I actually had this article on my ToDo list for months, but decided against writing it because I thought it would not be of any use to anyone, but then Robin asked me a question along those lines which obviously means that at least one person would find it useful. Oh well, I might as well write it down so that I don’t have to think about it any further.

The standard theory on how kalapas work assumes aggregation of kalapas from all kinds of sources, mostly from karmic transfers and compassion, and compression into more dense structures, a process which is very similar to what a refrigerator is doing – it compresses gas, which extracts heat from it. The spiritual analogue of heat is chaotic energy of the spiritual particles, and to compress them and remove chaos from them implies suffering, because this chaotic energy needs to be experienced by your soul and released, and here’s where up-stream kriya, the inner space and resonance techniques do their thing. Basically, they give you the tools to deal with this and not die or go crazy from the intensity of spiritual trauma, but the essential mechanism of this release of chaotic disturbance from a mass of kalapas is suffering. During this process, the question of where to get enough kalapas for the process is not something you would normally ask, because, if anything, you get more stuff on your plate than you can safely deal with, and the question is how to survive the process and undergo it safely. Essentially, the question of yogic practice and the preparation for the initiation into vajra is not even something a soul would have if it didn’t have enough “mass” to actually go through it, and at that point it’s the condition of that spiritual mass that is the problem; essentially, you are a chaotic mess and this needs to be “defragmented”, compressed and transformed. So, essentially, the issue of getting enough astral kalapas in order to undergo transformation into vajra never arises, which is why I never talked about it, having literally no reason to, since the number of people who would benefit from such a treatise is zero.

However, there’s the issue of “wielding” spiritual matter. Essentially, you can wield spiritual substance that is of a lower qualitative order than what your soul is made of. This would assume that your soul is more-less coherent, meaning that it doesn’t contain inclusions of lower energies, but let’s for the sake of argument assume a “clean” situation, and we can deal with the exceptions and complications later.

So, let’s assume your soul is made of astral matter. This means you can “wield” prana, or “work with energy” as it is usually called. If you tried to wield astral, that would end badly, because your soul would merge with the astral substance you tried to control and this would fall under the category of karmic transfer at best, if the amount you “touched” was small enough, and in the worst case your soul would lose its integrity and disperse in the larger chunk of astral substance, at which point your spiritual existence would end, at least as you know yourself.

If your soul is made of vajra, however, you can wield astral matter quite safely. You can create astral beings, you can destroy them, you can create complex astral structures, but you can’t wield vajra; basically, you can’t create a vajra object unless you somehow split your soul in two, which is something you would want to avoid at all cost, and I don’t know how that could even be done. However, at some point you evolve enough to be able to wield vajra, which means your soul substance is of an even higher order. Normally, one would be able to wield blue vajra if they attained core-density of Shivaratri, the black vajra, or the black night of Shiva, the black aspect of the “atmic level”, as this is known in some literature. I am pretty sure that the beings who evolved into the other, “white” polarity of the atmic level can also wield blue vajra, since their power level is the same, but different in a male-female way. I’m also not sure that the female Gods actually perceive this as “wielding vajra”, because from their perspective they might just exist on that level and witness blue vajra conform to their will. As I said, it’s similar to a male-female difference, and at that level you will simply recognize what’s natural for you and what feels good, and you’re also not going to be doing the same things the same way in all situations, because creating things of beauty might have different requirements than fighting evil, in a sense that one would strive to attract things to oneself, and the other will concentrate willpower in order to overcome and transform the present state.

So, let’s summarize. In order to wield a substance, you need to be initiated into a qualitative level above it, and by “initiated into” I mean “made of”. However, wielding prana and astral (citta) is pretty easy to imagine, since there’s prana and astral everywhere around us. It’s easy to imagine a compressor pulling in the air from the environment and filling a metal container. However, it’s not like there’s an abundance of vajra-matter floating around so that you can just reach out for it and will it into action, and that’s where we come to the actual point of this article. When you wield a substance, you call it into existence, ex nihilo, or ex brahman, if you will. Those kalapas were not there previously, because if so you’d have to do a karmic transfer/purification to integrate them and conform them to your will, which is a different process, one you would go through in order to grow your soul. No; if you wanted to wield vajra, vajra would manifest from the creative potential of God, which you tapped into. Basically, aspects of the Absolute would manifest in the Relative, existing at the energetic level you are able to invoke and wield.

