be dismissed in the same way. It becomes a part of your actual being and thus, it becomes solid and real. If a person liked the you that wasn't into that, they are suddenly confronted with the you that is into that. It provides change to the real world, and people might simply not be interested in that. 

There we go. Got all angsty earlier today which was why the shorter blog post earlier. But that's what I have for today.  

Gym and human design theory.

So, successes.

A few nights ago I went to the gym. I will probably have to take a break from it. My medical condition is known for not being as quick to recover. This feels bad but it is what it is. 

I am get insights from the gym. Often. Insights it does not feel I would normally have. Insights like 'so on so is jealous', when the evidence was clearly there I just didn't want to see it. I have very often mentioned that exercise gives me these kinds of insights and my theory is that, in a man, maybe in a woman too, but I can't speak for women. But in a man, stresses create a mental building block of a kind of information that allows a person to conform in a sense. So, the stress will give me a commitment to not seeing that a bunch of people don't like me as an example. That I am in a room with a bunch of people that dislikes me. This is a danger to me, perhaps not in modern times but in our ancestral past. 

Then when I do exercise. I will suddenly realise all the little signs these people did not like me. Because all the anxiety that is wrapped up in my muscles. All the adrenaline in my blood (even if this is years later) is suddenly cleared. 

Considering my background, and it is not completely pleasant. It is a bit dysfunctional. I have a medical condition that was badly controlled for years. I have a commitment to right wing politics even though I live in a very left wing area and I have been socially ostracised from pretty much every job and social group I have ever been in. Several workplaces they have arranged huge get togethers and invited everyone, (about thirty people), but me, and exclusively me. 

Human Design Theory.

This is probably why I started blogging to be honest. This is probably why I still blog. I have identified that a part of why I became so intense with that kind of information is because I was seeking a belonging in those communities to offset the constant bullying in my real life. 

I am not saying that these emotions are not the standard thing for people to experience given these experiences. But, the perceptual filter of the human design not self being anger, fits with my understanding of my mentality here. I am angry about this. And the anger, has become "layered". I got this term from Ra Uru Hu when he was talking about Projectors and the layering of their bitterness. For me, I think I have the same kind of layering, but it is not bitterness, as I am not a Projector. It is the layering of anger. 

So my way forward is the gym! Sitting at those weight machines and pushing forward to transfer that anger. Psychologically into insight, and physically into muscle. It would make sense if that, on a sociological level men experience a lot of stress from low status. That this is a good route for many men. 

The way it works for me then is that I go to the gym. I have insights into things that I am avoiding. Insights into why a person who screwed me over does justifiably deserve to be avoided, a bad thing about them when I have only seen good things. That kind of thing. But the point is to draw all the anger out of my subconscious. This is my process. 

So the process involves me feeling... More angry. More clarity at the anger I have always known is there and maybe, just maybe, I will unblock myself enough that I can actually create music again. That I will have something to sing about! 

At the moment, it might be the heat. I have been thinking of stuff to say. I have some stuff I want to say. But this subject is all I am going to talk about in this blog. As the anger is still too powerful. 

Ethics and the Law of One.

The video today:

Youtube: Melissa Dougherty: I went to a psychic fair, it was NOT what I expected. August 7th 2026.

https://youtu.be/btihYK4wWbE?si=ZK8-bRtGv5Ohz7jX

Firstly, before I go into this. I want to say that I will not, and would not, seriously engage with this woman. I feel that if I were to I would have strong ideas and would engage and debate like men do. Whereas, this is a soft creature that you do not do that with. I mean, technically writing in a blog I might bring some points in that would be confrontational. But it will be in the style of explanation and thoughts. Not opposition. 

The kind of person I would engage with seriously is someone like Ryan Gable. Who I wrote about before. I covered his Law of One video critique but I covered it barely. I have an affection for skeptics since Steven Cambian at Truthseekers, kind of singlehandedly saved me from David Wilcocks schizophrenic ramblings.

This person though, Ryan Gable, is not a good natured skeptic. He is not doing a legitimate search for truth in this area. I believe he is making bad faith and stupid arguments and I covered him very softly before. But I think I should do a more strongly opposing video. He has made certain claims in the notes I have made so far. Such as the idea that 'you have to be super high to write this stuff', which he says at 20 minutes. This was a comment I put on his video.

