Excellent post Tereza, these things are all connected
Within every Individual, there exists a sense of “Separateness,” that there is an “US” and a “THEM.” The very concept of Power, in Human terms comes from that Illusion of Separateness. As I emphasize on other posts; Power does not exist Outside of You, so any Solutions to World issues can also be found within, ultimately.
In the Social and Political sense; especially beginning with development of organized Religion, human interactions are always being affected by those who crave power. They seek control, and where do they seek it? Outside of themselves. — Is it any wonder that these are some of the MOST out of control Individuals anywhere?
Spirituality was reduced to Religion to extract Obedience ……. restricting access to God in order to gain control over “Belief,” has led to control over social behavior.
Spirituality is personal and cannot be controlled, when realized. They hate this. Those who are trying to maintain an Empire, need "believers" not "seekers" of Truth. Because an Empire is stitched together with lies. (Stories)
With the formation of Religion; the basis for Arbitrary Hierarchy was laid down, establishment of Centralized Government resulted and caused the spread of unaccountability and corruption. So, what we see in Israel is a predictable course of behavior. Governments have become the single biggest lethal threat to otherwise peaceful Human Beings that mankind has ever created.
Very well said, Nefahotep. Yes, I feel that you and I are in complete agreement on this. The whole idea of having power over someone else becomes absurd if that person is you in another form.
There was a line I read recently in the Course that formal religion was a contradiction in terms, and that people have become accustomed to accepting phrases that are mutually exclusive. And organized religion is the same. I've been saying for decades that I wanted dis-organized religion.
And what I really value about you is that you don't go to the other extreme and want to throw the whole thing out. I still dream about religion as a forum for asking the Big Questions. As you say, seekers of Truth, not believers.
I feel like every time we cut one of those story-strings, it unbinds all of us somehow. It will just be too weird the way that I discover (uncover) something, and then find echoes of it in every corner of my experience. It's all connected.
BTW I remember asking you about an ancient code of morality. I once saw it and it was very elaborate and robust, with dozens of points. I don't remember any that I disagreed with. Did you point me towards something it might have been? I wanted to contrast the Ten Commandments with other ancient moral codes for a future episode.
Here is a link to the Sri Aurobindo Ashram library, if you go to what is listed as volume 17; that's the Isha Upanishad. Sri Aurobindo writes in a manner that is enabling to people picking up the intended meaning while also allowing for the seeker of this sacred knowledge explore how knowing it affects the inner and outer life.
PREFATORY starting on page 23, this also has a very straight forward summary to interpret this great original work. I think this may be an excellent place to start.
"Plan of the Upanishad"
"THE UPANISHADS, being vehicles of illumination and not of instruction, composed for seekers who had al- ready a general familiarity with the ideas of the Vedic and Vedantic seers and even some personal experience of the truths on which they were founded, dispense in their style with expressed transitions of thought and the development of implied or subordinate notions.
Every verse in the Isha Upanishad reposes on a number of ideas implicit in the text but nowhere set forth explicitly; the reasoning also that supports its conclusions is suggested by the words, not expressly conveyed to the intelligence. The reader, or rather the hearer, was supposed to proceed from light to light, confirming his intuitions and verifying by his experience, not submitting the ideas to the judgment of the logical reason.
To the modern mind this method is invalid and inapplicable; it is necessary to present the ideas of the Upanishad in their completeness, underline the suggestions, supply the necessary transitions and bring out the suppressed but always implicit reasoning."
The problem with any "Moral Codex" like the 10 Commandments is the need for some form of dualism right verses wrong; requiring a strict "Definition." When we are seeking a "Meaning" of something it is a sense that is dynamically living within your perception life.
I would be quite honored to offer any help that you may request in your next post, especially if you would like to reference the Isha Upanishad.
You've caused me to brush off my 2005 writing on Revolutionary Mystics. Is there any passage from the Upanishads that might fit with this Gospel of Philip quote?:
"A Hebrew makes another Hebrew, and such a person is called a proselyte. But someone who calls another does not make them the same as they are. We are who we have always been. One who knows themselves calls others to become who they truly are." Philip 1
We are who we have always been. One who knows themselves calls others to become who they truly are." Philip ------ The principle of this is symbolically represented in both the Upanishad and Bhagavad Gita in some places.
So, one who knows themselves, knows "oneness" to call others to "become who they truly are," could be asking to awaken others to know themselves as well.
Remember, the underlying principle of meaning cannot be found literally by quotation.
I'm not certain about the use of the term "proselyte," unless we are referring to the projected word in an attempt to "teach" another individual to be a Hebrew.
Sri Aurobindo states about teaching another: "Nothing worth learning can be taught." If teaching happens or if learning happens it's because the student is actually teaching himself. So, maybe Hebrew actually means something quite different than what we thought. I can actually see the underlying principle is essentially very familiar, I just shy away from biblical terms like proselyte.
Yes, that's exactly the interpretation I use in my essay. I'm going to record it tomorrow. With a couple of tweaks, it was ready to go. I read it back over and thought, "Damn, I'm good." <grin> I was trying so hard in those days to get published or, honestly, just read by one person who wasn't doing me a favor. I'm really surprised that the basis of my thought hasn't changed in 20 yrs. And I must have been studying the Course for longer than that, since I'm quoting from it. So if a passage occurs to you that would fit, it would be easy to slip it in. And it doesn't need an explanation--we're mystics too, and can use symbolic language with impunity!
"Sri Aurobindo states about teaching another: "Nothing worth learning can be taught." If teaching happens or if learning happens it's because the student is actually teaching himself."
Ha! So true. That's why I say there is no such thing as "education" as most people use the term today and why skoolz are all about training and brainwashing, not about education at all. As far as I'm concerned, education is a DIY project as is life in general. Furthermore, one can not be educated without experience.
As for Hebrew meaning something different than what we thought/think, I'd say that's an accurate impression especially since words are pretty crude ways of communicating ideas and that goes especially for ones that have been translated through several layers of other languages and triple for ancient words.
So, maybe Hebrew actually means something quite different than what we thought.
There's a new sub whose byline is 'a highly-educated free-thinker' and I thought, isn't that a contradiction in terms? But my abd PhD gave me enough education not to be intimidated by those letters, and that was a valuable thing. There were a handful of things I learned in the process but the vast majority of what's formed my world view has been auto-didactic.
And Nef, I'm reading a sci-fi book called Babel, that I'll do an episode on when I'm done. I think it would fascinate you, as it does me, with its references to ancient language and empire/ colonization. I just read in it that the word etymology comes from Greek etymon meaning the true sense of a word from etymos, true or actual.
The more "education;" from schooling the more programed one can be. There is of course the level of personal involvement in the schooling where a student is essentially doing actual learning. But they are really directly teaching themselves.
As for "Public Education" and the "College Industrial Complex" that's where paying to learn has gone off the rails.
Schooling = Mandated Curriculum
True Learning = Curiosity & Attention
When it comes to ancient words and names, there are multiple layers of Meaning in them; in our language today, there are way more Definitions and less Meaning.
Meanings vs Definitions:
What has “Definition” is static, linguistically dead; unchanging, existing only in a Dictionary.
What has “Meaning” is dynamic, living and breathing with an Individual’s Life and can include connections to non-physical Reality.
This is one of the biggest reasons that I took so much interest in ancient languages. It's actually quite fascinating.
Another thought about proselyte as a teacher or "presenter."
One who presents something of importance such as knowledge; may do so, yet it only holds significance if the "presented" is ready for such knowledge.
Nothing presented from the outside can have any impact on a person who is not ready for it.
When an Individual makes the effort to "seek" true knowledge, they are becoming ready for it on the inside, then it is quite powerful. That's why they become "who they truly are."
Oh, I would love to write a post together, if you're willing. What an exciting prospect!
When I saw it was 600 pp, I was quite intimidated. But then I realized that it's actually 18 verses, is that right? And pp 23-94 are Sri Aurobindo's final interpretation, with the rest being drafts leading up to that. Not quite as intimidating!
In the system of thinking, it seems consistent with A Course in Miracles, although the latter is 1200 pp longer. But summed up in the intro: "Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists. Therein lies the peace of God." The other hundred thousands of words essentially rephrase that in different ways.
In style, it reminds me of the gnostic gospel of Philip. At one time I was working on a volume called Revolutionary Mystics and How to Become One. It took one verse at a time from Philip, paired it with a verse from the Course, one from the Tao te Ching, and poetry from East/ West. Then I'd write an essay pulling them all together. It was a fun project.
But I can see it would have been incomplete without the Upanishads. How shall we go about this collaboration?
"Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists. Therein lies the peace of God." ----- Now, that is beautiful.
I'm not sure how a collaborative process works in ss.
My guess is we could do a comparison between the different aspects of Definition vs Meaning that seems to offset current scriptures as opposed to the symbolism of original mystic writing.
Your interpretation of many biblical works to me makes a lot of sense.
What we inevitably find in difference between the Spiritual and the Religious is essentially Decentralized personal experience vs Centralized social dismemberment from Self Freedom.
It may make sense to do a post that summarizes Sri Aurobindo's interpretation, with some form of applicable principles that help the reader gain the sense of Meaning that it has. In each of the movements in the Upanishad, there are facets of mystic knowledge that can help meet the challenges of our current global social issues.
It may be better to point out that the "ancient mind" was functioning in a very symbolic manner; modern man is functioning in a very "litteral" manner. This could help explain the difficulty in interpretation of the most original works.
I am open minded to any of your suggestions as to how to do a collaboration on ss. I am a complete novice with the system. If you want, we can direct email each other with ideas, I'm open for that.
Oh you put that so well: "What we inevitably find in difference between the Spiritual and the Religious is essentially Decentralized personal experience vs Centralized social dismemberment from Self Freedom."
I'm open to any form of collaboration. What might be helpful is if you wrote about the Upanishads on your stack, particularly why they speak to you. I could then incorporate it into my episode, looking at it from the perspective of what eliminates something as scripture. The words that tripped me up a little were Lord and Brahman, since they both seemed like titles. I wonder if there's another potential translation for those words. Is atman a generic term that applies to all? And for me, I could use a very basic primer on their background--I really know nothing about how and when they were written. And email works for me, too. I think you can respond to the notification and it goes to me with your address, so I can respond with mine.
I'll be a bit more basic here in some of the questions, then I will try and send you a more detailed email afterwards.
Approximate Vedic time-line:
Original Vedic Reishis lived about 15,000 years ago. Vedas become an oral tradition that gets passed down until they are written in early written script sometime around 6,000 years ago. A few centuries later, the Vedic Symbolism begins to become culturally disconnected from the thread of Meaning, this is where the Upanishads begin to be written, this is because of linguistic changes. This is also when the Sanskrit gets changed by an agreement that it must not be allowed to change any further; effectively freezing it into a ceremonial sacred language, at this time it was still spoken. Event of the Mahabharata occurs around 5,300 years ago, the Bhagavad Gita was recorded in the new Sanskrit standard.
There's a lot of history, I am still a student to it.
Brahman is a complex term, in the context Sri Aurobindo uses it is not meant to be titular, nor is Lord. The need for using those words is because of how Indian culture was around the 1920's people had a lot of religious ideas. Lord is used in a context of describing the inner divine self.
There's the atman and the individualized self jivatman. One references the personal the other is the impersonal and is the non- local quality of the One.
Sri Aurobindo does have a glossary of Sanskrit Terms that show definition, but contextual use rules the meaning.
When I get a chance, I'll send some more information.