This, of course, implies that in order to wield Shivaratri, or the white equivalent of the Goddess, you need to be made of a substance at least one qualitative level higher.

I don’t know if I can even describe what the order of magnitude of these things is, since there are no human words for any of this; I’m basically making up the language and ideas as I go. However, imagine a very big cloud of gas. That’s citta, the astral substance. Now imagine it compressed to the point where the nuclei of the gas particles touch, and the protons beta-decay into neutrons, and the entire star of normal matter is compressed into an object few meters across made of “neutronium”, where the stuff itself is actually a giant vortex of quark-gluon plasma, essentially one big neutron, only made of many quarks and gluons, and not just neutrons tightly packed together. Let’s say this is a good analogue for vajra; blue vajra specifically. That thing is already unimaginably dense and powerful, like liquid lightning with the density so great that lead and gold feel like gas in comparison, and so hard that diamond feels like air. Now imagine millions of such neutron stars compressed into a huge supermassive galactic black hole, where you need a lot of blue vajra to get even a tiny particle of Shivaratri. OK, now imagine “that something” which wields Shivaratri like it’s smoke.

Yeah. It’s not something that relates to the practical experience of many beings, which is why this is probably the most useless article I ever wrote.


Yesterday I had a reason to think about some of the presuppositions of Satanic ideology, namely Thelema (the Will). Essentially, they idolise the Will as if it were some kind of a cornerstone thing, not realising what smarter religions do instantly: that Will is merely the first derivative of one’s nature. The Buddhists would say that one’s Will, defined as a general force behind one’s desires, will be a vector sum of all the energetic momenta that make up his soul. Translated to English, after the different things that fight for supremacy within your soul cancel each other out, if there’s any of the momentum of force remaining, it will be directed at something, and you can call this remainder Will, if you like, and this vector always powers Samsara, investing energy into one’s further bondage. The Hindus would say that your Will is conditioned by both your past karma and the disorderly state of your mind, making your will essentially a result of your conditioning and limitations. This is why only God and liberated souls have free Will, while others are merely oxen bound to the plough of the forces that enslave and condition them. The Christians state this in a less analytical way, but with the same purport: a human soul is conditioned by both sin and the nature of the body, which condition the direction and quality of its will. Without God’s grace, or as they would say, without Holy Spirit, a human soul is destined to wallow in the mud of the world, being motivated by pain of existence to commit sin, which then causes further pain of existence, motivating it to further sin, until death, and without redemption such sinful soul falls into hell, which was originally meant as Gehena, which was a name of a pit outside Jerusalem where the Hebrews threw corpses of diseased cattle and other trash to rot – essentially meaning an endpoint of total destruction, death without a future or afterlife. So, essentially, what the Christians are saying is that unless the light of God is lit within one’s soul, his inner darkness and depravity will cause him to think the thoughts and do the deeds of further darkness and depravity, his nature bound in a vicious circle that ends in his doom.

So, what do I think, which of those three is right? I think they all are. All of them formulate the problem correctly, with various degrees of poeticism or mathematical exactness, where Buddhism looks like someone applied mathematical analysis to the problem, where you can literally work with vectors, matrices, function derivatives and so on, and use them to explain things, which has both advantages and disadvantages. The advantage is the analytical clarity that is not clouded by emotionality, and the disadvantage is that it’s easy to forget that the fundamental vector elements it’s explaining are emotional momenta of all kinds, and while this abstract interpretation is useful to an expert, a beginner who is completely bound into this snare of unclear emotions will hardly benefit from it, which makes the Hindu model more useful, and the Christian one more useful still, if you want to explain things to a complete beginner who might not care for the analytical exactness, and just wants to understand his problem and solve it. Unlike the foolish Satanists who say that this is your life, this is your Will and you need to live your life and impose your Will upon the world, in which others are either tools or obstacles, the Christianity makes a very radical statement: you are dead, rather than alive. What you see as your life and Will are merely death-throes of an empty, godless existence. Since everything that motivates your Will is either ignorance or suffering, everything you do will just shovel manure on the shitpile that is your life. The only way to get out of this doomed position is to stop trying to save yourself and impose yourself upon the world, but instead recognise your worthlessness and helplessness and reach out to God, who is the true Life, and the true Meaning, or Logos in Greek. Rather than wallow in darkness or curse it, one is saved by accepting light and meaning of God into their life, and only at this point can you truly see the darkness that was your former life; if there’s no light in your life, you can’t understand you’re in darkness, because darkness is all you know; it’s “normal”. Only after the light appears can you understand your former darkness in contrast. So, essentially, Buddhism explains things as they actually work, and Christianity explains things as they feel. Both are perfectly valid and accurate.