On the Law of One main website. They do give an explanation of that statement in session 1.0: We communicate now. We, too, have our place. We are not those of the Love [density] or of the Light [density]. We are those who are of the Law of One. This was what they wrote: The word “density” was added here to add clarity to what we believe to be Ra’s intended meaning. The fourth density is the density of love and understanding. The fifth density is the density of light. Ra is of the sixth density where love and light are unified. https://www.llresearch.org/channeling/ra-contact/1 So in the way they see things, the contact sees things. There is a very specific set of densities. Which is repeated a lot throughout the text itself. And they wanted to clarify which one they were from. Even though the statement didn't make a lot of sense when it was first heard. From my understanding I am fifth density, so my signature, if this were the way people were commonly speaking would be: "I am not of the love, I am of the light, I am not of the Law of One".

There we go. I think that is youtube formatting. I have directly referenced what he was complaining about in the Law of One. What happened? He deleted the comment. In about half an hour. Since he has proven bad will, I think that necessitates a more thorough response.  

Anyway, Melissa's video was; well, it had a female easy going style of everything just flows. She talks about talking with an 'aura reader', who is like a classic Law of One type of person. Like the people at Bring4th. Just a messy, not committing to anything kind of person. You bring up a concrete issue or problem you have, even linking it to the Law of One texts. And they. very disrespectfully, ignore you. Just won't engage.

The woman Melissa was talking to would make no commitment that there are things like objective moral rules. The interaction ended with the woman apparently accepting Melissas idea that Jesus is the answer to all these things. Which of course, she just went passive and let Melissa say whatever she wanted, so Melissa says she feels good, but the womans views are unchanged because nothing really gets her. She is totally numb and dissociated; hiding behind a commitment to mysticism and the Law of One.  

It is a very female mindset not dissimilar to a communist. Or the female judges letting criminals walk free to kill again because of some vague attachment to a sense of spiritual egalitarianism. 

I wanted to say, firstly, to praise the video a bit; then what I think of as moral rules. Or how I would answer some of these questions - moral rules and such. Also, how I would handle this 'aura reader'. And then I will move onto challenges to Melissas position. She mentioned at a points he asked the aura reader if they knew the bibles claims. 

So firstly, Melissa offered a very intelligent, in my view, deconstruction of what was wrong with the aura readers views. She makes a case that ethics are objective. If the aura reader was talking to someone doing evil things would she offer any opposition to this? The aura reader said something like everyone is on their own journey. So Melissa said... OK the Nazi's then? Were they objectively evil? They believed they were doing things that were good, at least they stated that. Are the Nazi's on their own journey? Or are they in need of moral correction? The woman offered a kind of vague non answer. 

What I would have said, is what way do you vote? We know, 100% this aura reader woman votes leftist. Then I would say, OK, so you believe we should give infinite resources to immigrants as part of the Law of One to show compassion and such and you are willing to vote, do an action in the real world, to support that? To which she would agree. I would then say that this is against the Law of One. Because it is initiating violence on the taxed native citizens. Many of which were extremely angry when they heard about USAID and recounted stories of not being able to afford their kids food. 

It is against the Law of One and evil in itself to tax said citizens. The taxed citizen is of equal worth to the migrant under the Law of One. Also, women like this are supporting an extremely violent oppressive government regime. Which they are not karmically free of, in my opinion. 

She would ignore this too of course. But this would hit more of a nerve than any of what had happened previously. They sometimes offer an "apology" at this point, for any distress the discussion caused or something like that. But what the apology is is a moral highgrounding apology. "I am sorry you feel that way" (the implication being I am sorry you were unable to accept my more enlightened point of view). I would not accept the apology and inform the woman that her offering it has caused me further offence. It is directly condescending.

Nevermind really. Escalating the conversation to a confrontation might have made a bit more of an impact, but it wouldn't have changed anything. These leftist women sometimes get raped and carry on supporting the left. Women in Sweden have been known to accuse white men because they do not want to be racist by saying a refugee raped them. 

But that is where I would go with the ethical question.

Stefan Molyneux would no doubt hate this. But I see Stefan Molyneuxs Universally Preferable Behaviour as very consistent with the Law of One. One of its first principles is that of universalism, which states that moral laws apply in every circumstance. There is more to it than that but I can't go into this for length reasons. One of the relevant principles is that moral laws are applicable to all situations. We cannot have exceptions in moral laws meaning that they apply sometimes and not others. Because if they apply some times and not others, then there is another thing that supersedes them. Likely a persons will. If their is another persons will superseding them. Then that is more important than the moral law. If it is more important than the moral law. Then the application of the moral law is one of control, not morals.

This applies to a great deal of things and it opens up the conversation to a lot of deconstruction. The government bans violence in its citizens but commits violence, as an example. God in the Old testament, bans murder, and yet he murders. 

Then I would turn on Christianity. The 'claims that the bible makes' and such as she referenced. I don't know specifically what this woman believes. But in my view, mainstream Christianity does not have a leg to stand on.