Most "codes" of morality that I'm familiar with are what I might call inner awakening and self sense. That is, the more awakened with an inner sense of Oneness, the more a person can see that other people who are seemingly outside, are an extension of the Self and a part of the whole.
What is written in the original Sanskrit, has been religiously "cherry picked" into different styles of philosophy, in India. I would not suggest that any of the original writings are actually meant to be "moral" codes, most of the later interpretations of teachings will seem that way.
The single most profound teaching I learned from when I was younger was the Isha Upanishad. It is somewhat parallel to the Bhagavad Gita in the sense regarding action of the spirit and the yoga of "works."
I will send you some links to the Isha Upanishad but it's not going to have "defined" morality, rather it will have symbolic suggestion towards "meaning."
I haven't read it, someone linked to it in Eisenstein's thread. I can't read books online, I'm already tied to a screen in too much of my life. But it looked like it could be worth tracking down or skimming to see if it has new info on the big question of whether Hitler was a Rothschild agent.
I’m definitely going to take a look. It just seemed fitting that the pages were padded to make them 333, maybe the author was trolling the controllers.
A long time ago I argued that those people seeking power be the ones barred from power. Hmmmm. Does that make me an authoritarian, an anti-authoritarian, or a pragmatist who recognised that the people seeking power are the most powerless from within and so are the most likely to become monsters without? Hmmmm.
Well, I'd have to say that those who seek power are sensing a type of powerlessness inside, yet they are likely not aware of that facet. Any kind of "bans" or "barring" would probably include some type of government system, which applies such prohibitions. You could be a pragmatist, the important thing is you are like many of us in the position of "observer," finding effective solutions to what we are seeing can be quite a challenge.
Goeff, where have you been? I've been worried that I either offended you with my Chump Change post or you fell off that roof you were repairing!
Not that you don't have many irons in your fire, arguments to be launched at unsuspecting Unz readers. But your silence was uncharacteristic and spoke volumes, just ones I couldn't decipher.
I've been down several interesting rabbit holes and I got 3 new books in the past week. To give you some idea of what I do, I read a statement that quoted a guy from something published in 1920 so I went to the original source and found nothing. After about 5 hours I finally found it but it was written in 1925! As you know I'm somewhat of a quote fanatic and I always check the sources, but this one cost me a lot!!
You probably already know that both Jenner and Pasteur were audacious frauds with connections. A lot like Freud and EInstein and many other promtoed losers, but I just discoverd it. Bottom line is that vaccines have been extremely problematic ever since Jenner got involved so no one who's on board with them is to be trusted. Ever.
PS: The roof is done, so no worries! :) And I've long been done with UNZ although I did do some searching at his book and magazine archives which I find can be very useful.
Always good to have a quote fanatic in the extended fam ;-)
What I remember about Pasteur, from my raw milk connections, is that cows in urban areas were being fed junk like leftover hops from breweries. The milk was so thin it was blue and chalk was added to make it look white. People were getting sick from it. So Louis developed this way of salvaging milk that should have been thrown out. Totally unnecessary and unhealthy for good milk from healthy cows. I'm not a fact fanatic but that's the gist I remember.
And I would have assumed Freud was a fraud from Bernal being his nephew and his reversal of women's memories of childhood abuse into the Electra complex. But Einstein? Say it ain't so. Another enigmatic figure with some good quotes bites the dust!
Very nice. And so glad that my citing Blake fit with perfect timing the ideas you explored here.
In a pair of essays I published a short time ago I suggested that the catholic church fathers were in fact gaslighting narcissists, with having used exactly the same narcissistic techniques of creating coherence trauma by convincing their targets that the unbelievable is believable as a means of disengaging the body from reality and thus making nothing con-sensual or cognitively coherent. In other words, the narcissistic scriptures create a *word* experience of reality that does not cohere with the body's experience of reality — 'reality' is in immediate and powerful contradiction of the gaslighting 'truth' and yet the gaslighting overrules experience. (This was convid! Just look at masking gaslighting practices!) That is what creates the 'inner' break. The break is not between soul and body, which I now understand as a kind of red herring split so well articulated by William Blake, and that it is likely a distraction or even directed psyop - Gautama vociferous denounced such teachings as distractions that keep us from being able to reduce suffering and often as the propagating energy of expanding suffering. The break is between trusting the validity of the body's experience of what is now or trusting someone else's ideas of what 'now' is supposed to be, whether beautiful or whacked-out and can only be made true by gaslighting (propaganda) supported by authoritarian processes of intimidation of the psyche and of the body.
And as it pertains to the actual body it ultimately isn't even about trust! The body is the only thing which is in the present moment all of the time, and it is most often such things as (good inententioned?) mindfulness exercises that perpetuate anti-body self attack and split. Mindfulness exercise are a often a kind of good intentioned psyop that discounts the bodily experience of the moment for the mind's idea of what that bodily experience is *supposed to be experiencing*, loosely or tightly based on whatever scripture is guiding the particular 'mindfulness' process.
If power is defined as the default ownership of all properties and the exclusive right to issue credit against them, rather than elected figureheads, my system is a perfectly decentralized economy of collective power.
Elsewhere I've referenced to government by lot, in an old presentation to a public referendum in the province of canada after an egregious example of 'democratic' failure. Later I learned that aristotle talked about that process in his politics arguments. and more recently i read how the gnostics who had received advanced 'enlightenment' did not bow to the hierarchical church authority when they met and used a lottery system to guide their meeting as to who was doing what and what was to be moved forward on. i see that as a simple and likely effective manner to initiate 'collective and yet decentralised'.
You ask all the right questions and write so fluently and with such clarity. Go Team TC.
Topical: While I don't agree with everything Max Igan says, I just happened to watch this last night and I resonate with much that Max and Jeff Berwick say.
• Max Igan in Conversation with Jeff Berwick - Jan 2024 - thecrowhouse
Thank you so much, Julius! Sometimes I feel like I'm being so systematic that it's boring. Then I remember there are people who do 13,000 piece puzzles ;-)
I haven't seen Max since the beginning of the genocide. He's such a warm and human soul. I'll watch this with interest. But I just have to comment that it's pretty remarkable that Jeff feels comfortable scratching his crotch on camera. What a guy thing! Can you imagine the reverse? No, we cannot. And if you do have an example from the archives, I'm not sure I want to see it!
LoL! One day my ex made that exact same comment - well, it was actually about men adjusting their underwear in public. 'No way a woman would do that.' About fifteen minutes later, at one of the busiest corners in our part of the city, we watched a woman aggressively roto-rootering her pantyhose with her full arm up the inside of her skirt for a seriously protracted amount of time! No way I could imagine a man doing *that*! LoL
Haha. I will cut him a break that the little dog had just vacated his lap. What do I know about unruly man parts? I'm with Blake, for God's sake, not Calvin! Let the body be free.
Just watched it and fascinating! The only thing I'd question is whether 'trade route' applies if the goods are all going one direction to Rome. And the gold going in the other direction was certainly not being shared among those producers. This is really interesting and adds a whole new layer. Thanks for showing it to me.
I just watched this, what a spiritual guy! I hadn't seen that side of Max before. I really resonated with him on everything falling into place, and his comments on there being no word for 'Jews' in the Hebrew bible was elucidating. It confirmed my suspicion that the word meant 'followers of Judas' or the zealots. That's definitely who is being condemned in the gospels.
Thanks for pointing me to this, it was delightful!
I don't remember if you sent this to me, but I watched the interview and was blown away! So many new clues. I wrote a whole page of notes while watching it for a future episode. I'll be interested in the commentary too. Thanks, Julius!
My biggest wrestling comes with, if there is a god or creator of some kind, how can we believe that god created so much pain? I follow that trailhead to find that pain in my life has also brought so much beauty and so much learning. My pain is nothing compared to some - except that I consider myself highly sensitive and feel pains of all kinds much of the time.
But if we are no better than pyschopaths and leaders of genocide and child rapists....what is the purpose of creating such awfulness? And the story I tell is that those perpetrating such horrors, they are living in extreme pain and extreme separation, otherwise they couldn't take such actions. So why do they get the short end of the stick. I would never ever want to be them.
I've been reading the Sophia Code, which is said to be a modern scripture, channeled by Kaia Ra. Do you know this work? I'm finding it powerful - yet scary to let myself trust a new 'scripture'. Kaia Ra has survived the horrors of child sex slavery and intimately knows about the pains of this world. It opens me up to this question yet again - if we are all equal and perhaps One, how can someone who experienced such torture and brutality find truth in such a statement?
What a wonderful comment, marta. You're asking all the right questions and I love that you don't just shelve that conflict but wrestle with it.
Do you need the pain to get the gain? I'm not sure about that. We see it as a silver lining but I think that joy is our birthright. And I'm trying to let go of the 'other people have it so much worse' narrative. It doesn't help them to feel that way, it just takes away your ability to feel sorry for yourself when things go wrong. There IS no one else. Indulge your own sorrow.
And aha! Great question: "what is the purpose of creating such awfulness?" Because you see that awfulness as unquestionable reality, you have to see a creator of it, with a purpose for it. And we've been told it's a testing ground to separate the wheat from the chaff but your intuition is that all acts of violence are passing on their own trauma. And I love your sense that you'd never ever want to be them. Just like Mark Twain's mother, you'd have compassion for Satan! And that's the perfect place to be.
From the Course perspective, none of these terrible things are happening in Reality. We experience them, the same way we'd experience events in a dream. Purpose, meaning, Reality are all words for God. Pain has no purpose, no Reality, no creator because God never created it. It exists in our dreaming mind, not our Real Mind.
What I loved about Anneke Lucas was precisely that she came to a point of loving those who raped and tortured her, and seeing the traumatized child in each of them. I don't know the Sophia Code, do you have a link? I don't believe in 'trusting' any scripture, old or new. I think we need to apply the same scrutiny that I describe above to old and new irrespective. Looking forward to learning more about it from your analysis!
I'm in agreement about so much of what you've written. Where I get hung up - my brain still seems to cramp around the question of evil. "If it's all a dream, then for example, why do YOU care so much?" I don't mean that as criticism, just trying to grapple and get it into coherence in me. "if it's all a dream, what is the purpose of the dream? Maybe purpose isn't the right answer - but how to BE in relation to a DREAM. What do I want to get out of the dream?"
Matias deStefano talks about remembering all his past lives and life between lives - his theory is that we need the polarities in service of creating and expanding. That Satan was an angel who took on the job of being the polarity so that we could use that for our souls growth.
I don't know if I believe that either - I hesitate to say such things to people who have lived extreme trauma. But I know myself that coming through my own traumas have brought me so much growth.
As for the Sophia Code - I'm not swallowing anything just because she claims it's a modern sacred text. But there are things in the book that I take in, test out in my body, feel skeptical towards, start to open towards, experiment with, think its too weird, go back and forth, and so on.
Oh marta, you're asking all the right questions! And yes, that's why I use the term socio-spirituality to mean taking a hard look at the reality IN the world while questioning the Reality OF the world. If you're in a nightmare that you don't know is a nightmare, you experience all the fear and even pain of that. Experimenting with the possibility that it's a dream doesn't impede your ability to script a good ending to that dream or use the dream figure you associate with. On the contrary! It takes away your fear and limitations. There's no sense of 'this has always been this way and WILL always be this way. There are no levels of difficulty to what you can change, as the Course says.
