Category Archives: religion

Karma

Posted on by
12

There are two kinds of karmic retribution.

The first kind is intrinsic. Every choice has consequences. Choices of kindness, love, beauty, creativity, reality and consciousness have a harmonizing effect on the spiritual body. They make the spiritual substance coherent, regular, organized and compact. Every kind of spiritual understanding, the kind that is relevant and meaningful, removes gaps and lower-energy inclusions from the spiritual body. Every sin creates fractures and reduces specific energy of segments that are involved in the decision. Sufficient amount of weakening can result in fragmentation of the entire structure and, after the end of physical continuity, independent reincarnation of the fragments. There is only one worse form of spiritual degradation, and that is loss of inner cohesion of the soul to the point of complete disintegration, where none of the resulting fragments is capable of forming a consciousness. This is the final, true death of the soul, which is possible only if a soul violates the fundamental principles that made its existence possible in the first place.

This first kind is mostly unknown outside the expert circles; the advanced practitioners of yoga and vipassana know of it, because both the inner-space kriya of the Kundalini-yoga-sadhana and vipassana work at reconstruction of the soul-substance with intelligent effort, with the goal of transforming the soul into something of a much higher order. Outside of those circles, the inner workings of karma on soul-structure are mostly unknown, and soul is wrongly considered to be a constant and unchangeable entity surrounded by a layer of past karma. This is the second kind of karma, and it is both easier and more difficult to understand.

It’s easier to understand because everybody and their dog talk about it. It’s more difficult to understand because everyone and their dog are wrong, but something along those lines still exists. It doesn’t exist as an outside layer of karmic filth that needs to be worked out. It doesn’t exist as a page in God’s book of one’s past deeds. It does exist, however, although the actual mechanics are a bit difficult to understand without an analogy.

You see, your existence as a soul rests upon certain foundations. One of those foundations is your relationship with sat-cit-ananda, with brahman. The second foundation is the relationship between individual kalapas, the spiritual particles that make your soul. If the particles “love” each other, there is cohesion between them; the attractive forces prevail. If they “hate” each other, if they are in intrinsic conflict because of some action that cannot be internally reconciled, the repulsive forces prevail and the substance fractures. Also, if inclusions form within the substance that are of significantly lower energy than the rest of the material, it behaves like a strong rock with weak inclusions, or bricks connected with weak adhesive. It’s not that it necessarily falls apart, but the total structural integrity of the soul is weaker than its maximum potential. In order for the maximum potential of the soul to be realized, the weak inclusions need to be transformed, and that is accomplished by attaining higher understanding that removes spiritual weakness.

The extrinsic karma might actually be God’s reaction to your form of existence, but it’s more formal and mathematical than that. It’s as if we compress coiled springs with our actions, and they are released when the entire span of consequences of our actions is completed. Let’s say you promised to meet someone at 4 PM. If you lied and never had an intention of meeting him, this already influences your soul, but has no extrinsic consequences. You can also change your mind, and as long as it is possible for you to do so and fulfill your promise, the act isn’t final. However, when the window of opportunity passes, the act is final and the effect on your soul is complete. You suffered an intrinsic karmic reaction. The extrinsic karmic reaction is a more complex one, and I’m not actually sure how it all works, I only know what it does. The effect your actions had on other souls are important. It’s not just about you and your relationship to yourself; others matter. When you harm someone he gets a claim on you, your natural spiritual protections are weakened towards that person, and that person can hurt you, can basically influence your spiritual fate to a degree to which the harm you inflicted upon that person was serious and intentional. As you influence the world around you, you incur debts as well as obligations. Debts are usually repaid with pain, and obligations with kindness. You don’t live in a vacuum. Your actions that concern others can leave you in debt, and therefore at someone’s mercy. This can occasionally become so important, that your relationship with yourself and God becomes secondary; if you harmed others gravely and maliciously, they can completely determine your destiny. People think that murder is the worst kind of crime or a karmic offense, but that is not so; there are worse, more damaging things. Personal betrayals result in grave debts. Offending a worthy person is usually such a bad spiritual crime, that even one such action can completely doom you, unless you recanted and made reparations, and those reparations were accepted. Also, torture, defined as intentional malicious use of the limitations that physical plane inflicts upon a soul, in order to maximize suffering of the soul, is a much worse offense than murder, and the punishments are grave. The same goes for rape, defined as using physical limitations imposed upon a soul to inflict sexual humiliation and involuntary submission. In any case where you use the opportunities, presented by the limitations imposed by physical incarnation, to harm, humiliate, offend, restrict or deceive a soul, instead of spreading knowledge and joy and truth, and acting with kindness in order to ease the pain of others and point them towards the light of God, every time you choose darkness over light, you increase the power of darkness over yourself, you reduce the ability of light to save you, and you give yourself into the power of your victims, to do with you as they see fit.