Even though I am kind of Christian, as in, Christian enough for my own definition. But not from a mainstream Christians definition. I am also critical of Christianity and have a little knowledge on these areas built from people like Aaron Abke, Paul Wallis and Bart Ehrman. 

My essential position and point on the bible is that it is extremely inconsistent. That there is good evidence of it being changed and of non canon books having more validity. That Christianity itself relies on an appeal to authority fallacy. That Christianities moral precepts involve forcing others to submit to its rules when they might not believe in God, and that a true moral system has to be secular in order to get around this issue. 

But like I said, I don't know this womans positions so do not know what conversation I would be facing in this position. 

Anyway, that's all I have for the moment! 

Working with catalyst.

I wanted to do a kind of run down of my understanding of the balancing process given in the Law of One. Understanding (mind), acceptance (body) and forgiveness (spirit).

I am a kind of angry resentful person. And I do not disagree with that part of myself. Of that way that I have become. Following the Law of One. A person experiences "catalyst". Which is that stuff out in the world that we use to change ourselves. So, we see in the world there is something to strive for and we strive for it. Changing ourselves in many ways, including an increase of discipline. 

That is an example of positive catalyst. It could be something more negative. Like we get bullied or something. Each catalyst can give us more positive or negative tendencies and specific weight is given, in the archetypal system. For when we respond to positive catalyst with negative tendencies and vica versa. 

I have started reading Nietzsche recently and I am very happy doing so. It feels incredibly profound. Feels like it is just 'something else'. I wanted to get his work for an understanding of some basic concepts of his that I have thought over. But, I feel now I have the book that it is gaining entry into another thing completely. 

One of the things he says, not even in the text yet, it is excerpted in the introduction. That he dislikes the binary between true - false, good - evil etc. He says that it is very possible that something in between these poles will be life affirming and good. This reminds me of something I have recently begun to feel and understand. I have realised that seeking truth 'in every area', is a bit too much of an energy drain. It came to me as I was thinking over these mental health issues that people have. Autism etc. I had originally believed that a lot of these people were kind of making it up to cover for hedonism and the negative psychological effects of a bad conscience. This was partly from Stefan Molyneux. I do not recall if he said this precisely. But I think I got the idea from listening to him. 

Eventually though I realised, when confronted with people that strongly believe the mental health reasoning, and various other things I have experienced. I realised it doesn't really help me to think of it like this. Whatever the ultimate truth of these peoples issues are. It is easier for me to just accept what they say. It doesn't effect me. I am not going to feel sympathy for their mental health issues or make a whole load of concessions I wouldn't otherwise make. But the additional energy to attempt to prove to myself either that these are legitimate, or that they are spiritual problems. Is not something worth my time; and life will eventually sort that kind of stuff out anyway. As society changes and people improve and add more light to situations like this. 

The reason I took the circuitous route to explain that last paragraph. The idea of accepting a maybe lie, or accepting 'confusion' as a kind of easy way out sometimes. Is that it is directly relevant to my spiritual movement forward I believe. I will have to explain something else first then come back to this.

My current catalyst.

I have travelled a very strange route in this life. As I have explained here before. I have an illness, a physical illness. Which is kind of subtle and invisible. And causes massive amounts of stress and even schizophrenia through effecting brain chemistry. There has been better medical technology recently. Which means for the first time in my life I am kind of clear headed and normal. I can carry a conversation without going off into some weird, highly alienating, thing. 

Nevertheless, my catalyst. I.e. the information I have received from the world. Is a certain way. I have been socially excluded from every single social group I have ever been a part of. I had a group of male friends for a while in school. Before the medical situation really progressed. I was a bit odd and overly stressed then. But it started to grow really bad from my mid twenties on. 

I worked in a supermarket as my first real job. I was completely socially excluded from everyone in the entire, very large, supermarket. They arranged entire outings strategically ostracising me. I then went to Uni. Where I neither got on nor didn't get on with anyone there. I then volunteered in a Buddhist cafe. I then worked in a fast food place, and office for two years, back to fast food, this time with people that could barely speak English, because the bullying at the office was so intense, then I worked in a call centre. 

At each one of these. Every single one. I was socially ostracised. The call centre actually this was not the case technically. They were very big on arranging outings after work for everyone. But I was kept in a team where the only thing I could do was work because the work load was heavier. Even though everyone else managed to socialise in that team (although no one was in the team more than six months while I was permanently there!) I just worked. But outside that. I was socially ostracised everywhere I went. Like, people going for entire social events deliberately excluding me and only me.

This was NOT the extent of the social ostracism. Even in other things in my personal life I have also been ostracised. 

Like I said, and I am also bringing this point out for a later point. While there may be very good reasons for this. I could have said or done things weird that got me socially ostracised at these places. My experience is that I have been socially ostracised. That is the catalyst that I have had. Now my emotional reactions to the world are that of a person that has been socially ostracised constantly. 