But it also takes away the urgency to change the circumstances of the dream. The dream is happening in this way for a reason, under the guidance of One who knows all outcomes and how they affect everything and everyone else. So rather than worrying about things you can't change, your responsibility is seeing the Truth clearly, both within the dream and about it being a dream. Dream analysis is the most important thing we can be doing. What is the dream telling us and what's the underlying fear and guilt that the dream is acting out?
With Kaiara, I have to see if I can forgive her for being so beautiful and selling jewelry ;-) But the divine feminine as the divine mother is what I think our collective identity is in Reality. The personification of the trinity as all male makes NO sense to me, even though the Course uses that terminology. How can you have a Father and Son but no Mother? Here's an early video (pre-SS) on The Divine Feminine, responding to Jordan Peterson: https://youtu.be/ja_ADXTe7G4. And another early one, also on Peterson, called Waking the Dragon Mom (in an echo to Kaiara): https://youtu.be/E7IxL3WOf1w.
Also on Anneke, I actually preferred a video I watched later where she's interviewed by a woman. I've just looked but I can't find which episode I linked it in. It might come up in the sidebar when you pull up the 3-hr one in Pedo-Sadist Cults. Not as long and less machismo.
I guess I have more to say - as a person who has been incredibly fearful in life, I love that you specifically name that seeing all as a dream is a way to move to a level without fear and limitations. My experience with fear has been serious performance anxiety - which was tough since my first career was as a classical pianist. I muscled my way through so much, and have spent the last 13 years trying to learn how to truly heal fear, and how to perform under pressure and be the most me I can be at all times. In the last year or so I've had such a big boost forward, I can now really feel it as separate levels or separate realities. One reality of fear in the nervous system, and another reality of so much expansive love, creativity, possibility, openness. I am so happy that I'm moving in the direction of expansive love. Lots to learn, but at least I'm aware of these levels now and accelerating into expansion.
Wow that's so brave of you, marta. I'm sure you know that most people fear public speaking more than death. I can't play the piano in front of one person. And what an interesting process to overcome with brute force your fear, and now to heal it. It does seem like there was something that you needed to learn--not for you, but for all of us. What a beautiful process.
Curiously, I was talking about something similar with one of my dancer friends. We had been in the teacher training together, me for the third time. The first thing the teacher has you do is lead a warm up, which is improvising. Kiki started to do it and froze. Just couldn't do anything, and left. Do I need to admit I was secretly thrilled? May I mention that Kiki is poised and beautiful? I was deep into schadenfreude when, a few songs later, she asked to try again. And she crushed it! She talked about it today as this moment of grace when she just connected to Source and everything flowed. So I'm still, two years later, trying to take that as inspiration and not hate her just a little bit. ;-)
One quick note - I TOTALLY love your comment "With Kaiara, I have to see if I can forgive her for being so beautiful and selling jewelry". I feel the same! I'm holding skepticism towards her as a person for being glamorous and selling jewelry....and at the same time, the initiations in the book so far feel incredibly powerful to me. Waking up something that I've been looking to wake up for a long time, in conjunction with some other healing work. I always feel skeptical towards the leader of any organization though. So I'm okay not totally buying into Kaia Ra - and I'm finding a pull to listening to her youtube videos, and I'll keep following that instinct until another instinct comes in. I guess I trust my gut instincts more than my head decisions most days....My gut instincts also say to keep following you, even though I'm uncomfortable pulling on some of the threads you pull on. Not necessarily in disagreement - just that i'm not diving in headfirst. It's taken me this long to feel ready to listen to the interview with Anneke. I'll find your link and look on the sidebars with her being interviewed by a woman.
And Big AMEN to bringing in the Divine Mother as the Creatrix of all life. Thanks for the links to those particular videos from you!
Creatrix! I like how you can make the mature goddess sound kinky ;-) I learned in one of my videos that matrix comes from mother, so I'm substituting that for matriarchy as another form of hierarchy.
Haha, well if Kaia Ra and I are both in your gut instinct vibe, how can I object? But seriously, I wouldn't anyway. Revelation comes from everywhere. It's unbelievable some of the places I find it. The Creatrix is a jokester. And I'm glad you give me the benefit of the doubt to keep following along. I'm not comfortable with some of the strings I'm pulling on either.
Hi Tereza, I'm reposting my Rumble comments for substack.(with minor additions.)
Great quotes on religion being necessary to get good people to do bad things.
Your explication on authority is so key. Religious stories have certainly externalized authority and turned so much upside down as you say. Dissuading us from re-membering our direct connect with Divine Source and claiming our authority seems to be the main thrust of organized religion.
Assuming in an ultimate integration, we all go back to One Source, we have apparently, many people in positions of (falsely) claimed authority, acting out agendas fully disconnected from that unifying Source. Perhaps playing out a dream of what it looks like if disconnected from God. In their disconnection they seek to disconnect everyone else from their Source - we see this playing out right now.
So even if we include them in an ultimate Oneness, we simultaneously need to recognize they are operating outside that ultimate Oneness - Reality, and discern that in their disconnected state something else (not Source) is running them. The gap created by the disconnect, allows other energies to move in that are not human-friendly. We are clearly living with the consequences of that. Other anti-human energies have moved in. Hence the transhuman push, the desired overlay of a synthetic world over the natural world.
We don't have to judge that but we do need to discern it and reject it with clarity, as well as more deeply connect to our Source and the inalienable rights inherent in that connection.
To that end I had been looking more into Natural Law. (As has Spiral Leaf substack, re-igniting that exploration) Assuming we have been given everything we need - and I assume this - then that would include the natural principals or laws to live. We innately and intuitively know this. We are in the process of remembering all this.
Such a remarkable time.
And such a remarkable you, Tereza. A great exploration and needed to really get at the deeper layers of control we're dealing with. I look forward to your next post, and the one after that..
I was hoping you'd repost here and was keeping my tab open to copy my response:
Yes! I thought of you, Kathleen, with that definition of authority. I think that I and you (and maybe Guy and Blake) get stuck in that dichotomy between reason and intuition. But the real distinction is between external and internal authority, I think. Within the self, reason and intuition are in harmony, working together.
If I, from my perspective, look at all other people as figures of the fragmented self in my dreaming Oneness Mind, there's nothing real those dream figures are responding to or doing. When I come to a place of perfect forgiveness--giving them the benefit of the doubt--they'll no longer need to enact the role they're in now. IandYou (one entity) have the power to release them. Or not.
That's my best guess on a Thursday morning ;-) I am always so happy to be read and converse with remarkable you!
What if the god of the bible (and organized religion) is not the god everyone thinks? What if he is not the creator/source/universe that people tend to think of when they say god?
I’m delving into this sort of thing myself and have come up with some opinions that differ greatly from most others. To the point that I do not believe the bible is the word of creator at all but yes, the word of “god”. Depends on one’s definition of god and mine is, again, different.
Hmmm... I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying there is a god who created the world and there is a god who authored or inspired the bible, but they're not the same god?
My mind reels at the tapestry woven here from all the threads you tied together, thank you Tereza.
"And there’s more human interpretation that can, paradoxically, lead back to the Truth even if a text was corrupt at its origin."
- this sums up the way I feel about how the Universal Intelligence makes sure we obtain the messages that we need at any given point. One could be reading the unibomber manifesto or the like and still the message would be impressed on us.
Hi Tereza! So, you stated this: "The greatest challenge for empire is how to get good people to do bad things. If bad people do bad things for their own reasons, that doesn’t serve the empire. The greatest tool of the empire is the power of a story. Without a story, any would-be ruler has to do their own dirty work." Here's a bit more of my story that I didn't want to share until after "Christmas."
1. Santa Claus = Satan Clause, with clause meaning (law) - A separate part of a contract, a will or another legal document. (Part of how the empire gets us to buy into their crap).
2. Satan is first mentioned, by name, in 1 Chron. 21, which is the 359th chapter of the Bible.
3. Christmas Day is celebrated on 12/25, which is the 359th day of a non-leap year.
4. The numerology of Satan, aka, Shatan, in Hebrew Gematria = 359. (Shin/Sin (s or sh sound) = 300, Tet/Tes (T sound) = 9, and Nun (N sound) = 50.
5. Then think about a man dressed in a red Santa/Satan suit, at Christmas, and he bounces little children on his lap, granting them their material wishes. The following has two meanings, one of which is extremely lewd. Christmas = Crams Shit.
6. The Jesuit symbol consists of the letter, "I" "H" "S" and the cross or the letter "T." Those letters spell S-H-I-T.
Here are a couple more I forgot about, and I'm just not sure what to think about either, seeing as I agree that things are upside down, inside out.
2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
Thessalonians = Holiness Satan.
Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Eli Eli lama sabachthani = I Satan heil Michael Baal...or...I hail Satan Michael Abel...or the names in any given sequence - not sure.
That should be interesting:) The number 359 is 1 degree off the circle of 360, and the "prophetic year" used to be 360 days, as well. Perhaps Satan represents sun worship, like with Ra, where the sun is at its lowest point in the southern hemisphere around 12/21-22, and then it starts its "resurrection" trek around the 25th, on its way back north. I know others have spoken of this. I'm beginning to think the Bible is full of astrotheology, such as Lucifer was probably a comet, and maybe Esau was, as well, seeing as he was red and hairy, and the meaning of comet is described as long streaming hair, and a comet or meteorite could be red. Anyway, I look forward to your Satan Psyop video:)
From the piece I'm working on about What is the Bible, it's Jesus who represents Apollo or Sun worship. Constantine mandated Jesus worship as the imperial religion but never stopped worshipping Apollo: "Constantine merged his devotion to Apollo, Sol the ‘Unconquered Sun,’ with worship of the Christ but kept as divinely commissioned ‘that the rule of the whole world should belong’ to him. As soon as he came into power, he 'asserted the right to exercise absolute authority over the entire Church.'"
I still think Satan represents the rebel leaders from the crucifixion scene, or is the bar Abbas crowd scene where Satan is among the Jews? I'll find where Elaine Pagels talks about it when I do that post.
The Roman emperor, Constantine, reminded me of this:
Jesus Satan = Seats/Sates Janus or Janus Asset.
Janus being a double-faced Roman god, who was the god of beginnings, gates, transitions, time, duality, doorways, passages, frames, and endings. (Wiki). The month, January, was named after him, and was thought to represent Apollo and Diana, as well.
Because I think this is a "Simulation = Animus Toil" (consciousness net/snare/trap), and as shown before, the number 359 indicates a 1 degree opening of a circle (the Ouroboros), which could represent the "narrow" gate to escape from this trap. Yes, I think this is a trap, a prison planet per se, that our consciousness has been lured into via our senses of love/feelings, sight, taste, smell, hearing, but particularly the one of sexual euphoria.
Matthew 7:14 - "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."
Here's more I found. Have you ever wondered why the word "Resurrection" sounds like "Raise Erection?" And further, have you ever pondered why they refer to the word "Intercourse" as performing the sexual act? Also, the Bible describes the opening of the womb, as opening of the "Matrix," and Parent = Entrap. Also, consider why they are teaching children, at much earlier ages, about sex, or even abducting and using them for their sadistic pleasures. This may be why…
Resurrection = Intercourser. (If one takes away the unnecessary extra "R" it spells Intercourse).
In breaking down the word "Intercourse/r," this is what it means:
Inter means – to bury in a grave.
Inter- means – between, amid, among, mutual, together, reciprocal.
Course (n.) means – a program or chosen manner of proceeding, any ordered process or sequence of steps; (v.) – to run through or over, to pursue by tracking or estimating the course taken by one’s prey, to follow or chase after.
