Why people fall

The topic of the previous article started me on a line of thought which basically goes like this: “what is the fatal flaw of those people who profess salvation and what not, and secretly manifest all signs of spiritual fall, and how to avoid it”.

I think they assume that they must appear to be outwardly perfect, which creates a dichotomy of a perfect outward façade meant for the public, and their normal private condition, which they well know to be far from the ideal. As this dichotomy persists, they basically give themselves license to go incrementally more beyond the pale, because, from their perspective, it hardly matters – they are far from the ideal façade anyways, so it doesn’t matter whether they are off by an inch or by a mile. They are either doomed regardless, or saved regardless, depending on God’s point of view. Basically, they masturbate in secrecy anyways, which neither their Church nor scripture approve of, so they might as well have someone else do it for them.

From the perspective of their religion, that makes some kind of sense. From my perspective, the problem starts with separation of one’s consciousness from God, with the result of spiritual emptiness, which then manifests as many things – from desire for material things and pleasures, to actually sinful actions, such as treating other souls poorly, as if they were mere things. As you can see, my definition of sin is more abstract than the Christian one – I don’t see sin as something that is on a list of forbidden actions. I see sin as a state where your consciousness is not in God and of God, and this condition doesn’t make you experience agony. I see sin as willful defiance of God, and contempt/hatred for both God, and beings who love him. Basically, I see atheism and anti-theism as sin, and I see murder, rape, robbery, deception and other evil physical actions as manifestations of this inner spiritual state of sin. Sin is the state of apostasy from God.

The problem with those Christians is therefore that their religion has such impractically harsh definition of sin, that they basically can’t function as normal human beings without feeling that their religion condemns their actions, and they also feel that they have to keep up the outwardly charade for the sake of others, whose faith, they feel, will crumble if they knew how weak their leader actually is. And the more they outwardly condemn all sin, inwardly they drown in the feeling that they are fundamentally and irredeemably sinful, and even if God could somehow understand and forgive, their followers can’t and won’t, because the position of scripture is clear in condemnation of their actions.

The solution is that sin needs to be understood in a more abstract, fundamental way, so that people can focus on what matters, which is their personal relationship with God, and less on things that don’t matter, which is whether you allowed yourself to experience some innocent pleasure that didn’t hurt anyone. This doesn’t mean “tolerance for sin”, as some Christians would say. No, it means you need to stop being such bloody Pharisees, “who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel”. Focus on the important things, such as treating others the way you would treat God himself, and being forever in God. Stop annoying both yourselves and others with silly nonsense. If that made any sense, the early Church would not cease with the practice of imposing all those Jewish “laws” on the pagan-to-Christian converts. As St. Peter wisely stated, “Now then, why do you test God by placing on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe it is through the grace of the Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

What I want to say is, that by widening the spectrum of what is considered a sin, you think you are being moral and obedient to God, and what you are actually doing is falling into the trap of the Pharisees who even chastised Jesus and his disciples, thinking themselves more pure and lawful. Also, by broadening the definition of sin, you make it all but inevitable for one to consider oneself sinful, and from that point it’s a slippery slope, where it’s easy to cross the line into actions that are sin proper. Stop making both your lives and the lives of others more difficult without good reason, and instead focus your attention on that which is most important, and that is the presence of God within your soul.

There is another thing that I think is important; one of the reason why people fall into sin. You see, they see themselves as irrelevant and worthless, and they think their actions don’t matter one way or another. They think they are weak, powerless, worthless, small and inconsequential. As a result, they act like a child who takes his father’s gun, thinking it a toy, and kills his sibling. If a child truly understood the actual power it has in its hands, that would not have happened. It is only because they don’t understand what they wield, that makes it truly dangerous. In a similar manner, I’ve seen people condemn both themselves and others, thinking that their words and actions don’t matter, that seducing others away from salvation is merely an intellectual game. It’s like throwing rocks on a live land mine, or picking up a cobra thinking it’s a piece of rope. If people only knew how powerful their actions can be, and how much everything they do matters, they would tread very lightly through life.