A natural dynamic. 

In the world I notice a pattern. If I am in contact with someone. I try and put my best foot forward. My best foot is that I have found value in the kind of things I blog about. The constant pains of the social ostracism has driven me more strongly into spirituality. The amount of catalyst to get me to pray everyday, or at least intend to. Was not small. 

Now, I think I have adapted so well to these things that I am unrecogniseable to the original person I was who wanted to 'fit in'. I recall in a moment where I had felt socially ostracised in my personal life. An additional example. A friend of mine was meeting up with another friend and I was not only feeling socially ostracised but was starting to go into a kind of psychosis. It is something that was a part of my schizophrenic break in 2014. The pains of all this started to get me that badly. (I have mapped out this single thing being responsible for a lot of my psychosis).

But as I was starting to feel this. Actively getting weird with people. I stared at my human design chart. Something I had separated from a little. And it sorted itself out. I connected to something of myself that is higher, and I was suddenly unbothered with the social event I had been very deliberately not invited to. (The person involved here actually tried to involve me in the future and suffered socially for this in a big way. At least in my understanding).

But it goes even further than this. Now that I am interested in the subjects I am interested in. Now that I have started to carve out a life where I am, basically happy largely on my own, and without these larger social groups. In essence, with enough prayer and meditation, reading the Law of One, now philosophy and the gym. I have become, somewhat immune, it feels to me. Either that or the emotion is suppressed. I do not feel bad if I am not invited and I also, do not want to be invited. The smallest incling of disrespect and I am happy to go home, watch Star Trek, and have an early night. I also have the general tendency to avoid the social situation in the first place. To not want to be invited.

Obviously this does not seem healthy. It is hard to even want to spend time with women (it is anyone really, but I use women as an example because they are seen as desireable, they are important for my "biological need to reproduce"). So I must have destroyed a part of myself in some manner. But I cannot make myself want what I don't want. I cannot afford therapy either. 

Everytime someone does try to interact with me, or I with them. In some manner. I kind of do my best. I provide what I think is a good addition to the conversation. But often, this is discouraged or ignored. If someone talks about xyz and I think Law of One type stuff, or Stefan Molyneux type stuff is useful or relevant. I will talk about it. The person will show a bit of interest. Then not be interested somehow. To forget about it. I might also make jokes. 

Eventually with enough ignoring me from the other person. I have to withdraw. This is obvious. You make a joke and someone takes more than 24 hours to respond. Frequently. Then obviously it is logical to withdraw. Without a casual conversation going over Whatsapp, for example. I cannot then casually say does someone want to meet up? I might even doubt myself and say, perhaps I should not be talking about philosophy with people? But, it is in my human design. Personality Mercury 56.2. Design Mercury 24.6. That is just me, what I am about. Sometimes the world/ people, give us feedback that we should change in some manner. But if what it wants us to change is a fixed attribute like that. There is not much we can do. 

The solutions. 

I have noticed one of the biggest changes in my psychology recently. I think this is due to working out in the gym a good deal. Since I have been working out at the gym. There is just something about all this I have begun to accept. 

For years, especially before I went to the two year office job. I just thought that things were going badly from bad luck. The people in the supermarket were an exception etc. I thought it was super strange I had not been out in a mixed gender group my whole life. Not gone out for a drink with say, three women and three men (including me). That because it was so strange that that hadn't happened. It was liable to happen. 

For a while I went through various crazinesses. But I always kind of desired that. Kind of desire that socialising or something in that entire area. But recently, since the gym, all of a sudden I do NOT desire that. I do not look around when walking in town hoping I can strike up a conversation with some chick. It feels like a deep and fundamental acceptance that that has not happened, and it probably isn't going to happen now. And I'm not sure I even want it to happen!

Since the gym though. I have gone from kind of desiring that and still thinking about it. To not thinking about it at all. Just love of gym. Nothing else.  

During the period Mid - late June to Mid - late July where I temporarily went off Communion. I did feel far more emotionally raw. I made this song:

I have the right to resent you. I have the right to feel,

The sun reveals everything, every little piece of you.

And you are love, maybe poison love,

And I am need, that is true.   

I have not been able to make music for a long time and I do not know why. This song was honest about that angry resentment I feel. Which, it exists for a reason and I don't see a problem with it. Like the song says, I do have the right to my emotions and when I was bullied at various workplaces. It was always women doing it. Every single time. 

Since I have gone back onto Communion though. These kinds of words are not coming. I wonder if it is because part of me wants to make a song with higher, more positive or more complex lyrics? Something meaningful in a different way? 