Courser means – one who is taking the actions of the verb, Course, to mean one is coursing or traveling through passages of time, war, hunting or being hunted, a race, etc.
Basically, Intercourse/r means that after we die and are buried in the grave, we’ll then find ourselves amid coursing through a passage (a Janus gate of transition), which if we are not aware, would be passing back through the matrix/womb passage, to find ourselves trapped here again. And also, in the midst of coursing, two people are on this plane performing the reciprocal act of having intercourse. How will they trick us?
It could be that sexual euphoric feeling. IMHO, I think they will use this feeling, along with other means such as loved ones who have passed, at some point after death, to trap us, like prey they are pursuing, into coming back through the reciprocal parents (= entraps) performing intercourse, and then 9 months later we will be here again! Perhaps this is why they are teaching children about sex, as well, more victims! So, beware of this, as well! Remember, Jesus cried out in the 9th hour, which reminds me of 9 months of pregnancy. Sorry for the rambling, but my mind just won't shut up:)
Off topic but relevant for the times nonetheless. I just recently "discovered" this guy of whom I have never heard before.
While working for the Rockefeller Institute, De Kruif submitted an anonymous entry about modern medicine, for a book entitled Civilization. In the article, he decried the state of contemporary medical practice, which, because it lacked scientifically sound practices, he called "medical Ga-Ga-ism". De Kruif decried doctors as providing only a "mélange of religious ritual, more or less accurate folk-lore, and commercial cunning". When it was discovered that De Kruif was the author of the essay, he was fired from the Rockefeller Institute.[2]
Interesting, Goeff. I've not heard of him either. I did find these biblical quotes, however. Let me first add that I read years back, where someone was speaking to a rabbi, stating that the book of Job and Amos did not sound like Hebrew texts. The rabbi agreed.
Job 13:4 - But ye are forgers of lies, ye are all physicians of no value.
And here is who was commanding the physicians in ancient Egypt. I wonder if the same tribal brethren are commanding them today.
Gen. 50:2 - And Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his father: and the physicians embalmed Israel.
Rockefeller Foundation = Felon Oil Founder Racket (This foundation began in the same year as the Federal Reserve - 1913).
Rockefeller Institute = Ill Counterstrike Fete (ill (adj.) meaning malevolent, harsh, or cruel intentions - Counterstrike (n.) meaning tactic of counterattacking - Fete (n.) feast or celebration...perhaps like Purim and that celebration representing the murder of over 75K people speaking out against the tribe).
I remember reading about Jeckyl Island and how they divided the means of manipulation between them. One took money, one took media, one took medicine and one took education (there's overlap but I forget which was who). So the whole strategy of the philanthropath was set in 1913. Very interesting.
I don't know if it was their intention to hide all these ciphers or if they're clues left by Spirit. Either way, I'm glad you're picking up on them, my mystic cryptographer friend ;-)
I did not know that about the Jekyll Island divisions. Do you remember the name of the book? And yes, it seems they set up philanthropy ahead of the Federal Reserve, probably as a money laundering and funding scheme that would be outside the reach of the Federal Reserve, which was reserved for the serfs who would fund them.
I have NO idea how the words reveal underlying meanings, UNLESS this is all a programmed Matrix:) It's hard to believe that Rockefeller would have chosen the words to spell out what they reveal, so I think something else is at play here. I have to add, it is weird that Sorcerer sounds like Source-rer.
You also did a video about "nations," and later this came to me:
And yes, we're thinking in tandem. That was exactly the play on words I was going for in I Mage a Nation. I think we should be sorcerers for the worlds we want to see ;-)
Interesting. Can you direct me to the post please?
I used to follow MC at the beginning of the covidcircus but I quit. I started to doubt him as he was still pushing the virus and variant plus I found his style exhausting. Your interview with him (or rather his with you) confirmed my decision. I loved how you incessantly tried to bring him back on track when he went off tangents and off pontificating about himself/his experience, while he was meant to interview YOU. I mean I am interested in tangents in general but his in that interview were not enlightening and felt like wasted my time for I came to listen to you.
Laura Garcia had an interesting experience and insights about Meryl Nass. I wish I could find that comment.
Many among Nass' current and now past followers started to doubt her.
And VERY interesting that you bring up Meryl in relationship to Laura Garcia. She had mentioned that in the comment and I said I had saved a comment thread I had with Meryl. Someone else said they'd like to see it, because she thought Meryl was sincere and doing good work. So I'm going to post that convo in a couple of days. Check out the comment thread when you're there. And thanks for being interested in my interview!
Seems like ideology is worse than religion, or at least equally as bad, justifying the unjustifiable. Seems to me like the golden rule would be about the best concept for this.
William! I'm looking forward to digging into your latest article. How do you distinguish between ideology and religion? Which is a subset of the other? Although I used the quotes from Weinberg and Blake, I don't entirely agree with either of them. Ideology and religion both seem like generic terms; the important distinction is their content. Do they endorse empire aka hierarchy or sovereignty aka moral equality? If we're not morally equal, then some people are better than others and the worse people need to be subject to the good people. If we are morally equal, then we can establish principles together that we want to live by. And the golden rule, particularly its inverse of NOT doing anything you wouldn't want done to you, is about the best concept for this.
I'm going to do another post on moral codes, comparing them to the 10 Commandments. One that I came across is Native American Code of Ethics, that seems like you might like: https://themindsjournal.com/native-american-code/.
Also, I found that Weinberg quote to be a bit offensive, as he seems to be arguing that a belief in a creator is inherently an offense against human dignity, which I consider to be the conceit of atheists.
That was why I chose to put the whole quote in context, rather than the abbreviated last two lines. Both Frederich Douglas and Mark Twain are talking about the religion of Judeo-Christianity, and both were scathing about its hypocrisy from reading them directly. Douglas cites that Paul was always read to them, saying slaves should return to their masters. Twain also writes about the massacre of peaceful Indians living in their midst and compares the morality of Christians to 'barbaric' people. Christians don't come out looking good in the comparison.
And I might agree with you. As I said in the essay, money and nations are two other ways to get good people to do bad things, even if they're atheists. The belief in superiority isn't limited to religions. However Judeo-Christianity and Hinduism are two religions in which superiority is written into the scripture. And that certainly is an offense to the human dignity of those cursed by God to be slaves or animals without souls.
Ideology I tend to attribute to secular/atheism, particularly Marxism. Religion would be related to the eternal/God. Though, as we are seeing, the ideology of woke/progressives which is at root Marxist, takes on a lot of the worst characteristics of religious fundamentalism/zealotry.
As to that NACE, I know some American Indians who would look askance at it, "Native American says who?" Though reading it it seems like anyone would do well to use it as an ethical foundation.
I just looked to see if there was a definition of ideology that was neutral. The best I could find, with edits, was "An organized and systematic process of thinking." Most definitions looked at 'beliefs' and 'philosophies' and 'doctrines,' which would certainly be part of the thinking process within a religion.
From my episode The Dogma of Atheism, you know that I agree that atheism is a belief system like a religion. I have another episode that might look differently at ideology: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/ideology-is-everything. I think it was from just before you started reading me.
I had exactly the same reaction to the NACE! I kept looking for a source reference that it wasn't something made up on the spot that sounded nice. And yet I thought it beat out the 10 Commandments by a mile for a practical ethical code. Thanks for checking it out and confirming my misgivings ;-)
Humans can be fundamentalist creatures, regardless of the ideology, religion or atheism. Humility and empathy I think are of great importance, if we want America to remain free and true to self determination.
Haha, nice quote! It's a subtle distinction but my hunch is that I'm not. I lean towards the suspicion that I'm the Word of God and God is my author. But I think that we (the One Self) was created to create, and that we're the co-author with God of all other things that exist. But that can't possibly include the world unless we retrofit God as an entity that would create pain, loss, death and chaos. So either the world exists and God does not, or God exists and the world does not. Both are not possible.
I prefer to define God as an Action, not an entity. I like "The Creating Universal One And Whole", a big mouthful, but less distortion as a description of Source.
When Seth used 'Gods' in the quote I referred to, his intent is for us to see ourselves as extensions of that action, and to shake us out of our 'tiny lives' perspective.
God didn't create the world and we are victims to it.
We chose to have these experiences of ourselves as individual and separate.
Consciousness explores everything, and All-That-Is includes all things, not just the things we like.
I love that! I've been saying that God is a verb not a noun, and I think Nefahotep would agree from his treatise on the "I am" without being followed by a noun.
Very interesting on the gospel of Seth. I haven't explored that one. Thanks for adding your insights, Philip.
Speaking of using the word of god to justify lies that kill (and empire too) check out the three essays on this website: http://opentabernacle.wordpress.com
The outfit thus described and the many right-wing Christian outfits that link into it, including First Things are more than enthusiastic supporters of the all-encompassing 2025project.
A certain prominent substack writer is slotted in to give a First Things Erasmus presentation
Excellent post Tereza, these things are all connected
Within every Individual, there exists a sense of “Separateness,” that there is an “US” and a “THEM.” The very concept of Power, in Human terms comes from that Illusion of Separateness. As I emphasize on other posts; Power does not exist Outside of You, so any Solutions to World issues can also be found within, ultimately.
In the Social and Political sense; especially beginning with development of organized Religion, human interactions are always being affected by those who crave power. They seek control, and where do they seek it? Outside of themselves. — Is it any wonder that these are some of the MOST out of control Individuals anywhere?
Spirituality was reduced to Religion to extract Obedience ……. restricting access to God in order to gain control over “Belief,” has led to control over social behavior.
Spirituality is personal and cannot be controlled, when realized. They hate this. Those who are trying to maintain an Empire, need "believers" not "seekers" of Truth. Because an Empire is stitched together with lies. (Stories)
With the formation of Religion; the basis for Arbitrary Hierarchy was laid down, establishment of Centralized Government resulted and caused the spread of unaccountability and corruption. So, what we see in Israel is a predictable course of behavior. Governments have become the single biggest lethal threat to otherwise peaceful Human Beings that mankind has ever created.
Very well said, Nefahotep. Yes, I feel that you and I are in complete agreement on this. The whole idea of having power over someone else becomes absurd if that person is you in another form.
There was a line I read recently in the Course that formal religion was a contradiction in terms, and that people have become accustomed to accepting phrases that are mutually exclusive. And organized religion is the same. I've been saying for decades that I wanted dis-organized religion.
And what I really value about you is that you don't go to the other extreme and want to throw the whole thing out. I still dream about religion as a forum for asking the Big Questions. As you say, seekers of Truth, not believers.
I feel like every time we cut one of those story-strings, it unbinds all of us somehow. It will just be too weird the way that I discover (uncover) something, and then find echoes of it in every corner of my experience. It's all connected.
“…people have become accustomed to accepting phrases that are mutually exclusive” 👌🏾
BTW I remember asking you about an ancient code of morality. I once saw it and it was very elaborate and robust, with dozens of points. I don't remember any that I disagreed with. Did you point me towards something it might have been? I wanted to contrast the Ten Commandments with other ancient moral codes for a future episode.
Here is a link to the Sri Aurobindo Ashram library, if you go to what is listed as volume 17; that's the Isha Upanishad. Sri Aurobindo writes in a manner that is enabling to people picking up the intended meaning while also allowing for the seeker of this sacred knowledge explore how knowing it affects the inner and outer life.
https://www.sriaurobindoashram.org/sriaurobindo/writings.php
This I believe is a direct link for downloading the whole Isha Upanishad:
https://www.sriaurobindoashram.org/sriaurobindo/downloadpdf.php?id=32
PREFATORY starting on page 23, this also has a very straight forward summary to interpret this great original work. I think this may be an excellent place to start.