Wrestling with the beast

There has recently been major fallout in the Christian circles regarding the Ravi Zacharias scandal, revealed after his death last year.

For those who don’t know, Ravi Zacharias is one of those American evangelists; you know the kind: saved by Jesus, because you need to accept Jesus as your personal savior because no salvation is possible otherwise, et cetera, ad nauseam.

Let me quote from the Christian site I linked above:

Zacharias used tens of thousands of dollars of ministry funds dedicated to a “humanitarian effort” to pay four massage therapists, providing them housing, schooling, and monthly support for extended periods of time, according to investigators.

One woman told the investigators that “after he arranged for the ministry to provide her with financial support, he required sex from her.” She called it rape.

She said Zacharias “made her pray with him to thank God for the ‘opportunity’ they both received” and, as with other victims, “called her his ‘reward’ for living a life of service to God,” the report says. Zacharias warned the woman—a fellow believer—if she ever spoke out against him, she would be responsible for millions of souls lost when his reputation was damaged.

The findings, alongside details revealed over months of internal reckoning at RZIM, challenge the picture many have had of Zacharias.

When he died in May, he was praised for his faithful witness, his commitment to the truth, and his personal integrity. Now it is clear that, offstage, the man so long admired by Christians around the world abused numerous women and manipulated those around him to turn a blind eye.

You get the picture. Some will say he “fell into temptation”, but from what I could see looking at the reports, he’s actually the one who manipulated others into temptation, mostly by using his charisma and willpower to force them into doing his will. He doesn’t look like an otherwise saintly person who fell into temptation, he looks like a manipulative, self-serving pig of a man; a “religious” Harvey Weinstein. But the man himself hardly matters.

The reason why his sleezy crimes and misbehaviors managed to remain secret until after his death is, to quote the argument from the man himself, “if she ever spoke out against him, she would be responsible for millions of souls lost when his reputation was damaged”. Basically, if it turned out that the great Christian apologist who is berating everyone into accepting Christ as a personal savior because there is no other way of salvation, manifested more signs of being a power-drunk piece of human garbage than someone in whom salvation could be witnessed, one could conclude that the entirety of this teaching is dubious.

I’ve been warning Christians about this, but they are incredibly arrogant, probably because they are intoxicated by the ego-trip of being on the right side of salvation and being the ones that preach from the high ground. It’s incredibly seductive, I know, but it doesn’t excuse them. I’ve been hearing the same thing from them for decades – how their Church is somehow shielded from spiritual fall by the Holy Spirit because it’s the holy fiancée of Christ, how the Pope is personally appointed by the Holy Spirit and you are protected from false teachings and spiritual fall if you are a faithful member of the Church. I steadfastly reminded them that nobody can protect you from your own spiritual failings and you depend on yourself alone to establish a personal connection and relationship with God, and to defend and confirm this relationship with your daily actions, with every thought and every breath. They thought I was the deluded one, that I am the one who needs to come to his senses and accept the “truth”. Then they elected that terrible leftist demagogue as the Pope, because the Church was so full of homosexuals and pedophiles that the previous saintly Pope resigned because he faced such stringent opposition to his attempts to purify the Church, he probably surrendered everything to God, as a good saint that he is, and left them to God’s judgment. The Christians would probably call his successor the Antichrist, but I don’t think Antichrist is a person; it’s a spirit of “progressivism” and humanistic materialism that is a direct opposition to the teaching of Christ, and as such is literally anti-Christ. However, it’s not that people have ideologies – ideologies, in fact, have people who are possessed by them, and that Francis creature is obviously possessed by progressivism. Now, apparently, the Catholics are more aware that they have a problem, because their very dogma is being actively changed by that creature, and being safe from false teachings isn’t something they would brag about very loudly, if they had any sense in them.

The protestant Christians can of course use this opportunity to mock the Catholics for having a fallible man as a safeguard of their theology, while they “have Christ”, and thus they have “certainty of salvation”.