But to be honest. I don't really know the reason for it. When I went off Communion. I could make a song showing how I really feel. When I am on it. No song is made up. I'm just into playing scales and such. 

Perhaps it is a refinement to make a better song later? One with more of the scales that I am practicing? 

The decline of entertainment media.

It's been six days since my last post. I used to post daily! I suppose from one perspective, it is good that because this is set out like it is. Like, it is not attached to any sort of revenue stream. When I don't have anything to say I don't speak. 

Recently, I have really enjoyed some of the older TV shows I have been watching. Star Trek Deep Space Nine. Watched the entire series. Now onto Star Trek Voyager. Watched a bit of Star Trek the Original Series which might be where I go next. Previously rewatched The Mentalist. Older series. 

I recall watching the first Scream and how good it was. For my birthday I watched Scream 7. It was OK. But I didn't really feel anything watching it.

It brings me to this tweet:

There has been a lot of discussion of this kind of thing. There was a paid article by Adrian something or other. Perhaps Adrian Winters. That showed how this has happened. How a lot of Hollywood writing rooms have gone from 80% to 10% white males. 

It makes it harder to find things to watch on TV because a lot of these things are written by women. And women, as leaders of these kinds of things. Have never produced anything that is obviously interesting to me. These women are likely all liberal as well. Recently, as well, even things made by men, such as 'The Boys'. Is so infected with woke, it is unwatchable. 

Scarpetta is a good example. It has a good vibe of a female investigator going for a serial killer and a serial killer from thirty years ago also used the same tactics. There is a LOT of soap opera kind of stuff in this show. Which, might be OK. I watched it thinking perhaps there would be a payoff. Perhaps really engaging with the characters would be relevant as the plot unfolds. 

But, as it ended. As the plot solved. I realised that the soap opera element of the show was really all it had to offer. The serial killer element was clearly an after thought and even though the show was set up to imply that there would be some great relevance to the thirty year gap and the memories. There was not. It was literally a soap opera with a bit of serial killer stuff involved to engage people. The main character for the Mentalist was in this show to further imply an interesting detective angle. 

Another with a similar issue I just started watching yesterday. But have realised now is also terrible in the same way. I watched either one or two episodes of "Walker". I started watching it and there was again, a subtle serial killer plot happening and an emotional angle that might be interesting, provided it is not the only draw of the show. 

So I look up the reviews on youtube. Universally bad and I found just a single guy with low production quality. A source I can trust. Just a guy. Who literally labelled it "Woker". Then I look up who is running it. A woman named Anna. It will be the same thing. So I am not watching it. 

I think this is the problem that has infected basically all of modern screenwriting. I have watched a bit of Walker, and what is it missing? Being that I am in the category of the kind of person banned from the modern writing rooms? Well, it misses a strong male antagonist. Walker, Jared Padalecki, needs someone that could possibly beat him. It would immediately add that adrenalised, distinctly non soap opera like energy. 

But it is written by a woman, so it will just be an ongoing soap opera. Even shows with a lot of emotional stuff in them. Like Star Trek Voyager, that I am now watching. Produced by Rick Berman. But with a female captain. There is a lot of fairly deep emotional themes. But they don't make the show completely lose direction. 

What this has all added up to is that all modern TV is just kind of dull. Wokeness; liberal, female heavy writer rooms are just filled with a kind of directionlessness. It is hard to describe quite what has gone wrong with modern TV. But it is like the life has somehow been taken out of it.

Scream 1 had a very nail biting tension to it. Scream 7 just... didn't. It had all the pieces technically in place. But it just didn't really grab attention.  

In corners of the internet. Various male personalities have carved out a space for themselves best they can by doing things like writing science fiction ebooks. But none of that creative energy can find expression in the actual media that is available for casual viewing. None of it has any support. I also suspect this same problem is the reason why a lot of fields have a similar 'dullness' to them. That until 'God makes his will known' in a sense. Until there are consequences to the liberals for their many crimes. Things will carry on just as they are. 

Insights into a changing world.

This is an important post to me. But a personal one. I am doing what I often do on this blog. I am using introspection to gain insight into what are effective methods to move forward and improve ones life. 

Recently, I have noted a few times. A strong sensation that something has just "worked out" recently. Just flowed. Things just fit. There is a sense of treading water that I had for a long time that is gone.

Now, there are a lot of physical things that could be. I will likely go into these. But the thing that made the most sense was when I looked into the astrology at the moment. We have been undergoing, in mid - late July; this is the Jupiter - Pluto opposition. 

There are a few more specific transits. Jupiter is very soon to cross my natal Sun. From 4th of August it is in the same hexagram as my natal Sun. When this happened before, sometime in or after August 2014. Was when I had a strong schizophrenic episode. So it feels like this time I have navigated that energy properly. In that, I am not a raving madman on this pass. 