"Plan of the Upanishad"
"THE UPANISHADS, being vehicles of illumination and not of instruction, composed for seekers who had al- ready a general familiarity with the ideas of the Vedic and Vedantic seers and even some personal experience of the truths on which they were founded, dispense in their style with expressed transitions of thought and the development of implied or subordinate notions.
Every verse in the Isha Upanishad reposes on a number of ideas implicit in the text but nowhere set forth explicitly; the reasoning also that supports its conclusions is suggested by the words, not expressly conveyed to the intelligence. The reader, or rather the hearer, was supposed to proceed from light to light, confirming his intuitions and verifying by his experience, not submitting the ideas to the judgment of the logical reason.
To the modern mind this method is invalid and inapplicable; it is necessary to present the ideas of the Upanishad in their completeness, underline the suggestions, supply the necessary transitions and bring out the suppressed but always implicit reasoning."
The problem with any "Moral Codex" like the 10 Commandments is the need for some form of dualism right verses wrong; requiring a strict "Definition." When we are seeking a "Meaning" of something it is a sense that is dynamically living within your perception life.
I would be quite honored to offer any help that you may request in your next post, especially if you would like to reference the Isha Upanishad.
You've caused me to brush off my 2005 writing on Revolutionary Mystics. Is there any passage from the Upanishads that might fit with this Gospel of Philip quote?:
"A Hebrew makes another Hebrew, and such a person is called a proselyte. But someone who calls another does not make them the same as they are. We are who we have always been. One who knows themselves calls others to become who they truly are." Philip 1
We are who we have always been. One who knows themselves calls others to become who they truly are." Philip ------ The principle of this is symbolically represented in both the Upanishad and Bhagavad Gita in some places.
So, one who knows themselves, knows "oneness" to call others to "become who they truly are," could be asking to awaken others to know themselves as well.
Remember, the underlying principle of meaning cannot be found literally by quotation.
I'm not certain about the use of the term "proselyte," unless we are referring to the projected word in an attempt to "teach" another individual to be a Hebrew.
Sri Aurobindo states about teaching another: "Nothing worth learning can be taught." If teaching happens or if learning happens it's because the student is actually teaching himself. So, maybe Hebrew actually means something quite different than what we thought. I can actually see the underlying principle is essentially very familiar, I just shy away from biblical terms like proselyte.
Yes, that's exactly the interpretation I use in my essay. I'm going to record it tomorrow. With a couple of tweaks, it was ready to go. I read it back over and thought, "Damn, I'm good." <grin> I was trying so hard in those days to get published or, honestly, just read by one person who wasn't doing me a favor. I'm really surprised that the basis of my thought hasn't changed in 20 yrs. And I must have been studying the Course for longer than that, since I'm quoting from it. So if a passage occurs to you that would fit, it would be easy to slip it in. And it doesn't need an explanation--we're mystics too, and can use symbolic language with impunity!
Yes, indeed we are mystics.
"Sri Aurobindo states about teaching another: "Nothing worth learning can be taught." If teaching happens or if learning happens it's because the student is actually teaching himself."
Ha! So true. That's why I say there is no such thing as "education" as most people use the term today and why skoolz are all about training and brainwashing, not about education at all. As far as I'm concerned, education is a DIY project as is life in general. Furthermore, one can not be educated without experience.
As for Hebrew meaning something different than what we thought/think, I'd say that's an accurate impression especially since words are pretty crude ways of communicating ideas and that goes especially for ones that have been translated through several layers of other languages and triple for ancient words.
So, maybe Hebrew actually means something quite different than what we thought.
There's a new sub whose byline is 'a highly-educated free-thinker' and I thought, isn't that a contradiction in terms? But my abd PhD gave me enough education not to be intimidated by those letters, and that was a valuable thing. There were a handful of things I learned in the process but the vast majority of what's formed my world view has been auto-didactic.
And Nef, I'm reading a sci-fi book called Babel, that I'll do an episode on when I'm done. I think it would fascinate you, as it does me, with its references to ancient language and empire/ colonization. I just read in it that the word etymology comes from Greek etymon meaning the true sense of a word from etymos, true or actual.
The more "education;" from schooling the more programed one can be. There is of course the level of personal involvement in the schooling where a student is essentially doing actual learning. But they are really directly teaching themselves.
As for "Public Education" and the "College Industrial Complex" that's where paying to learn has gone off the rails.
Schooling = Mandated Curriculum
True Learning = Curiosity & Attention
When it comes to ancient words and names, there are multiple layers of Meaning in them; in our language today, there are way more Definitions and less Meaning.
Meanings vs Definitions:
What has “Definition” is static, linguistically dead; unchanging, existing only in a Dictionary.
What has “Meaning” is dynamic, living and breathing with an Individual’s Life and can include connections to non-physical Reality.
This is one of the biggest reasons that I took so much interest in ancient languages. It's actually quite fascinating.
Another thought about proselyte as a teacher or "presenter."
One who presents something of importance such as knowledge; may do so, yet it only holds significance if the "presented" is ready for such knowledge.
Nothing presented from the outside can have any impact on a person who is not ready for it.
When an Individual makes the effort to "seek" true knowledge, they are becoming ready for it on the inside, then it is quite powerful. That's why they become "who they truly are."
Oh, I would love to write a post together, if you're willing. What an exciting prospect!
When I saw it was 600 pp, I was quite intimidated. But then I realized that it's actually 18 verses, is that right? And pp 23-94 are Sri Aurobindo's final interpretation, with the rest being drafts leading up to that. Not quite as intimidating!
In the system of thinking, it seems consistent with A Course in Miracles, although the latter is 1200 pp longer. But summed up in the intro: "Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists. Therein lies the peace of God." The other hundred thousands of words essentially rephrase that in different ways.
In style, it reminds me of the gnostic gospel of Philip. At one time I was working on a volume called Revolutionary Mystics and How to Become One. It took one verse at a time from Philip, paired it with a verse from the Course, one from the Tao te Ching, and poetry from East/ West. Then I'd write an essay pulling them all together. It was a fun project.
But I can see it would have been incomplete without the Upanishads. How shall we go about this collaboration?
"Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists. Therein lies the peace of God." ----- Now, that is beautiful.
I'm not sure how a collaborative process works in ss.
My guess is we could do a comparison between the different aspects of Definition vs Meaning that seems to offset current scriptures as opposed to the symbolism of original mystic writing.
Your interpretation of many biblical works to me makes a lot of sense.
What we inevitably find in difference between the Spiritual and the Religious is essentially Decentralized personal experience vs Centralized social dismemberment from Self Freedom.
It may make sense to do a post that summarizes Sri Aurobindo's interpretation, with some form of applicable principles that help the reader gain the sense of Meaning that it has. In each of the movements in the Upanishad, there are facets of mystic knowledge that can help meet the challenges of our current global social issues.
It may be better to point out that the "ancient mind" was functioning in a very symbolic manner; modern man is functioning in a very "litteral" manner. This could help explain the difficulty in interpretation of the most original works.
I am open minded to any of your suggestions as to how to do a collaboration on ss. I am a complete novice with the system. If you want, we can direct email each other with ideas, I'm open for that.
Oh you put that so well: "What we inevitably find in difference between the Spiritual and the Religious is essentially Decentralized personal experience vs Centralized social dismemberment from Self Freedom."
I'm open to any form of collaboration. What might be helpful is if you wrote about the Upanishads on your stack, particularly why they speak to you. I could then incorporate it into my episode, looking at it from the perspective of what eliminates something as scripture. The words that tripped me up a little were Lord and Brahman, since they both seemed like titles. I wonder if there's another potential translation for those words. Is atman a generic term that applies to all? And for me, I could use a very basic primer on their background--I really know nothing about how and when they were written. And email works for me, too. I think you can respond to the notification and it goes to me with your address, so I can respond with mine.
I'll be a bit more basic here in some of the questions, then I will try and send you a more detailed email afterwards.
Approximate Vedic time-line:
Original Vedic Reishis lived about 15,000 years ago. Vedas become an oral tradition that gets passed down until they are written in early written script sometime around 6,000 years ago. A few centuries later, the Vedic Symbolism begins to become culturally disconnected from the thread of Meaning, this is where the Upanishads begin to be written, this is because of linguistic changes. This is also when the Sanskrit gets changed by an agreement that it must not be allowed to change any further; effectively freezing it into a ceremonial sacred language, at this time it was still spoken. Event of the Mahabharata occurs around 5,300 years ago, the Bhagavad Gita was recorded in the new Sanskrit standard.
There's a lot of history, I am still a student to it.
Brahman is a complex term, in the context Sri Aurobindo uses it is not meant to be titular, nor is Lord. The need for using those words is because of how Indian culture was around the 1920's people had a lot of religious ideas. Lord is used in a context of describing the inner divine self.
There's the atman and the individualized self jivatman. One references the personal the other is the impersonal and is the non- local quality of the One.
Sri Aurobindo does have a glossary of Sanskrit Terms that show definition, but contextual use rules the meaning.
When I get a chance, I'll send some more information.
Most "codes" of morality that I'm familiar with are what I might call inner awakening and self sense. That is, the more awakened with an inner sense of Oneness, the more a person can see that other people who are seemingly outside, are an extension of the Self and a part of the whole.
What is written in the original Sanskrit, has been religiously "cherry picked" into different styles of philosophy, in India. I would not suggest that any of the original writings are actually meant to be "moral" codes, most of the later interpretations of teachings will seem that way.
The single most profound teaching I learned from when I was younger was the Isha Upanishad. It is somewhat parallel to the Bhagavad Gita in the sense regarding action of the spirit and the yoga of "works."
I will send you some links to the Isha Upanishad but it's not going to have "defined" morality, rather it will have symbolic suggestion towards "meaning."
Thanks. On another topic, have you read Conjuring Hitler? It seem like it could be up your alley: https://ia801705.us.archive.org/2/items/ConjuringHitler/ConjuringHitler.pdf
333 pages!
I haven't read it, someone linked to it in Eisenstein's thread. I can't read books online, I'm already tied to a screen in too much of my life. But it looked like it could be worth tracking down or skimming to see if it has new info on the big question of whether Hitler was a Rothschild agent.
I’m definitely going to take a look. It just seemed fitting that the pages were padded to make them 333, maybe the author was trolling the controllers.
Looks intriguing, I'll have to check that out.
A long time ago I argued that those people seeking power be the ones barred from power. Hmmmm. Does that make me an authoritarian, an anti-authoritarian, or a pragmatist who recognised that the people seeking power are the most powerless from within and so are the most likely to become monsters without? Hmmmm.
Well, I'd have to say that those who seek power are sensing a type of powerlessness inside, yet they are likely not aware of that facet. Any kind of "bans" or "barring" would probably include some type of government system, which applies such prohibitions. You could be a pragmatist, the important thing is you are like many of us in the position of "observer," finding effective solutions to what we are seeing can be quite a challenge.
Very gracious of you, Nefahotep. Gracias.
LeBon would agree.
Goeff, where have you been? I've been worried that I either offended you with my Chump Change post or you fell off that roof you were repairing!
Not that you don't have many irons in your fire, arguments to be launched at unsuspecting Unz readers. But your silence was uncharacteristic and spoke volumes, just ones I couldn't decipher.