The further issue I have with Satanism is that it’s teenage rebellion against parental and societal authority that’s somehow codified into ideology. It’s basically a scream of a frustrated teenager who discovered that he is a person and wants to live his own life, and not be defined by external authorities. What this fails to understand is, of course, that this is not a valid model for interpreting the human condition. You are not an inherently free being that is being bound by external forces. You are an inherently conditioned being, bound by your past karma multiplied by your ignorance, and in this quagmire that defines your soul, the more energetically you move to free yourself, the deeper you sink. You are not a free being surrounded by things that limit you. You are a conditioned, ignorant and sinful being, surrounded by others of your kind, each wallowing in the mud of your inner depravity, interacting in selfish and sinful ways and causing each other further suffering and ignorance. So, basically, as much as others limit you and contribute to your suffering, you likely do the same to them, and this creates the collective mess of sin and depravity with very little redeeming light, if any.

So, the way out of this predicament is not found through attempts of emancipation or self-assertion, since that’s what everybody tries and invariably fails at, because you can’t pull yourself out of the mud by your hair. No; your salvation is not in your hands. Your salvation is possible only by identifying what light it is possible for you to perceive in your darkness, grasp at it and give it preference over whatever you think you are and over whatever you think is your Will and desires. As you feel the light and allow it to heal you, the fractures in your soul will heal, and its nature will improve, having been healed by the light of God. Your thoughts and emotions will then be more of the nature of God’s light, than of the darkness that preceded it, and, paradoxically, as you surrender your Will to God, your Will becomes more free, as conditioning upon it is removed; it’s a paradox, but the path of self-assertion and emancipation only strengthens the chains that bind you; as you let go of self, you gain insight, freedom and power, because you understand that “self” is not your miserable darkness, “self” is what you find only in God’s presence, in the light of truth, when you understand that emancipation of true self comes not from a struggle against Other, but through release from the bondage of spiritual darkness and depravity that defined your miserable existence.

So, no, you’re not a spark of light in the darkness of the world, where God is a limiting force that tries to make you conform to expectations, where you heroically rebel against bla bla bla. Nonsense. You’re a fool, ignorant and depraved, weak and cowardly, and God is the light you reject, and since this light is the necessary prerequisite of courage, heroism and virtue, you possess neither. God is not that one great being that wants to keep you small, as Satanist fools assume. No, God is the Force that can make you a Jedi. God is that greatness that makes all that embrace it great. Without God, there is nought but depravity and darkness.

So, no, Satanism isn’t a struggle of light against darkness, it’s a struggle of darkness against fictions of its own foolishness and delusion. It’s a struggle of darkness that sees the light as a terrible beast that threatens its existence and wants to dispel it, to which I say, good. Die, then, so that truth and virtue may be born.


In one of my previous articles I wrote something that started bothering me the moment I wrote it, and it still does.

It was the statement that, essentially, Putin is on God’s side. It was meant as a simplification, but I feel it is so inherently false I cannot justify it. I succumbed to an obvious fallacy, whereby if one side is obviously satanic and villainous, as America and the vassal West obviously are, and the other side is apparently virtuous, as Russia is, the virtuous side must have some connection to God, or at least in some way strive towards God. I don’t see that. It’s a fallacy to assume that if one side is evil, their enemy must have transcendental inclinations. What I see in Putin is a desire to restore the good parts of the past, and use them as a foundation for building a better future. If anything, he sees God in a materialistic way, as something that is good for the society, in service of a new and better Russia, but wanting to benefit from God is very far from being in service of God.