In this I see the same arrogance that is the bane of Catholics – everybody likes having the high ground, the claim to the position of certain salvation from which they can “teach” others. Accept Christ, that’s the only thing you need, that’s the only thing that’s important.

How did that work out for Ravi Zacharias and hundreds like him?

A person who is so spiritually empty that he behaves literally like the stereotypical alpha-male ape that coerces females into having sex with him by invoking his exalted position in his tribe, is not saved by any definition of the term. That is as base and animalistic and devoid of holiness that is of God, as you can possibly imagine. He was a charismatic male specimen of human animal, he behaved in a bestial manner, lacked not only holiness but also any kind of gentlemanly refinement and self-restraint that would indicate normal human sophistication. If he “had Christ” or “was saved”, then I need neither, and may God keep me safe from those horrors.

God only knows that I have to wrestle with the human animal on a daily basis. It degrades my spiritual connection when it’s sick, it wants to eat too much food automatically when I’m focused on something else, the dullness of the physical brain blocks my insight, it colors my emotions and spiritual states with its own instincts, it automatically tries to project fulfillment into all kinds of material things, and I constantly have to check myself to see whether something originates from higher spiritual sources or the “rightness” instincts originating from the ape-body. To think I’m in the clear while I still share this animal’s existence would be foolhardy, and it is that very same foolhardiness that I perceive in the Christians, and I must admit I find them annoying. Even St. Paul wouldn’t dare say he’s “saved” before the “end of the race”, and you don’t have that problem? Really? It is one thing to say that God extended his hand towards you, that you recognized and accepted this hand, and that it is that very hand of God that is your salvation, and not any virtue or power of your own, and I would have no issues with that, seeing it as merely a different formulation of my own position. However, it is quite obviously possible for quite a significant number of Christians to use the claim of salvation as an instrument of their own power over others, which they use to satisfy their own chimpanzee instincts and desires. Obviously, there’s more to salvation than accepting Christ as a savior and belonging to “the” Church. You need to actually keep the faith, remain loyal, every moment of your existence, and the pride of salvation is, to me, just a symptom of spiritual apostasy, of fall into animalistic darkness, where “having Christ” becomes a currency of social posturing. This is something to be aware of, because these things don’t just exist in the community of leftists, atheists and others; you don’t just suddenly cease to have these kinds of problems just because you managed to sniff some spiritual substance and decided that’s what you want and need. The entirety of your animal problem is still there and you will have to keep it within the grip of the “structural integrity field” of your spirit until it dies and allows you to leave, and failure to keep a vertical spiritual presence as a dominant force that incarnates in your body will result in the animal part gradually taking parts of control away from the spirit, and it will do its thing.


Watch this first:

There is a serious problem with identifying the leftists as “liberals”. A liberal is someone who minds his own business and does his own thing, and expects others to do so as well, the only limitation to freedom being the point where you infringe upon the freedoms of others. In that sense, I am a liberal. They are not. They are outright fascists. There’s no place for verbal ambiguities there. They have massive overlap with movements like the Khmer Rouge, the Bolseviks, Maoists, Sendero Luminoso, and the NSDAP. The only reason why they don’t actually commit genocide is that they are still in the process of maneuvering into the position of power where they will be able to do so with impunity. I am absolutely convinced of that, because I have historically seen such movements and all of them were outright murderous and genocidal. Calling them “liberal” is such an incredible misnomer, one can only facepalm. They are the exact diametrical opposition to liberalism.