I've been down several interesting rabbit holes and I got 3 new books in the past week. To give you some idea of what I do, I read a statement that quoted a guy from something published in 1920 so I went to the original source and found nothing. After about 5 hours I finally found it but it was written in 1925! As you know I'm somewhat of a quote fanatic and I always check the sources, but this one cost me a lot!!
You probably already know that both Jenner and Pasteur were audacious frauds with connections. A lot like Freud and EInstein and many other promtoed losers, but I just discoverd it. Bottom line is that vaccines have been extremely problematic ever since Jenner got involved so no one who's on board with them is to be trusted. Ever.
PS: The roof is done, so no worries! :) And I've long been done with UNZ although I did do some searching at his book and magazine archives which I find can be very useful.
Always good to have a quote fanatic in the extended fam ;-)
What I remember about Pasteur, from my raw milk connections, is that cows in urban areas were being fed junk like leftover hops from breweries. The milk was so thin it was blue and chalk was added to make it look white. People were getting sick from it. So Louis developed this way of salvaging milk that should have been thrown out. Totally unnecessary and unhealthy for good milk from healthy cows. I'm not a fact fanatic but that's the gist I remember.
And I would have assumed Freud was a fraud from Bernal being his nephew and his reversal of women's memories of childhood abuse into the Electra complex. But Einstein? Say it ain't so. Another enigmatic figure with some good quotes bites the dust!
Anyway, good to have you back. BTW, do you know the book Conjuring Hitler? I sent the link to Julius but he hadn't read it: https://ia801705.us.archive.org/2/items/ConjuringHitler/ConjuringHitler.pdf
Governments have become the single biggest lethal threat to otherwise peaceful Human Beings that mankind has ever created.
This is so true, thank you Nefahotep.
Hola, Teresa.
Very nice. And so glad that my citing Blake fit with perfect timing the ideas you explored here.
In a pair of essays I published a short time ago I suggested that the catholic church fathers were in fact gaslighting narcissists, with having used exactly the same narcissistic techniques of creating coherence trauma by convincing their targets that the unbelievable is believable as a means of disengaging the body from reality and thus making nothing con-sensual or cognitively coherent. In other words, the narcissistic scriptures create a *word* experience of reality that does not cohere with the body's experience of reality — 'reality' is in immediate and powerful contradiction of the gaslighting 'truth' and yet the gaslighting overrules experience. (This was convid! Just look at masking gaslighting practices!) That is what creates the 'inner' break. The break is not between soul and body, which I now understand as a kind of red herring split so well articulated by William Blake, and that it is likely a distraction or even directed psyop - Gautama vociferous denounced such teachings as distractions that keep us from being able to reduce suffering and often as the propagating energy of expanding suffering. The break is between trusting the validity of the body's experience of what is now or trusting someone else's ideas of what 'now' is supposed to be, whether beautiful or whacked-out and can only be made true by gaslighting (propaganda) supported by authoritarian processes of intimidation of the psyche and of the body.
And as it pertains to the actual body it ultimately isn't even about trust! The body is the only thing which is in the present moment all of the time, and it is most often such things as (good inententioned?) mindfulness exercises that perpetuate anti-body self attack and split. Mindfulness exercise are a often a kind of good intentioned psyop that discounts the bodily experience of the moment for the mind's idea of what that bodily experience is *supposed to be experiencing*, loosely or tightly based on whatever scripture is guiding the particular 'mindfulness' process.
Some thoughts. Thank you.
Glad we've still got the synchronicity vibe going, Guy!
If power is defined as the default ownership of all properties and the exclusive right to issue credit against them, rather than elected figureheads, my system is a perfectly decentralized economy of collective power.
Elsewhere I've referenced to government by lot, in an old presentation to a public referendum in the province of canada after an egregious example of 'democratic' failure. Later I learned that aristotle talked about that process in his politics arguments. and more recently i read how the gnostics who had received advanced 'enlightenment' did not bow to the hierarchical church authority when they met and used a lottery system to guide their meeting as to who was doing what and what was to be moved forward on. i see that as a simple and likely effective manner to initiate 'collective and yet decentralised'.
You ask all the right questions and write so fluently and with such clarity. Go Team TC.
Topical: While I don't agree with everything Max Igan says, I just happened to watch this last night and I resonate with much that Max and Jeff Berwick say.
• Max Igan in Conversation with Jeff Berwick - Jan 2024 - thecrowhouse
https://odysee.com/@thecrowhouse:2/Vigilante.TV-Land-of-the-banned:b
Thank you so much, Julius! Sometimes I feel like I'm being so systematic that it's boring. Then I remember there are people who do 13,000 piece puzzles ;-)
I haven't seen Max since the beginning of the genocide. He's such a warm and human soul. I'll watch this with interest. But I just have to comment that it's pretty remarkable that Jeff feels comfortable scratching his crotch on camera. What a guy thing! Can you imagine the reverse? No, we cannot. And if you do have an example from the archives, I'm not sure I want to see it!
LoL! One day my ex made that exact same comment - well, it was actually about men adjusting their underwear in public. 'No way a woman would do that.' About fifteen minutes later, at one of the busiest corners in our part of the city, we watched a woman aggressively roto-rootering her pantyhose with her full arm up the inside of her skirt for a seriously protracted amount of time! No way I could imagine a man doing *that*! LoL
You boring? Impossible!
That crutch thing - I think you have the wrong (blue martini) perspective :-)
https://www.pinterest.com.au/pin/118501033924231015/
Haha. I will cut him a break that the little dog had just vacated his lap. What do I know about unruly man parts? I'm with Blake, for God's sake, not Calvin! Let the body be free.
Just watched it and fascinating! The only thing I'd question is whether 'trade route' applies if the goods are all going one direction to Rome. And the gold going in the other direction was certainly not being shared among those producers. This is really interesting and adds a whole new layer. Thanks for showing it to me.
Thanks, I'll check it out!
I just watched this, what a spiritual guy! I hadn't seen that side of Max before. I really resonated with him on everything falling into place, and his comments on there being no word for 'Jews' in the Hebrew bible was elucidating. It confirmed my suspicion that the word meant 'followers of Judas' or the zealots. That's definitely who is being condemned in the gospels.
Thanks for pointing me to this, it was delightful!
I forget where I was going to post this ...
• Stew Peters Interview with Brother Nathaneal Kapner On Jews and Zionism
https://www.realjewnews.com/?p=1803
I watched it with commentary by Zach (LogosRevealed) here
• Hangout Stream #28 – LogosRevealed Zach – 2:02:41
https://odysee.com/@LogosRevealed:0/Hangout-Stream--28:a
Music to 9:20 then greetings and live stream chat
16:45 – start of Stew Peters clip
27:30 – Brother Nathaneal is introduced – Zionism = Jews, not separate.
1:57:30 – end of Stew Peters segment
Don't drop everything - this is just for your readers and your bottomless archives.
I don't remember if you sent this to me, but I watched the interview and was blown away! So many new clues. I wrote a whole page of notes while watching it for a future episode. I'll be interested in the commentary too. Thanks, Julius!
I love this exploration so much.
My biggest wrestling comes with, if there is a god or creator of some kind, how can we believe that god created so much pain? I follow that trailhead to find that pain in my life has also brought so much beauty and so much learning. My pain is nothing compared to some - except that I consider myself highly sensitive and feel pains of all kinds much of the time.
But if we are no better than pyschopaths and leaders of genocide and child rapists....what is the purpose of creating such awfulness? And the story I tell is that those perpetrating such horrors, they are living in extreme pain and extreme separation, otherwise they couldn't take such actions. So why do they get the short end of the stick. I would never ever want to be them.
I've been reading the Sophia Code, which is said to be a modern scripture, channeled by Kaia Ra. Do you know this work? I'm finding it powerful - yet scary to let myself trust a new 'scripture'. Kaia Ra has survived the horrors of child sex slavery and intimately knows about the pains of this world. It opens me up to this question yet again - if we are all equal and perhaps One, how can someone who experienced such torture and brutality find truth in such a statement?
What a wonderful comment, marta. You're asking all the right questions and I love that you don't just shelve that conflict but wrestle with it.
Do you need the pain to get the gain? I'm not sure about that. We see it as a silver lining but I think that joy is our birthright. And I'm trying to let go of the 'other people have it so much worse' narrative. It doesn't help them to feel that way, it just takes away your ability to feel sorry for yourself when things go wrong. There IS no one else. Indulge your own sorrow.
And aha! Great question: "what is the purpose of creating such awfulness?" Because you see that awfulness as unquestionable reality, you have to see a creator of it, with a purpose for it. And we've been told it's a testing ground to separate the wheat from the chaff but your intuition is that all acts of violence are passing on their own trauma. And I love your sense that you'd never ever want to be them. Just like Mark Twain's mother, you'd have compassion for Satan! And that's the perfect place to be.
From the Course perspective, none of these terrible things are happening in Reality. We experience them, the same way we'd experience events in a dream. Purpose, meaning, Reality are all words for God. Pain has no purpose, no Reality, no creator because God never created it. It exists in our dreaming mind, not our Real Mind.
What I loved about Anneke Lucas was precisely that she came to a point of loving those who raped and tortured her, and seeing the traumatized child in each of them. I don't know the Sophia Code, do you have a link? I don't believe in 'trusting' any scripture, old or new. I think we need to apply the same scrutiny that I describe above to old and new irrespective. Looking forward to learning more about it from your analysis!
Hi Tereza! Thanks for the thorough comment!
I'm in agreement about so much of what you've written. Where I get hung up - my brain still seems to cramp around the question of evil. "If it's all a dream, then for example, why do YOU care so much?" I don't mean that as criticism, just trying to grapple and get it into coherence in me. "if it's all a dream, what is the purpose of the dream? Maybe purpose isn't the right answer - but how to BE in relation to a DREAM. What do I want to get out of the dream?"
Matias deStefano talks about remembering all his past lives and life between lives - his theory is that we need the polarities in service of creating and expanding. That Satan was an angel who took on the job of being the polarity so that we could use that for our souls growth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMdmpBOm3kc
I don't know if I believe that either - I hesitate to say such things to people who have lived extreme trauma. But I know myself that coming through my own traumas have brought me so much growth.
As for the Sophia Code - I'm not swallowing anything just because she claims it's a modern sacred text. But there are things in the book that I take in, test out in my body, feel skeptical towards, start to open towards, experiment with, think its too weird, go back and forth, and so on.
https://kaiara.com/about/the-sophia-code/
Overall I love her message that we are SOVEREIGN beings and moving more towards that in all the different ways that I use is very important to me.
I haven't watched the long interview with Anneke yet but it is in my awareness that it's time to do so. Thanks for naming her again.
I appreciate you! I appreciate conversing with you! I appreciate these big questions!
Oh marta, you're asking all the right questions! And yes, that's why I use the term socio-spirituality to mean taking a hard look at the reality IN the world while questioning the Reality OF the world. If you're in a nightmare that you don't know is a nightmare, you experience all the fear and even pain of that. Experimenting with the possibility that it's a dream doesn't impede your ability to script a good ending to that dream or use the dream figure you associate with. On the contrary! It takes away your fear and limitations. There's no sense of 'this has always been this way and WILL always be this way. There are no levels of difficulty to what you can change, as the Course says.
But it also takes away the urgency to change the circumstances of the dream. The dream is happening in this way for a reason, under the guidance of One who knows all outcomes and how they affect everything and everyone else. So rather than worrying about things you can't change, your responsibility is seeing the Truth clearly, both within the dream and about it being a dream. Dream analysis is the most important thing we can be doing. What is the dream telling us and what's the underlying fear and guilt that the dream is acting out?