Neither Russia nor China are anything more than “normal countries”, in a sense that they are not infected by whatever mental illness it is that is devouring the West. Even that might be an overstatement, having in mind the similarities in totalitarian response to the American bioweapon, and Russian reluctance to divest itself from the Western fiat monetary system.

So, while I might cheer for them when they oppose a clear evil, thinking we are on the same side would be deluding myself. Both worldly sides are much more similar to each other than they are to me. They both see their future in this world and in worldly terms, while I see my future only in the context of God, and I barely hold on to this world as it is. Stating that Putin is on God’s side just because I cheer for him in his fight against the obvious evil of America, was obviously a mistake, and I renounce it.


I was thinking about the concept of persistence in spirituality, and this might actually be a more layered and important issue than anyone thinks.

You see, I was thinking about my mistakes, about why I made them, whether they were “unforced” or not, to use the tennis analogy, about what I could have done better, how I handled the fallout, and what’s the reason why I could essentially walk away without so much as missing a step.

The reason why I could “fail gracefully”, to use a programming analogy, is because I think like a scientist, which means that I understand that failure is always an option. Once you think you can’t possibly be wrong and all that is needed is persistence and diligence and the attainment of perfection is guaranteed, you are either an omnipotent and omniscient God, or a stupid cultist.

I was a zealot and a fanatic, but I was never a stupid cultist. The difference is, I was absolutely dedicated to attaining the ultimate goal, but I knew better than to assume I know what that ultimate goal is, which is why I could fail an arbitrary number of times and not lose a step – you see, my assumption was that I am lost, in the dark, with everything stacked against me, that everything I know about transcendental realities is based on very powerful experiences that were short, translated very poorly into concepts that can be intellectually processed by the human brain, that all the theory I had to work with is merely someone else’s attempt at making an intellectual system out of something his brain was as poorly suited for interpreting as mine, and even when I discovered mechanisms that work repeatedly and reliably and could be made into “spiritual technology”, I could hardly even attempt to explain the actual theory, the way scientists can tell you everything about how gravity works, but they know nothing about what gravity actually is, and how mass actually bends spacetime.

Sure, I always had some kind of a theory about how things work, what’s going on and where I seem to be heading, but I knew it was a theory; or a working hypothesis, to use scientific terms. You need to have some kind of a roadmap in your brain, and if you don’t, your brain will basically refuse to cooperate. However, the way my personal roadmap works is that I absolutely need to know what my next step needs to be. I need to know what to do at the next intersection. This is where my roadmap works the best. As things get less immediate, I care less about knowing details in any kind of a resolution. I don’t care about things some religious people seem to fuss over – how many wings and eyes does some type of angel have, does God have a throne, and similar nonsense. No, I understand that physical brain has limitations, and interpolating nonsense and pretending it’s resolution doesn’t contribute anything to the probability of actual spiritual achievement and success. What I need to know is whether meditation needs to be separate from all other activities or do I have to extend meditation into daily activities and basically make it the underlying state in everything I do. The latter; good, spend years perfecting that.

That’s why I am annoyed when some supposed Buddhists talk about renouncing Nirvana at the very beginning of their path, as if it were possible for a beginner to even know what Nirvana is and what it feels like, and as if it made any sense to accept or renounce something that might be the ultimate goal, from a position where you can’t even know anything for certain about realities three steps away from your current position.