The problem with this aspect of karma is that it’s automatic, it’s stupid, it doesn’t recognize complexity and sophistication of actions. You suffer a karmic backlash even for the pain inflicted with the purpose of doing good and helping. You do, however, obtain a karmic benefit for doing the good that you intended. As I said, it’s stupid, it’s automatic, and good intentions don’t justify harm. There are no excuses, there are no exceptions, and the rules are universal. It works on you regardless of whether you’re a God or an ordinary soul. This stupid aspect of karma is dangerous as hell and you don’t want to fuck with it. I know quite well how it works since I had to suffer severe karmic backlashes in the process of helping some people in the only way that I knew would work, and regardless of how thankful they were when it worked. I still had to take a serious karmic blow. There’s no amnesty, no forgiveness, no mercy, nothing. It’s as automatic as gravity. It doesn’t think, it doesn’t judge, it doesn’t deliberate. It’s a formula that works, always, without exceptions, on anyone.

You can fuck with it if you’re suicidal enough, though. I know of a spiritual entity who did just that. You see, there are tricks for postponing reactive karma of this kind, and I’m not about to teach you those, and as a warning, the only person who tried this kind of a dance was very successful; he kept it going for millennia, and slipped only once. The backlash was swift, immediate and deadly and he no longer exists as a spiritual entity, the backlash completely extinguished his spiritual continuity and ability to form consciousness. He was powerful to the point of calling himself immortal and eternal, he committed unspeakable acts against innumerable souls and he thought he was untouchable, and yet it was a fraction of a second between a slip and final death for him. I watched. It took me quite a while to be able to believe he’s actually gone.

So, be kind to other beings, and don’t think you can ever justify harsh actions. Nobody is listening to your justifications, the punishment is administered automatically and without appeal. Every time I had to resort to harshness I was aware that there would be a price for me to pay, and I went into it with full awareness of the consequences and with my entire skill. Every bad thought has a price, every harsh word has a price, every evil deed has a price, and there is no way to weasel out, there is no forgiveness, there is no consideration of intent. It simply doesn’t care, and it doesn’t care whether you knew about it or not. It’s like jumping out of a window. Gravity works and the impact hurts you regardless of your motives for jumping, and regardless of your understanding of gravity. Intrinsic karma is a bitch, but it’s a bitch with brains. Extrinsic karma is a sledge hammer. It’s pure momentum, unthinking, inevitable, merciless. Never, ever fuck with it. God might forgive you but karma will crush you regardless, and if you think you can justify your acts before God, you’re barking at the wrong tree, because God can’t really forgive you. If He forgave you, karma would crush Him instantly. Why do you think Jesus had to suffer and die on the cross if God is above karma? If God was above karma He could wave his finger and forgive everyone. No, he had to have flesh stripped off his bones with whips and he had to die humiliated and ridiculed, powerless, in order to produce significant but limited karmic effect. That’s the problem with karma: in order to forgive someone you need to pay his debts. It’s not some touchy-feely bullshit where you forgive your enemies and everybody is happy and hugs trees. No, if you forgive your enemies you get to be crucified for their sins, while they laugh at you and spit at you and enjoy your apparent demise.

Don’t fuck with karma. Not if you don’t know what you’re doing, and especially if you think you do.

Why walk when you can teleport?

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been watching Youtube videos with people restoring old computers to full functionality and using outdated equipment to perform tasks, and it’s been bothering me for non-obvious reasons, and I was thinking why that is.

Why use a i7-6700K when a Q8200 will do? Why use a modern smartphone when a 5 year old device will do?

It will do exactly what? Just now, I took an old netbook from my “outdated shit bin”, installed a modern version of Linux on it together with all essential apps in order to test whether it will “do”. The touchpad is shit, the display is shit, it is slow and although it does perform basic functions, like writing documents, answering mail, watching videos and playing music, it does everything poorly and with delays. So yes, it will “do” if you can’t afford a modern well made device, but if you can, by all means do because it’s worth it. Elimination of all those delays and nagging flaws has a very liberating psychological effect akin to removing painfully tight clothes or shoes; you don’t know how much it was bothering you until it stops. So one thing that was bothering me with the concept of reusing outdated equipment was the concept of deliberately putting up with bad things that can be avoided simple because you rationalized the good thing as “too expensive to be worth it”. It’s too expensive to be worth it if it gives you no actual benefit (like a gold-plated phone), but this excuse seems to be overused in order to rationalize not being able to afford things that are quantifiably better. I’m often not able to afford things, but I try not to resort to a “sour grapes” excuse. Instead I usually say something like “yes, x would be better but I can’t afford it so I use y, which is cheaper, not so good but I can get the basic functionality out of it”.