With Kaiara, I have to see if I can forgive her for being so beautiful and selling jewelry ;-) But the divine feminine as the divine mother is what I think our collective identity is in Reality. The personification of the trinity as all male makes NO sense to me, even though the Course uses that terminology. How can you have a Father and Son but no Mother? Here's an early video (pre-SS) on The Divine Feminine, responding to Jordan Peterson: https://youtu.be/ja_ADXTe7G4. And another early one, also on Peterson, called Waking the Dragon Mom (in an echo to Kaiara): https://youtu.be/E7IxL3WOf1w.
Also on Anneke, I actually preferred a video I watched later where she's interviewed by a woman. I've just looked but I can't find which episode I linked it in. It might come up in the sidebar when you pull up the 3-hr one in Pedo-Sadist Cults. Not as long and less machismo.
I guess I have more to say - as a person who has been incredibly fearful in life, I love that you specifically name that seeing all as a dream is a way to move to a level without fear and limitations. My experience with fear has been serious performance anxiety - which was tough since my first career was as a classical pianist. I muscled my way through so much, and have spent the last 13 years trying to learn how to truly heal fear, and how to perform under pressure and be the most me I can be at all times. In the last year or so I've had such a big boost forward, I can now really feel it as separate levels or separate realities. One reality of fear in the nervous system, and another reality of so much expansive love, creativity, possibility, openness. I am so happy that I'm moving in the direction of expansive love. Lots to learn, but at least I'm aware of these levels now and accelerating into expansion.
Wow that's so brave of you, marta. I'm sure you know that most people fear public speaking more than death. I can't play the piano in front of one person. And what an interesting process to overcome with brute force your fear, and now to heal it. It does seem like there was something that you needed to learn--not for you, but for all of us. What a beautiful process.
Curiously, I was talking about something similar with one of my dancer friends. We had been in the teacher training together, me for the third time. The first thing the teacher has you do is lead a warm up, which is improvising. Kiki started to do it and froze. Just couldn't do anything, and left. Do I need to admit I was secretly thrilled? May I mention that Kiki is poised and beautiful? I was deep into schadenfreude when, a few songs later, she asked to try again. And she crushed it! She talked about it today as this moment of grace when she just connected to Source and everything flowed. So I'm still, two years later, trying to take that as inspiration and not hate her just a little bit. ;-)
One quick note - I TOTALLY love your comment "With Kaiara, I have to see if I can forgive her for being so beautiful and selling jewelry". I feel the same! I'm holding skepticism towards her as a person for being glamorous and selling jewelry....and at the same time, the initiations in the book so far feel incredibly powerful to me. Waking up something that I've been looking to wake up for a long time, in conjunction with some other healing work. I always feel skeptical towards the leader of any organization though. So I'm okay not totally buying into Kaia Ra - and I'm finding a pull to listening to her youtube videos, and I'll keep following that instinct until another instinct comes in. I guess I trust my gut instincts more than my head decisions most days....My gut instincts also say to keep following you, even though I'm uncomfortable pulling on some of the threads you pull on. Not necessarily in disagreement - just that i'm not diving in headfirst. It's taken me this long to feel ready to listen to the interview with Anneke. I'll find your link and look on the sidebars with her being interviewed by a woman.
And Big AMEN to bringing in the Divine Mother as the Creatrix of all life. Thanks for the links to those particular videos from you!
Creatrix! I like how you can make the mature goddess sound kinky ;-) I learned in one of my videos that matrix comes from mother, so I'm substituting that for matriarchy as another form of hierarchy.
Haha, well if Kaia Ra and I are both in your gut instinct vibe, how can I object? But seriously, I wouldn't anyway. Revelation comes from everywhere. It's unbelievable some of the places I find it. The Creatrix is a jokester. And I'm glad you give me the benefit of the doubt to keep following along. I'm not comfortable with some of the strings I'm pulling on either.
Hi Tereza, I'm reposting my Rumble comments for substack.(with minor additions.)
Great quotes on religion being necessary to get good people to do bad things.
Your explication on authority is so key. Religious stories have certainly externalized authority and turned so much upside down as you say. Dissuading us from re-membering our direct connect with Divine Source and claiming our authority seems to be the main thrust of organized religion.
Assuming in an ultimate integration, we all go back to One Source, we have apparently, many people in positions of (falsely) claimed authority, acting out agendas fully disconnected from that unifying Source. Perhaps playing out a dream of what it looks like if disconnected from God. In their disconnection they seek to disconnect everyone else from their Source - we see this playing out right now.
So even if we include them in an ultimate Oneness, we simultaneously need to recognize they are operating outside that ultimate Oneness - Reality, and discern that in their disconnected state something else (not Source) is running them. The gap created by the disconnect, allows other energies to move in that are not human-friendly. We are clearly living with the consequences of that. Other anti-human energies have moved in. Hence the transhuman push, the desired overlay of a synthetic world over the natural world.
We don't have to judge that but we do need to discern it and reject it with clarity, as well as more deeply connect to our Source and the inalienable rights inherent in that connection.
To that end I had been looking more into Natural Law. (As has Spiral Leaf substack, re-igniting that exploration) Assuming we have been given everything we need - and I assume this - then that would include the natural principals or laws to live. We innately and intuitively know this. We are in the process of remembering all this.
Such a remarkable time.
And such a remarkable you, Tereza. A great exploration and needed to really get at the deeper layers of control we're dealing with. I look forward to your next post, and the one after that..
Best.
I was hoping you'd repost here and was keeping my tab open to copy my response:
Yes! I thought of you, Kathleen, with that definition of authority. I think that I and you (and maybe Guy and Blake) get stuck in that dichotomy between reason and intuition. But the real distinction is between external and internal authority, I think. Within the self, reason and intuition are in harmony, working together.
If I, from my perspective, look at all other people as figures of the fragmented self in my dreaming Oneness Mind, there's nothing real those dream figures are responding to or doing. When I come to a place of perfect forgiveness--giving them the benefit of the doubt--they'll no longer need to enact the role they're in now. IandYou (one entity) have the power to release them. Or not.
That's my best guess on a Thursday morning ;-) I am always so happy to be read and converse with remarkable you!
Thought provoking read, thank you.
What if the god of the bible (and organized religion) is not the god everyone thinks? What if he is not the creator/source/universe that people tend to think of when they say god?
I’m delving into this sort of thing myself and have come up with some opinions that differ greatly from most others. To the point that I do not believe the bible is the word of creator at all but yes, the word of “god”. Depends on one’s definition of god and mine is, again, different.
Hmmm... I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying there is a god who created the world and there is a god who authored or inspired the bible, but they're not the same god?
My mind reels at the tapestry woven here from all the threads you tied together, thank you Tereza.
"And there’s more human interpretation that can, paradoxically, lead back to the Truth even if a text was corrupt at its origin."
- this sums up the way I feel about how the Universal Intelligence makes sure we obtain the messages that we need at any given point. One could be reading the unibomber manifesto or the like and still the message would be impressed on us.
Hi Tereza! So, you stated this: "The greatest challenge for empire is how to get good people to do bad things. If bad people do bad things for their own reasons, that doesn’t serve the empire. The greatest tool of the empire is the power of a story. Without a story, any would-be ruler has to do their own dirty work." Here's a bit more of my story that I didn't want to share until after "Christmas."
1. Santa Claus = Satan Clause, with clause meaning (law) - A separate part of a contract, a will or another legal document. (Part of how the empire gets us to buy into their crap).
2. Satan is first mentioned, by name, in 1 Chron. 21, which is the 359th chapter of the Bible.
3. Christmas Day is celebrated on 12/25, which is the 359th day of a non-leap year.
4. The numerology of Satan, aka, Shatan, in Hebrew Gematria = 359. (Shin/Sin (s or sh sound) = 300, Tet/Tes (T sound) = 9, and Nun (N sound) = 50.
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7854.htm
https://livingwordin3d.com/discovery/2016/09/12/satan-hebrew-word-study/#content
5. Then think about a man dressed in a red Santa/Satan suit, at Christmas, and he bounces little children on his lap, granting them their material wishes. The following has two meanings, one of which is extremely lewd. Christmas = Crams Shit.
6. The Jesuit symbol consists of the letter, "I" "H" "S" and the cross or the letter "T." Those letters spell S-H-I-T.
We've been so duped!
Mind utterly blown!
Here are a couple more I forgot about, and I'm just not sure what to think about either, seeing as I agree that things are upside down, inside out.
2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
Thessalonians = Holiness Satan.
Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Eli Eli lama sabachthani = I Satan heil Michael Baal...or...I hail Satan Michael Abel...or the names in any given sequence - not sure.
I'm glad you have these handy. I'm going to do something on The Satan PsyOp in the future.
That should be interesting:) The number 359 is 1 degree off the circle of 360, and the "prophetic year" used to be 360 days, as well. Perhaps Satan represents sun worship, like with Ra, where the sun is at its lowest point in the southern hemisphere around 12/21-22, and then it starts its "resurrection" trek around the 25th, on its way back north. I know others have spoken of this. I'm beginning to think the Bible is full of astrotheology, such as Lucifer was probably a comet, and maybe Esau was, as well, seeing as he was red and hairy, and the meaning of comet is described as long streaming hair, and a comet or meteorite could be red. Anyway, I look forward to your Satan Psyop video:)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophetic_Year
From the piece I'm working on about What is the Bible, it's Jesus who represents Apollo or Sun worship. Constantine mandated Jesus worship as the imperial religion but never stopped worshipping Apollo: "Constantine merged his devotion to Apollo, Sol the ‘Unconquered Sun,’ with worship of the Christ but kept as divinely commissioned ‘that the rule of the whole world should belong’ to him. As soon as he came into power, he 'asserted the right to exercise absolute authority over the entire Church.'"
I still think Satan represents the rebel leaders from the crucifixion scene, or is the bar Abbas crowd scene where Satan is among the Jews? I'll find where Elaine Pagels talks about it when I do that post.
The Roman emperor, Constantine, reminded me of this:
Jesus Satan = Seats/Sates Janus or Janus Asset.
Janus being a double-faced Roman god, who was the god of beginnings, gates, transitions, time, duality, doorways, passages, frames, and endings. (Wiki). The month, January, was named after him, and was thought to represent Apollo and Diana, as well.
Because I think this is a "Simulation = Animus Toil" (consciousness net/snare/trap), and as shown before, the number 359 indicates a 1 degree opening of a circle (the Ouroboros), which could represent the "narrow" gate to escape from this trap. Yes, I think this is a trap, a prison planet per se, that our consciousness has been lured into via our senses of love/feelings, sight, taste, smell, hearing, but particularly the one of sexual euphoria.
Matthew 7:14 - "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."
Here's more I found. Have you ever wondered why the word "Resurrection" sounds like "Raise Erection?" And further, have you ever pondered why they refer to the word "Intercourse" as performing the sexual act? Also, the Bible describes the opening of the womb, as opening of the "Matrix," and Parent = Entrap. Also, consider why they are teaching children, at much earlier ages, about sex, or even abducting and using them for their sadistic pleasures. This may be why…
Resurrection = Intercourser. (If one takes away the unnecessary extra "R" it spells Intercourse).
In breaking down the word "Intercourse/r," this is what it means:
Inter means – to bury in a grave.
Inter- means – between, amid, among, mutual, together, reciprocal.