However, to be honest, when I called myself a liberal that was true only to a point, because my personal worldview is nowhere near as relativistic. If I would have to qualify it more precisely, I would say my worldview can be summed up by “do what you think is right, and pay the price”, because I don’t believe there is such a thing as a right to free speech, or that there is free anything, for that matter. If you speak lies, there will be consequences – your consciousness will drift away from reality, and your outward situation will reflect that. Also, if your lies offend people, they might do something about it, which also limits the concept of “freedom” of whatever is it that you want to do. If you speak the truth, there will also be consequences – basically, your consciousness will be more aligned with reality, but you might also offend liars and those who believe in falsehoods; and they, too, might choose to do something about it. The only way to avoid consequences is to live an utterly inconsequential life, but if you think that isn’t a consequence, you are sorely mistaken. In my worldview, you are judged by the harsh light of reality, and that which is of God will share destiny with God, while that which is false and evil will share destiny with nothingness. I always had contempt for the religious zealots who believe they have to kill people because they are the “enemies of God” as they see those things, as if God is powerless to kill his own enemies so they have to help him. That’s incredibly ridiculous. God has ways of dealing with scum. Trying to help God with justice is like trying to push Earth in order to help it spin. God doesn’t need you to help him with implementing justice. You need God in order to be aligned with justice. It’s impossible to be righteous if your consciousness isn’t in God. That’s the fundamental flaw of all those false moralists who are all basically atheists, and who in their conceit think they can be moral without God, and even want to kill everyone who disagrees with their pathetic “moral” views, usually based on “equality”, as the most pathetic of all concepts, because that’s what you come up with when you lack any moral compass whatsoever. So, my “liberal” approach is to tell you that you are free to explore reality and choose whatever path, but God is reality and illusion is deadly, and whatever you do, there will be a price. Offend evil by choosing God, there will be a price. Offend God by choosing evil, there will be a price. Try not to offend anyone and you will be inconsequential trash that will be taken out and recycled in the end.


I was thinking about chaos for quite a while during the last few months, and I talked about it a lot in person with several people, but I never got around to actually writing an article, so it’s about time I remedied that.

When people think about chaos, they usually fall into two groups. The first group imagines chaos in terms of putting a frog into the blender and pressing the “bzzt” button. Basically, you have a frog that’s an orderly organized system, you introduce randomizing force into the system and you get a frog milkshake: a disorderly, chaotic system. It doesn’t improve the frog, in any case. The second group imagines chaos in terms of what Von Clausewitz would call “the fog of war” – you have too many forces interacting, and the slightest variations in the initial conditions can produce vastly different outcomes. An example of such a system is weather, and this is the reason why it’s impossible to make a good weather forecast even with the best computers; the weather is a chaotic system with a very large number of variables, and it would be bad even if it had far less variables.

Based on those two examples, it’s obvious that chaos isn’t seen as a good thing; it’s either a non-intelligent, random application of forces that either kills you or makes a terrible destructive mess, or it clouds your ability to understand complex systems and predict the future. In both cases, order is the opposite of chaos, and is preferable.

In religious philosophy, chaos is usually seen as the opposite of logos, which is an order-inducing, intelligent spiritual force identified with God. In this imagery, chaos is seen as satanic destruction, or a Dionysian force at best, along the lines of drunken debauchery and madness, opposed by the Apollonian force of reason, order and self-possessed approach to life. Again, chaos is seen as a bad thing, and its opposite as a good thing. Similar imagery exists in Hinduism, where Kali is the force of chaos, and Shiva is a force of yoga – control, self-possession and transcendence.

But all of that might merely reflect the human desire for control and predictability in a world that doesn’t necessarily care whether they live or die.

If we step away from the human perspective for a while, and think from a position of self-realization of brahman, we see that I Am beyond name or form. I Am the totality of existence, reality, consciousness and bliss. I Am beyond limitations and duality, in Me there is no up different from down, no left different from right, and light is not defined through contrast with darkness.