The physical reasons I am better. Well it could be one of many, many things. It could be that I had a surgery (biopsy) and got a result that was an OK one, considering how bad it could have been. Maybe that was hanging over me. It could be that I had a few weeks off jobseeking to recover from it. And jobseeking causes a lot of stress. And it never stops. There are no holidays from jobseeking. Every week you do it. I have been unemployed for more than three years. 

It could be that I met up with friends recently. It could be that I have reached a good point in health things like drinking water and going to the gym. It could be that I have properly stayed away from 'transcient' material and I have got the benefit. As my dreams indicated. It could be that some of the things I have talked about here I have properly applied. I am thinking of the first archetype. The Matrix of the Mind. 

Nevertheless, the transit is very compelling. Between dreams and transits of both astrology and human design. It provides a lot of good insight and direction into things. I have not had a great deal of insights outside those resources.  

Reflections on mental health issues and IQ.

Video for today:

Youtube: Shelby Exists and Makes Stuff: My IQ is 135 and I hate it. July 29th 2026:

https://youtu.be/Zk0Zeqy7q1w?si=jhsYb-omKzhxTelh

OK, so what is my IQ firstly? I don't want to reveal it. But I will say two things. One is that when I did take an IQ test, I have only taken one. In person, with Mensa. I was quite ill at the time and I remember intentionally throwing one of the questions because I thought if I answered it correctly the intelligence services might "get me". The second is that, vaguely, my IQ is somewhere between the top of 'average' IQ. So what is thought of as about 110. And the Mensa level. Which is 130 or 150 depending on the test.  

I have kept that vague enough I think to not claim the status of high IQ in this blog entry.  

Idiot in the comments saying that his IQ is 160. It is mid wits that say this kind of thing. Because mid wits keep saying they have 170 something IQ. People think that 130's is not high. But it is in fact, very high. 

The point of this video I think is not IQ though. Two things I have found recently, one of which is shown in this video. Firstly, there is a kind of myth around that mental health disorders like autism are not a real thing. This woman shows that very strongly. I have known people personally that are well acquainted with therapy culture. That also claim these kinds of mental health disorders, suggesting they are a real thing. I do not take the argument, I can see no evidence of. The idea that mental health disorders are the side effects of evil doing. Whose source is being concealed by the person with the disorder.  

Also, not mentioned at all in the video. But I have been told before by such people that marijuana was the only thing to have solved their autism (or similar). I used to not believe that. Partly this was because of my ongoing experience with passive aggressive stoners. But it is something that I have come to accept as... they tell me that's what their experience is. So I am not going to argue with it. 

I got those two viewpoints partly from Stefan Molyneux. Or I had them anyway and his podcasts confirmed what I thought to me. It is really not consistent with the Law of One to be so resistant of what is obviously infront of a person. To assume that amount of lying. Of course there are things that a lot of people lie about. But there is not enough personal information to oppose the idea that these mental health disorders are simply, as the people that claim them, claim them to be. 

I should not continue to think through if the themes of this girls video are relevant to me. I played it through in my mind but I do not think it is interesting for a blog. One small thing that I have noticed about high IQ people that this woman has mentioned. An incredible speed of motion. I knew one guy who was Mensa level IQ at a fast food place. And he was just so incredibly fast.  

Transits of the day.

It took me a little time to get to what I am going to talk about today. Recently, I have seemed to have gotten things right in relation to spirituality and such. Have been having amazing dreams. Part of the dream guidance I interpreted, at least I think, is that a big part of why I am getting this positive increase in energy and 'flow' is because I have genuinely come away from "transcient" material. 

Which makes it annoying then that the main thing I am thinking about today is doing a run down of the Human Design transits which does link to politics. Links to politics more than I want to. Perhaps I am doing it wrong. Or perhaps that is just part of the great unpredictability of life. 

To begin with. In my personal life, as I just alluded to. I struggled for a long time, when I was less well. In bringing up all sorts of things into my conversations with others that would alienate me from them. Politics was chief among these. I do need to still write up on how David Wilcock types of information perverts the desire towards the sublime that would normally be satisfied by the Law of One. 

I used to bring up all the stuff. To do with Islam, immigration etc. In my conversations with people. Had I not found a reason not to, a practical technical reason, I would probably still be doing it. But since then I have really taken more seriously my study of the Law of One, which talks about avoiding 'transcient' information. 

So, not only am I avoiding getting in discussions and conflicts with people. But I am avoiding even looking into those matters. Even where it is just basically news that I would be looking at. This means, that there is no emotion connected to politics so when I talk to people. Rather than wanting to talk about that stuff but not saying it and having that emotion. Having that need to withdraw to conceal. I can actually not be thinking about it. 