Course (n.) means – a program or chosen manner of proceeding, any ordered process or sequence of steps; (v.) – to run through or over, to pursue by tracking or estimating the course taken by one’s prey, to follow or chase after.
Courser means – one who is taking the actions of the verb, Course, to mean one is coursing or traveling through passages of time, war, hunting or being hunted, a race, etc.
Basically, Intercourse/r means that after we die and are buried in the grave, we’ll then find ourselves amid coursing through a passage (a Janus gate of transition), which if we are not aware, would be passing back through the matrix/womb passage, to find ourselves trapped here again. And also, in the midst of coursing, two people are on this plane performing the reciprocal act of having intercourse. How will they trick us?
It could be that sexual euphoric feeling. IMHO, I think they will use this feeling, along with other means such as loved ones who have passed, at some point after death, to trap us, like prey they are pursuing, into coming back through the reciprocal parents (= entraps) performing intercourse, and then 9 months later we will be here again! Perhaps this is why they are teaching children about sex, as well, more victims! So, beware of this, as well! Remember, Jesus cried out in the 9th hour, which reminds me of 9 months of pregnancy. Sorry for the rambling, but my mind just won't shut up:)
You would probably find this of some interest. No kidding!
Speaking of the wod of Gawd, this guy makes a good case that Cheezus was a smart-ass. And I suspect a lot of others were too, including the Buddha...
THE WIT OF THE CARPENTER
BY L. M. HUSSEY
https://www.unz.com/print/AmMercury-1925jul-00329/
Enjoy! : )
Off topic but relevant for the times nonetheless. I just recently "discovered" this guy of whom I have never heard before.
While working for the Rockefeller Institute, De Kruif submitted an anonymous entry about modern medicine, for a book entitled Civilization. In the article, he decried the state of contemporary medical practice, which, because it lacked scientifically sound practices, he called "medical Ga-Ga-ism". De Kruif decried doctors as providing only a "mélange of religious ritual, more or less accurate folk-lore, and commercial cunning". When it was discovered that De Kruif was the author of the essay, he was fired from the Rockefeller Institute.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_de_Kruif
I anticipate being indisposed for a while since I intend to check out his work.
Interesting, Goeff. I've not heard of him either. I did find these biblical quotes, however. Let me first add that I read years back, where someone was speaking to a rabbi, stating that the book of Job and Amos did not sound like Hebrew texts. The rabbi agreed.
Job 13:4 - But ye are forgers of lies, ye are all physicians of no value.
And here is who was commanding the physicians in ancient Egypt. I wonder if the same tribal brethren are commanding them today.
Gen. 50:2 - And Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his father: and the physicians embalmed Israel.
Thank you. Interesting. Now I'm off to check out your quotes!
Something else I wanted to show you...
Rockefeller Foundation = Felon Oil Founder Racket (This foundation began in the same year as the Federal Reserve - 1913).
Rockefeller Institute = Ill Counterstrike Fete (ill (adj.) meaning malevolent, harsh, or cruel intentions - Counterstrike (n.) meaning tactic of counterattacking - Fete (n.) feast or celebration...perhaps like Purim and that celebration representing the murder of over 75K people speaking out against the tribe).
I remember reading about Jeckyl Island and how they divided the means of manipulation between them. One took money, one took media, one took medicine and one took education (there's overlap but I forget which was who). So the whole strategy of the philanthropath was set in 1913. Very interesting.
I don't know if it was their intention to hide all these ciphers or if they're clues left by Spirit. Either way, I'm glad you're picking up on them, my mystic cryptographer friend ;-)
I did not know that about the Jekyll Island divisions. Do you remember the name of the book? And yes, it seems they set up philanthropy ahead of the Federal Reserve, probably as a money laundering and funding scheme that would be outside the reach of the Federal Reserve, which was reserved for the serfs who would fund them.
I have NO idea how the words reveal underlying meanings, UNLESS this is all a programmed Matrix:) It's hard to believe that Rockefeller would have chosen the words to spell out what they reveal, so I think something else is at play here. I have to add, it is weird that Sorcerer sounds like Source-rer.
You also did a video about "nations," and later this came to me:
Imagination = I Magi Nation (Magi are sorcerers).
Off to watch your new video:)
The book I cite in my book is The Creature from Jekyll Island: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/66499.The_Creature_from_Jekyll_Island.
And yes, we're thinking in tandem. That was exactly the play on words I was going for in I Mage a Nation. I think we should be sorcerers for the worlds we want to see ;-)
I just lost another, longer comment... argh!
It is off topic and was to bing Alison McDowell's fascinating research and analytical abilities to your attention.
On RFK jr
https://wrenchinthegears.com/2023/05/26/camelot-corner-with-operation-snow-white-and-charles-eisenstein-as-troubadour/
https://www.thehighersidechats.com/alison-mcdowell-human-capital-markets-predatory-philanthropy-the-gamified-world/
And another individual I much enjoy reading, interacting and learning from is Petra Liverani on substack.
Thanks for those, I'll check them out. Sorry you lost the post :-(
Perhaps start with the interview (second link) on human capital markets. It is fascinating and terrifying at once.
Alison is very good at making complex concepts and situations accessible to all.
Yes I've heard Alison before and like her. Funny that Laura Garcia just mentioned her over on Mathew Crawford's stack. I'll listen later today.
Interesting. Can you direct me to the post please?
I used to follow MC at the beginning of the covidcircus but I quit. I started to doubt him as he was still pushing the virus and variant plus I found his style exhausting. Your interview with him (or rather his with you) confirmed my decision. I loved how you incessantly tried to bring him back on track when he went off tangents and off pontificating about himself/his experience, while he was meant to interview YOU. I mean I am interested in tangents in general but his in that interview were not enlightening and felt like wasted my time for I came to listen to you.
Laura Garcia had an interesting experience and insights about Meryl Nass. I wish I could find that comment.
Many among Nass' current and now past followers started to doubt her.
Here is the post: https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/lies-and-gaslighting-over-the-military. It is about his primary tangent in that interview and I appreciate your insights ;-)
And VERY interesting that you bring up Meryl in relationship to Laura Garcia. She had mentioned that in the comment and I said I had saved a comment thread I had with Meryl. Someone else said they'd like to see it, because she thought Meryl was sincere and doing good work. So I'm going to post that convo in a couple of days. Check out the comment thread when you're there. And thanks for being interested in my interview!
Ooh this sounds interesting. Thank you. Will read later.
I like how he's been calling out Kirsh and co.
Re Meryl. Something is not right with her, like with many if not most in the so called MFM.
This may be of interest to
https://open.substack.com/pub/claudiofabinguevara/p/covid-as-trauma-monarch-programming?r=1t06qv&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
Very interesting, I posted a comment there.
Seems like ideology is worse than religion, or at least equally as bad, justifying the unjustifiable. Seems to me like the golden rule would be about the best concept for this.
William! I'm looking forward to digging into your latest article. How do you distinguish between ideology and religion? Which is a subset of the other? Although I used the quotes from Weinberg and Blake, I don't entirely agree with either of them. Ideology and religion both seem like generic terms; the important distinction is their content. Do they endorse empire aka hierarchy or sovereignty aka moral equality? If we're not morally equal, then some people are better than others and the worse people need to be subject to the good people. If we are morally equal, then we can establish principles together that we want to live by. And the golden rule, particularly its inverse of NOT doing anything you wouldn't want done to you, is about the best concept for this.
I'm going to do another post on moral codes, comparing them to the 10 Commandments. One that I came across is Native American Code of Ethics, that seems like you might like: https://themindsjournal.com/native-american-code/.
Also, I found that Weinberg quote to be a bit offensive, as he seems to be arguing that a belief in a creator is inherently an offense against human dignity, which I consider to be the conceit of atheists.
That was why I chose to put the whole quote in context, rather than the abbreviated last two lines. Both Frederich Douglas and Mark Twain are talking about the religion of Judeo-Christianity, and both were scathing about its hypocrisy from reading them directly. Douglas cites that Paul was always read to them, saying slaves should return to their masters. Twain also writes about the massacre of peaceful Indians living in their midst and compares the morality of Christians to 'barbaric' people. Christians don't come out looking good in the comparison.
And I might agree with you. As I said in the essay, money and nations are two other ways to get good people to do bad things, even if they're atheists. The belief in superiority isn't limited to religions. However Judeo-Christianity and Hinduism are two religions in which superiority is written into the scripture. And that certainly is an offense to the human dignity of those cursed by God to be slaves or animals without souls.
Ideology I tend to attribute to secular/atheism, particularly Marxism. Religion would be related to the eternal/God. Though, as we are seeing, the ideology of woke/progressives which is at root Marxist, takes on a lot of the worst characteristics of religious fundamentalism/zealotry.
As to that NACE, I know some American Indians who would look askance at it, "Native American says who?" Though reading it it seems like anyone would do well to use it as an ethical foundation.
I just looked to see if there was a definition of ideology that was neutral. The best I could find, with edits, was "An organized and systematic process of thinking." Most definitions looked at 'beliefs' and 'philosophies' and 'doctrines,' which would certainly be part of the thinking process within a religion.
From my episode The Dogma of Atheism, you know that I agree that atheism is a belief system like a religion. I have another episode that might look differently at ideology: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/ideology-is-everything. I think it was from just before you started reading me.
I had exactly the same reaction to the NACE! I kept looking for a source reference that it wasn't something made up on the spot that sounded nice. And yet I thought it beat out the 10 Commandments by a mile for a practical ethical code. Thanks for checking it out and confirming my misgivings ;-)
Humans can be fundamentalist creatures, regardless of the ideology, religion or atheism. Humility and empathy I think are of great importance, if we want America to remain free and true to self determination.
Nice article!
"You are your own Authority. The Gods do not come kneeling."
Haha, nice quote! It's a subtle distinction but my hunch is that I'm not. I lean towards the suspicion that I'm the Word of God and God is my author. But I think that we (the One Self) was created to create, and that we're the co-author with God of all other things that exist. But that can't possibly include the world unless we retrofit God as an entity that would create pain, loss, death and chaos. So either the world exists and God does not, or God exists and the world does not. Both are not possible.
I prefer to define God as an Action, not an entity. I like "The Creating Universal One And Whole", a big mouthful, but less distortion as a description of Source.
When Seth used 'Gods' in the quote I referred to, his intent is for us to see ourselves as extensions of that action, and to shake us out of our 'tiny lives' perspective.
God didn't create the world and we are victims to it.
We chose to have these experiences of ourselves as individual and separate.
Consciousness explores everything, and All-That-Is includes all things, not just the things we like.
I love that! I've been saying that God is a verb not a noun, and I think Nefahotep would agree from his treatise on the "I am" without being followed by a noun.
Very interesting on the gospel of Seth. I haven't explored that one. Thanks for adding your insights, Philip.
Jane Roberts' Seth -- some consider it gospel, but Seth would quickly disavow them of that notion lol.
Seth would describe himself as an Energy Essence Gestalt who spoke through Jane Roberts.
Thanks for the clarification!
Impressive, Tereza. Well martialed facts; cogently argued. Historical context is always so important.
Speaking of using the word of god to justify lies that kill (and empire too) check out the three essays on this website: http://opentabernacle.wordpress.com
The outfit thus described and the many right-wing Christian outfits that link into it, including First Things are more than enthusiastic supporters of the all-encompassing 2025project.
A certain prominent substack writer is slotted in to give a First Things Erasmus presentation
Ah the Opus Dei rabbit hole, always fruitful. I didn't see the First Things but who is the prominent Substacker?