In short, God is Chaos. God is the ultimate reality that is unbound by limitation of any kind, the limitless potential that is and can be anything, and this world is its polar opposite – it’s defined through limitations, through rules, through contrast; essentially, the more you have of this world, the more you have obstacles to God, because God is freedom, and freedom doesn’t work well if you have all those rules and limitations in the way. You can try to manifest God in this world by intuitively following a path where God is more present – usually through greater consciousness, reality and loving-kindness, but that is to God what a reflection of the Moon on a clear body of water is to the Moon. When you look at things this way, this world of Order is basically telling God that He can’t be both A and NOT A at once, it’s trying to limit things and impose order in ways that are inherently incompatible with the very nature of God. Suddenly, this no longer looks like a juxtaposition between the Dionysian chaos and the Apollonian order; rather, it looks like a juxtaposition between creative freedom and rule-based fascism, where order is not a good thing. What if the chaos of God doesn’t shred the frog in the blender; what if it shreds your limitations, your inability to get past blaming yourself for your sins in some static frame of mind where you oscillate between fucking up and self-destruction? What if chaos of God allows you to see many apparently contradictory sides of a situation, to see yourself as both the villain and the victim, and simultaneously as the transcendental, higher reality that is within both, and yet untouched by either, except as the eternal witness of space, time, name and form? What if this holy, transcendental chaos is the only thing that can save you from the quagmire of order, from the infernal rules that demand a pound of flesh for transgressions that arise naturally in the environment that is inherently opposed to the nature of God? That’s the other way of looking at Shiva – He is not an Apollonian deity of order, He is the destroyer of limitations in a dance of Chaos, God as the freedom from limitations that make this world appear real to the deluded.

What if the only way to know true freedom is to embrace Chaos in a dance that defies limitation, that defies static principles and ideas, that allows song to become a bird to become light that is beyond, and up and down are meaningless; what if we need to stop thinking in terms of fruit in a bowl on a table, where all three are distinct and separate, and embrace the idea that the entire scene is rendered and exists only as a structure in a computer’s memory, or, to be quite specific, within the mind of God? You can think of things as distinct and separate all you want, but all those distinct and separate things you perceive on your monitor start looking very similar when you inspect your computer’s memory with a hex editor, and yes, up and down are meaningless.

Vajra in the context of siddhi

There are several obvious questions everybody will want to ask after reading the previous article, the most obvious being the omission of initiation into vajra in the definition of stages of spiritual magnitude, and that was actually intentional, because I omitted things that would increase complexity at the point where I wanted to simplify things for the sake of getting the point across. However, it’s quite a big omission, so I’ll get to it now.

First of all, we need to return to the kalapas themselves, to get the basics straight. As I already mentioned, kalapa is the smallest spiritual particle, the smallest manifestation of sat-cit-ananda in the relative. They have inherent intelligence, reality and blissfulness, if you want to simplify it a step further, but that’s already straying from the clarity of definition and introduces linguistic ambiguities. Enlightenment, too, is a misnomer; it is misunderstood and misinterpreted so much, that the word borders on the useless, but let’s for the sake of argument use it to describe a situation where kalapas, the fundamental soul-particles, aggregate in sufficient quantity, and are in such mutual alignment as to not cancel each other out, as they for the most part do in normal human condition, but produce a strong, coherent light, all of the same “frequency” at once, all pointing at the same direction. Patañjali would speak of waveforms that cease to fluctuate and enter a state where complete clarity is possible, and that is certainly a legitimate interpretation of what’s going on, but that’s not the entirety of what is going on, because, to introduce another analogy with physics, when the kalapas are in a coherent state, and when their quantity is sufficiently large, the repulsive forces between them drop exponentially, in a way very similar to what happens in the core of a star, where the hydrogen atoms are compressed so much that this force overcomes the normal repulsive forces between the particles of the same electric charge, or, as a physicist would put it, it overcomes the Coulomb barrier. This results in nuclear fusion of hydrogen into helium, to simplify things greatly again for the sake of intelligibility. This fundamentally and permanently changes the nature of the physical matter, because the helium thus produced in a stellar core remains stable in all conditions, from stellar core to the cold of space and room temperature. Once the critical conditions for a transformation are achieved, the process cannot be reversed by removing the extreme conditions. There are several even more extreme transformative environments that permanently change matter – a supernova explosion, and the pressures inside a neutron star or a black hole – but let’s, for the sake of clarity, just accept that there are special, extreme circumstances that can permanently change matter, and this change is not reversed once those extremes are no longer present, because that is the analogy I want for the situation with kalapas and the process of initiation into vajra. Vajra is, basically, a different form of a spiritual body that is attained by coherence, compression and “fusion” of kalapas into a form of spiritual mass of different “hardness”, higher “reality” and “density”. The existence of vajra doesn’t introduce any fundamentally new concepts – you still have brahman that is sat-cit-ananda, you have kalapas as the smallest energetic manifestations of sat-cit-ananada in the relative, you have spiritual growth by accretion, by aggregation of kalapas into a greater spiritual entity, due to, if we resort to a poetic description, their “realization” that they are “more God” together than individually. This poetic way of putting things is not at all out of place, because you have to remember that those are not inert material particles, they are inherently spiritual, and they actually feel and reason, on a fundamental level, and this feeling and reasoning is stronger when they are bound together, and this increased feeling, reasoning and self-awareness is a coercive force that binds them together in proportion to its strength, and eventually results in threshold-events such as the collapse of repulsive forces and initiation of the whole mass into vajra.