That’s where we come to the issue of persistence. You can’t know whether persistence on your current path is good or bad if you don’t know your ultimate destination, because you’re in the process of learning. Yes, you are currently moving South, but you don’t know whether South is your ultimate destination, or merely a direction of the next important junction, where you will need to re-evaluate your entire situation because you learned something new and important. Essentially, your entire theory is good if it brings you to your first transcendental experience. Then you will know much more about higher realities, you will have something practical to check your theory with, and you will have fresh understanding that will make possible for you to learn new skills and acquire new abilities, making you into a whole new kind of being that can now understand things your previous version couldn’t even comprehend. When I think about this, I remember myself and other kids in the fourth grade trying to imagine what mathematics in higher education looks like, and all we could imagine was working the same basic operations but with bigger numbers. It turned out that bigger numbers were never a thing, and I learned something about expectations based on experience. Basically, what you need to worry about is the general trajectory, and doing the immediate next step properly, not the ultimate goal, not remaining faithful to the religion you started with. The idea that a religion will take care of you from beginning to end is incredibly naive; you will eventually experience something that will make your religion seem naive and superficial, and you will then either switch to something that explains your new experience better, or simply carve your own path into solid rock, if nothing else works. Sometimes there are no paved paths because you’re on your own, doing something nobody else did before, because that’s the trick with Creation – to believe that God created souls only so that they could all end up in the same place, or at least sorted in several known boxes, is to believe that the whole thing is essentially pointless. Also, since there’s a risk of failure, the reward for success must be something much greater than what you had in the beginning, or it would just not be worth it.

You can now say that making sure that the next step is on a generally positive trajectory is, in a sense that it leads to God, is paramount. Honestly, you’d have to be God in order to know what is on a generally positive trajectory. I’d rather trust God to guide my next step than try to figure out whether a negative present slope of the curve means I’m doing something wrong, or do I need to climb down a smaller mountain top before climbing a taller one, because I learned long ago that being in the driver’s seat while blind, drunk and not knowing how to drive is not the best thing, and in most cases having control over your situation just gives you enough rope to hang yourself. It is much better to just trust God with choosing the path, and take care of the immediate things that you can actually do well if you apply yourself to it.

So, yes, do the immediate next step like your ultimate destiny depends on it, and with absolute dedication and diligence. Also, understand that you’re not a train, you’re a leaf in the wind, and act accordingly – learn what God is trying to teach you and go where He leads you. Don’t be persistent, consistent or right. It’s not about being right, or about always maintaining the upward trajectory, because you’re not in a position to know. You’re in a position to keep your mind on God, and figure out how to make that next step so that you can still keep your mind on God. If you keep your mind on God and focus only on what you need to do, God is your ultimate trajectory. If you try to figure out the path, the trajectory and the ultimate goal, the illusory forces of this world control your path and your outcome. Basically, if you try to be in control of your path, you are ceding control to Satan, and the ego trip of being in control of your situation claims another sucker.

God’s terms

There’s another thing I thought of while writing the previous article, but I decided to separate it into another article due to its importance.

You see, spiritual experience usually begins on your own terms; your limitations, preconceptions and general qualities determine how you will allow God to approach you and be perceived. You are a set of hurdles God needs to jump over in order to be experienced, and what you will experience is going to be primarily determined by you – your limitations, your ability to conceptualise spirituality and God, and so on. You will approach God as Jesus, or heavenly Father, or Mother, or your friend. Your human condition determines almost the entirety of the “interface”; everything is taking place on “your ground” and on “your terms”.

However, if you are to make spiritual progress beyond this initial phase, you must transcend your human conditioning and meet God progressively on his terms. This is when things get very hard to describe in terms that will mean anything to humans, which is why I don’t even try, instead choosing to put everything in terms very much resembling a fairy tale – something that’s of course not true or real, but conveys a message that is very much real, and I would rather be understood than formally accurate.

What does it mean to meet something on its own terms? It means to feel the spiritual state of a tree the way the tree itself perceives existence. It means to feel another being the way this being perceives from within itself. It means perceiving a spiritual being’s inner consciousness and position, and understanding how it exists, and what it is in itself. It means not drawing Sun with a smile because it makes you feel happy, like children do, and not thinking God is love because God’s presence makes you feel loved.

You start from your human condition and limitations, but if you fail to transcend it, it’s not a journey. It’s stagnation on square one. If you keep forcing God to meet you on your terms, and fail to transcend yourself and your conditioning in order to start meeting God progressively more on his terms, what are you even accomplishing?