Because I know that eventually, this stuff will come to people via the mainstream media. It does not need to come from me. If it is not in the mainstream media, it doesn't exist for a large part of the population. To the extent these people have to deal with you they will have a great deal of emotion about it that will connect to you. Telling them you were right really just sets them through an unproductive loop. 

The post below reminds me of how I have to act. It feels very comfortable to see it this way:

For optics. We need to just not engage with this kind of thing. Even intellectually. 

Anyway, having said that, I am going to go a bit into politics now:

Human Design Transits:

 

North Node gate 30. 

Recently, I said directly to someone I am close to that is very much someone that will never consider anything non mainstream legitimate. That there was a transit coming soon and that it would bring politically relevant information. Specifically, it will reveal something emotionally relevant, and that has been a pattern for a long time (connection to Pluto in the gate 41). From Saturday 27th of July. But a long ish transit so not necessarily perfectly timed. 

That would be, the North Node in the gate 30. The gate 30 is one that I have found correlated very strongly with left wing beliefs. While the left wing is the homogenised reality. I have found that people with the gate 30 have a deep, powerful emotional core that won't compromise and is attached to leftism. (I theorise the strong emotion can go the other way!) It is the kind of intensity where if peoples feelings get railroaded over, if they are won against. It turns to gossip. I have found people without the gate 30 but that are still left wing; mostly I think for social acceptance. They tend to say things about it but just not care about politics. Over time they forget about it. 

Confusingly. The ones that end up talking about it have a different gate. Usually gate 25. The way the body graph works is we are all really meant to get on and so these things get discussed. But the world being sprawled out and disconnected. This doesn't always happen. 

Anyway, as predicted, but unfortunately not publicly before it happened. The North Node went into gate 30 and we have all this Fauci diary stuff. Fauci before some sort of committee etc. It is potentially the beginning of a serious inroad against the left. There have not been any serious inroads against the left. There have been things happening with Trump. Things that go against the left wing agenda on the global level. But not anything that says that they themselves were wrong. That they may have to admit wrongdoing and that goes against one of the lefts deeply held beliefs. Which is that they are morally perfect, beyond reproach, and everyone else. Trump, Charlie Kirk, Ann Widdecombe. Are the bad ones. 

Uranus in gate 20.

Much of what I am talking about here is altogether too vague. Although personally, astrological transits are fairly unequivocable in my life. (I have daily spent time recently wondering what has changed and I have found it to be the Jupiter Pluto opposition. A strong emotional experience!) When I talk about them in the more general sense. A lot of what can be said and reflected on it is just kind of annoyingly vague. A lot of these thoughts on it will be too. 

Uranus is an interesting transit. I have shown it before to correlate with right wing politics in general. When Trump and UKIP suddenly came on the scene originally in 2012 ish when Uranus entered Aries. Then when Uranus entered Taurus, in the same month. Brexit was officially triggered. 

I think it does correlate with a kind of free market style of inventiveness. Of using a lot of intelligence and details to arrive at a positive conclusion as with music. 

When Uranus was in the gate 8. I got huge insights as to what some of my 'conditioning' was, and how it linked to a schizophrenic episode I once had. To general conclusion. (This links to a sense of homogenisation in the new age world!)

Transiting Uranus in gate 20. I have wondered about this transit for a while. Since gate 20 is the beginning of Gemini. It follows on from gate 8 where I had the insight. These things usually do link in a kind of story. So what happens earlier on with an outer planet links to the story of it's later hexagrams. But, for me personally. I have not found any personal attachment to gate 20. Because I do not have it in my chart. I have gate 1 in my chart linking to the gate 8. But I do not have any of the connections to the gate 20:

This is the human design mandala again. As I mentioned Uranus is a planet of impact. It tends to arrive with right wing politics as one example which sets a neat knife through what a lot of people thought reality was. On the integration circuit it links to gate 35, gate 57 and gate 10. It is a generally very animalistic circuit that is a lot of societies animalism and work ethic, through the 34 - 20. 

So I thought as this impacts so many people. And so many animalistic people. Perhaps the type more inclined to working than thinking about stuff. That there would be a huge impact from this transit.

I have not found that. The only thing I think this could correlate to is Andrew Tate going to jail. Whichever way someone sees it. Whether he is guilty and is carrying the energy of the sexuality of the cam girl business and such. Or whether it comes from the energy of false accusations. Which is a place of female sexual power. Him going to jail. With his following being fairly animalistic. Definitely brings these themes to the forefront. 

Jupiter in gate 31, Neptune in gate 17.

These two I have only experienced personally. I do not have a good idea of how they have shown up collectively.  