The other concept that’s bothering me is that I can recognize some urge to use minimalistic tools, the worst possible stuff that still gets the job done, in order to avoid the trap of the law of diminished returns that always rears its ugly head when you try to use the best possible tools to do the job. That makes sense when you just need a good hammer, not the best hammer in the world, because you occasionally need to hammer some nails, not do it all day, every day, for a whole year. But the problem with this is that when you try to buy the least expensive tools, they occasionally fail, and they always fail when you need them. Even if they don’t fail, they usually do a shitty job. I have a pair of cheap water pump pliers that keep slipping and performing poorly, and I never get to actually replace them because the good ones are more expensive and I’m not sure they will perform better. But I use those twice a year on average so it’s not a big deal, it’s just evidence that there indeed are bad tools and that being cheap can bite you.

There’s more, of course. There’s also a question of “why try to be rich when you can do everything with less money”, as a rationalization for staying poor. There is a limit, of course, where additional money doesn’t really get you any additional real quality of life, because you simply run out of useful things to buy. This amount of money, however, is huge; it’s probably in a billion-dollar range, and even in the open-ended range you can use the money to influence the entire civilization, by financing things that would otherwise make no economical sense, like spaceflight or pure science.

It comes down to “why would you need a car when you have your feet”, or “why would you need a forklift when you have your arms”, and, essentially, to “why do you need power”.

You need power because being limitless is better than being limited, because being powerful is better than being powerless, being great is better than being small, and a wonderful thing is better than a shitty thing, although a shitty thing is often better than nothing at all.

People love fast cars not because they couldn’t do everything with a slower and cheaper vehicle, but because a fast car gives you the feeling of unrestrained freedom that reminds you of the state in which you existed before you were born in this limiting existence. People love power because it reminds them of freedom and the joy of not being restrained in everything you attempt. That’s why settling for the inferior things disturbs me – because it looks like giving up on ever being able to see God again, and be free and unrestrained and powerful. It looks like the final acceptance of defeat. Of course, things will not give you that which you lost, but once you start giving up on greatness, you might actually mindscrew yourself into ultimate spiritual failure.

About death and meaning

Posted on by
Reply

For materialistic and godless people, the entirety of ethics seems to revolve around avoiding death and discomfort. The magnitude of evil is defined by the body count. The magnitude of goodness is defined by the number of live bodies added or preserved.

Death is so feared, as the ultimate evil and the ultimate foe, that old and mortally ill people are not allowed to die, and their meaningless agony is prolonged to the extents previously unimaginable, just because the living are unable to cope with the inevitability of their passing.

Death is so feared, that NDE reports are summarily ignored and swept under the rug, because they disagree with the common, materialistic perceptions about death and, even more importantly, the meaning of life.

Even the Catholic Church, which is usually the island of sanity and reason in the vast ocean of madness, has since the Second Vatican council adopted the ridiculous position that life is the supreme virtue. If so, is then nothing more important in life than staying alive? Is there absolutely nothing worth dying for, except, of course, keeping a greater number of people alive? What about truth, holiness, faith? What about eternity? Are we not advised to abandon this life for the sake of eternal life, and are we not warned that whomever attempts to save his life, will lose it? Is birth control really the most important issue for us to deal with, or should we let the dead bury their dead, while we reach for the life eternal?

Is the “right to live” really more important than the duty to love God, and man in whom we see God?

If death is indeed the enemy, why then does Paul greet it as the end of the race, where winners are to be proclaimed and prize is to be won?

If life is indeed the supreme value, why then did Jesus submit himself to the will of God and willingly choose suffering and death, on the narrow path?

If we are indeed to fear death as the prince of all evils, have we not already lost the battle for the meaning of life?

And if life has no meaning, why does it have value, and why is it virtuous to preserve it?

Power corrupts. Really?

Posted on by
Reply

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

What incredible crock of shit.

Let’s define power, first. Power is the opposite of impotence. Power is to have options, to be able to choose what to do, instead of having your life pre-determined by demands of mere survival. Power is the ability to know, to be aware of the nature and the scope of the world, instead of living a life of ignorance and being limited by some village. Power is the ability to do what you want, the ability to express your wishes and your nature.