So, if we now return to our initial classification of spiritual progress as levels of siddhi, it will become clear why I had to omit initiation into vajra for the sake of simplicity, because once I mentioned it, I would have to use different language throughout the definition, and it would probably be for the better, because then it would be difficult for stupid people to think they know what I’m talking about, just because they heard similar words before.

A person who had a spiritual experience, a darshan or a samadhi, is still a “level 0”, or not a siddha at all. It’s not an achievement, it’s an experience. When an experience is transformative in a way that you actually make it your own, act from it and change in ways that are “of God”, that changes your spiritual structure on a kalapa-level, puts it into coherence, unites the incoherent waveforms within the mind into a coherent one, and this is how the most underestimated type of yoga, karma yoga, is the only one that actually produces great achievement, because to put a spiritual state in action is to put your entire being in coherence on a high energy level, not leaving parts behind by entering meditation, and this coherence promotes conditions that eventually result in initiation into vajra, which doesn’t take place at some nice round number in my classification of siddhi, but it has to be more than level 1, because that’s the threshold that promotes the necessary preconditions for the transformation. It becomes both simpler and more complicated later on, because let’s say that on level 2, you become a being that is attaining initiation into God-stuff of even higher density and quality than vajra, and you become capable of wielding vajra with the coerciveness similar to that in which a vajra-being can wield astral substance at will, because vajra can coerce astral in a way analogous to the effect of a powerful magnetic field on a cloud of electrically charged particles. So, this nameless God-stuff coerces and wields vajra as if it were nothing, and not the stuff of enlightenment and virtue, so hard that any kind of “love” and “wisdom” a normal human being can imagine are but a wisp of smoke in comparison. This process of initiation and mastery happens somewhere between siddhi levels 2 and 3. Between levels 3 and 4, your core structure progresses in “hardness” and “density” to the power levels where you wield that previously described nameless God-stuff the way you previously learned to wield vajra. Compared to this, anything a religion can perceive as God is a bug hitting a wind shield; not that it takes anything away from the majesty of Gods, but this analogy is necessary to describe the magnitude of what we are talking about here. Any yes, there is a level 4. 🙂

Anything a human, who isn’t a vajra-initiate, can possibly understand, is level 1 siddhi and below. Stuff above level 1 falls into the category of inconceivably powerful, magnificent and terrible beings generically called angels, demigods or gods. Level 2 or above is that absolute terror Arjuna saw in Krishna’s true form, a power that wields death and destruction, time and space, boundless and limitless and void of any human emotion, and Arjuna at that point shits himself and begs Krishna to show him his human form again because this god-stuff is absolutely terrifying, incomprehensible, vast and deadly. God is not love and kindness. God is not your mother. If you saw God you wouldn’t feel the warm fuzzy feeling of a pampered child. You would shit yourself from sheer terror and, unless you are already an excessively pure and holy being of Arjuna’s magnitude, your soul would disintegrate, because coerciveness of darshan would overpower coerciveness of cohesive forces within your soul.

And yes, beings of all four levels of siddhi can be absolutely and completely human, to the point where you can spit, whip and crucify them. If that doesn’t blow your mind, you probably don’t have any to begin with.