I am a manifestor in the human design with the gate 7 hanging. Linking to the gate 31. What I have realised about Jupiter in this gate 31, is that when I talked to a friend recently, he said that when we were young, sometimes because of the way I was, if I wanted to talk about something everyone had to talk about it. That is the kind of insight I might get from the conditioning of the gate 31. Because of the manifestor being like they are. There is a natural sense of leadership that does follow from them. But it is subtle. Or at least it can be and probably should be a lot of the time. 

Neptune in gate 17. Neptune is an extremely subtle abstract energy. It is just for me at the moment in the general conversation points and thoughts. The really far out planets Neptune and Pluto tend to effect everyone I think even if you have no connections. Gate 17 I have been talking and thinking about things like first principles way more. And making quite a bit of headway actually. It is not yet applicable enough to put into the blog. But it is something that is relevant to me. 

Conclusion.

Anyway, that's all I have for today.  

Aaron Abke and Paul.

The amount of energy to just get to this point feels huge. The point of finishing up the last of the three posts I set myself.

I did the Ryan Gable one. Then the Stefan Molyneux one. Now I want to write on Aaron Abke. 

Youtube: dallas: Aaron Abke is wrong about Paul: October 17th 2025:

https://youtu.be/ik9JSnS7D60?si=xYe1uEQVLRg20nY0

I realise as I mention this that it might be better for the readers to have knowledge of where I have been with this. The questions I have had about Christianity and what my faith kind of is. But I am not going to go through that now. So when I talk about this it might seem as though there is something missing. 

This video from dallas. Is covering a previous video by Aaron Abke which I watched and enjoyed and still remember. Not just the factual information but the emotional connection to the information. 

Aaron explained by going through some bible quotes this story of how Paul talks about the disciples. That he called them out infront of each other which is not what you are meant to do. That the story Paul puts forward is a certain one but reading between the lines. This might not be what the situation being described is. It might be in fact that Paul is being unpleasant and the other people in the room are responding as though that is the case.

BUT, as dallas points out. Aaron has strategically quoted here. Not strategically quoted in a way that doesn't matter. Strategically quoted in a way that really changes the story.

What Paul actually says is that he had a disagreement with Peter in Jerusalem. Then he doesn't handle it at the time. He handles it later when Peter comes to Antioch. 

This COMPLETELY changes the story. The narrative that Aaron is putting forward.

Also, looking more at what is being said. Before I was under the impression that it was just a conversation and disagreement between peers of a sort. But the actual text when fully quoted is to do with the disciples having a kind of in group preference for those whom are "circumcised". Whereas Paul wants to make clear that even those uncircumcised are 'worthy of Christs love in a sense'. 

This, along with things I have found from other more pro Paul perspectives. Definitely adds a positive dimension to Pauls teachings. 

Take away:

When you are involved in this much abstraction. Which is inevitable with any serious look at biblical sources because there is a LOT of history and context in a lot of the literature. I often find I have to come back to what I know. That I cannot gain any kind of clarity in the mess of such things. Christianity was kind of secondary in my life. It feels like I am trying to get a foothold in it. It is very relevant, and very powerful. But it doesn't quite make sense at the same time. 

What I have valued then, what I fall back on. Is that logically makes sense to me and the Law of One. 

Listening to an Aaron Abke video recently. I decided to stop doing Communion and immediately felt absolutely awful. Like, I just didn't love a lot of the things in life that I know are good for me. I was unmotivated. It was a little bit of a 'death'. 

And Aaron Abke might have been right. It is not clear where the idea of Communion came from but Pauls letters said it before the gospel. Plus, the taking in, drinking, of "holy" material is very much a pagan thing. 

I don't know why it is good though. But I know it is. I do it because it is talked about in the Law of One. Perhaps that is all I need to do. My spirituality is just a trial and error of what works for me. It is also a following of the Law of One. I pray; when I don't, I get ill. So I pray.

This is the same way I feel about most of Christianity. So much of it is just lost and does not make a great deal of sense. I still feel that people that legitimately follow Jesus should be able to energy heal. He told his disciples to do that. They should be able to do it. 

Norse mythology actually satisfies a lot of these same requirements. It has prayer, it has a kind of communion that is done very frequently I think. It does not have Monotheism. Which is heavy in the Law of One. And kind of non negotiable I think. But it does have other things. For instance, it has a list of nine nobel virtues instead of the commandments:

Courage, Truth, Honour, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality, Industriousness, Self Reliance, Perseverence.

It has far less emphasis, perhaps no emphasis. On the pacifist and non violent ways of Jesus. This is a big plus to me. 

Not that this is a serious idea. But it is something worth thinking about I think. 

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.