If someone seems to have become corrupt because of power, that’s most likely an illusion. He was corrupt to begin with, and power merely allowed him to make choices that showed his pre-existing corruption. If anything, poverty corrupts. It is my experience that the poor people have the worst character and nature; they are usually impolite, vicious, envious, spiteful and evil. They are quick to hate and slow to kindness. If you walk through a rich neighborhood, you can feel safe, but if you walk through a poor neighborhood, you are right to feel afraid for your safety, because poor people are more likely to be evil, they are the ones who will rob you, rape you or murder you. If power corrupts, how do you explain that? If anything, power improves people, because if you are powerful, you will feel worthy and important, and you will automatically see others as worthy and important. You will be more likely to be kind and considerate to others. Poor people usually think they are worthless, and they treat everybody as worthless.

There is a reason why rich people tend to keep to themselves: it’s because everybody else tries to take advantage of them, rob them, deceive them, treat them with dishonesty in order to incur some favour, or, more subtly, join powers against them in order to change society in such a way as to defraud the wealthy of their wealth. In a universal-suffrage democracy it is done by electing demagogues who promise to increase taxation of the rich, and give the money to the poor. The wealthy people instinctively understand such conspiracies against them and they will of course attempt to protect themselves in any way they can, and the logical way is to associate only with people of similar social status, who are not likely to treat them badly. If you don’t think poor people are that bad, try winning a lottery and see how the people around you will treat you. You are suddenly prey, you are worse than an animal, you are someone to be manipulated and defrauded, and your only options will be either to be a victim or to protect yourself and change the company you keep, and if you choose the latter, those who wanted to rob you will say that you “changed”, that wealth “corrupted you”. No, it didn’t corrupt you, it opened your eyes to the true nature and character of people, who are mostly predators and scum, and once you gain some wealth they will stop seeing you as a person, they will see you as resources, the same way a butcher sees a cow. He actually loves the cow, because he makes his entire living out of it. He doesn’t see his attitude as hating the cow. The cow, however, might disagree.

This, of course, doesn’t apply only to human society. In spiritual worlds, power to do things is directly correlated with someone’s spiritual value; the higher a being, the greater the power. I have seen the Gods, and they are both immensely powerful and immensely holy, to the point where I would be hard pressed to tell the difference between the two. This power is the degree of participation in God’s nature, the degree of possession of the qualities of brahman, which is sat-cit-ananda. It’s not merely the power to do things, it’s literally the strength of God’s light that makes one’s soul, the degree of “hardness” and sophistication of that light, and, as a result, the power over lesser beings whose light is dimmer and whose spiritual value is less. It is the power to know the truth and the authority to pass true judgement, that is of God. Essentially, it’s the difference between Jesus and some generic human. Not only that the true power doesn’t corrupt, the true power is purity and wisdom and knowledge and love and strength of character. True power is indeed true holiness, and if you know a person of holy character, rest assured that this person is powerful among the spiritual beings.

I often see conspiracy theorists who slander and malign the “elites”, and I wonder, are those people so stupid as to be unaware of the meaning of the word, or are they so envious and evil that they want nothing but destroy all who are better than they? Elites, by definition, are those who are better. It’s people who are two or three standard deviations better than the general population, the “one percent”. That “one percent” is portrayed as the essence of all that is evil in mankind, but if you take a closer look, it’s the people who employ others, who pay the most taxes, the artists, intellectuals, inventors, the people who make all the difference and create all that is good in this world. Poor people will use Facebook, Twitter and iPhone to malign the “one percent”, the very one percent that invented Facebook, Twitter and iPhone, that invented the Internet, that invented electricity, that invented radio, that invented satellites, that invented medicine and science and technology, that created their job so that they can have resources in order to live. The “elites” don’t conspire to enslave you or destroy you, as the conspiracy idiots dream in their sick brains. The elites have better things to do – they make sure that you have electricity, water, communications, they make sure that you can buy smartphones and computers, software and services, and the ones who make the things that are of most use to most people are the most powerful among the “elites”, and they get more power to do more good things, so that fuckwits of the lowest order could slander them and malign them out of jealousy and spite, while they are benefactors to millions of people.

While the “elites” dream of inventing and manufacturing even greater things for the greatest benefit to the world, the “99%” are busy dreaming of ways in which to rob the “1%”. Honestly, it seems that wealth and power indeed corrupt, but they corrupt the poor and the powerless, who become corrupted with their envy, jealousy, malice and spite towards the powerful, and it all reminds me so clearly of the feelings that I saw demonic souls projecting towards God. If anything, the poor people in their envy and malice mirror Satan’s hatred of God and his angels, and their ideas about possible improvements to the world are also quite similar. The devils also think that world would be a better place if God and his angels didn’t exist, and they mock saints and try to portray them in the most negative possible light. I think it’s the same feeling, the same spiritual emptiness that is wretched and wants to grind all that is good and worthy to dust and to shit on it before it dies in its own misery.

If power corrupts, what, then, is God?

Does God exist?

Posted on by
4

When people ask “does God exist”, my initial reaction is to roll my eyes. Does what exist, exactly?

What they really ask is “does my concept of God, based on this or that religious scripture, describe reality accurately?” Even atheists base their ideas about God on some religious scripture, so it’s always about that.

My response to that is layered. First of all, if I had nothing but religious scriptures as evidence on which I were to base my assessment of God’s existence, I would be an atheist. Old scriptures are really a very weak and tenuous reason for such a huge leap of faith, and without some direct and personal reason for believing in God, I would find it all lacking. The thing is, St. Augustine had the same situation. He knew about the Bible, he spoke with the priests, and he found it all insufficient for making the leap of faith. It was a combination of events in his personal life, where he felt God’s guiding influence, and gradual comparative understanding of both Manichaeism and Christianity, and eventually it clicked. So, it’s not about the scripture alone; you need to have valid personal reasons to believe that what was described there has a basis in reality. Only when you feel God’s influence in your own life can you have valid reasons to believe that something like that inspired the scriptures; otherwise, it might as well be pure fiction, and to base your life on a work of fiction is not the brightest idea.

Also, there must be corroborating evidence and witnesses. There must be other people who had similar experiences, because if that is missing, you might be crazy. But if several pieces of the puzzle fit, the picture starts to emerge and then you can say that you have sufficient evidence to make a leap of faith and say that “something” exists up there, and religion is the only thing that even attempts to make sense out of it, so you might as well go from there.

Unfortunately, this is how people become religious fanatics. They start by having good evidence that there is a transcendental, spiritual, benevolent force that influences their lives, and they make a huge leap from there into “certain knowledge” about Adam, Eve, Noah and similar mythology, and since it’s now all faith, it is usually cemented into a place that is not subject to any further inquiry or revision, and that’s actually sad. Religion is supposed to be an aid to spiritual growth, but instead it often becomes a rut in which one gets stuck and loses his way. Religious people who became religious because they had some kind of a spiritual experience forget that it’s not religion that brought them to God, because they had God before they came to religion. God was here first. God is therefore not some distant and vague goal for them, He is a presence in their personal lives, and religion might actually stand in the way of knowing God better. Because, what is to say that authors of the scripture got it right, that they got it better than you could with a bit more experience? And when you take a look at various “spiritual people”, they all copy each other’s bullshit, because they don’t verify ideas, and when someone comes up with one, the others adopt it and it becomes a meme that is actually never verified, it’s never put to a trial and tested, because everybody is afraid to do so because what would other spiritual people say?

That’s why I’m probably the only one with original ideas, because I don’t give a fuck about being spiritual or about what spiritual people will say. I’m not in it for their opinion, I’m in it because I wanted to figure things out. I want to know what is actually true, how things actually work. I don’t want to settle with something “everybody knows”, because “everybody” is usually an idiot. I wanted to learn the truth about God from God, not from some scripture. And I learned very quickly that God will actually respond, once you think of asking Him personally instead of going at it in some roundabout way. The response you get isn’t something that’s easy to figure out, to put it mildly. It took me decades to figure out some things that were shown to me in a matter of seconds, and I’m quite a bit smarter than your average bear. But the thing is, it’s a difference between eating fresh pizza and eating 2000 years old pizza that was chewed up by many people before you: fresh pizza is what you want, and the other kind is shit. You do have an alternative to a personal relationship with whatever marvels there exist in the transcendental realm, but you don’t really want it. You can’t taste food if you allow other people to chew it for you. Religion and its “sacred lineage” is a kind of a “human centipede” where each next generation in the chain feeds on the previous generation’s shit, instead of going straight to the source. So when I say that there is God, I don’t mean it in the sense that religions are right. No, I mean it in the sense that you don’t need them. God exists, go straight to the source, fuck what everybody else says, go see for yourself. You can use other people’s ideas as help, but if the entire Universe is inside God’s mind, that means that God is not really in you, it’s more intimate than that. You are in God, in the same way in which this article in a web browser is in your computer. There’s nothing closer to you than God and if you think otherwise you’re a stupid idiot.

But of course, not all “software” in the computer is the good stuff. Some is junk that will eventually be purged because it’s worse than useless. Humans are a special type of software that can decide to be either the most transparent window into the very substance of the computer, or junk mail and bloatware. God will perform a garbage removal event, and it will not be a tragedy, it will be a triumph of all that is good and beautiful and worthy.