Aristo Tacoma
THE INTERRATIONAL MIND
A practical physics of 8-spheres
ISBN 978-82-996977-3-6
[[[GENERAL BOOKLET INFO:
Title: The Interrational Mind
Subtitle: A practical physics of 8-spheres
A PRIVATE PUBLICATION
Booklet is copyright author -- who is
also, as author names, Stein von Reusch,
and Stein Henning Braten Reusch, and
Henning W Reusch -- all rights reserved;
ordinary quoting accepted when references
given. Stein Henning Braten Reusch asserts
the copyright of all works published with
(artist) name / main name Aristo Tacoma.
Publisher: Yoga4d von Reusch Gamemakers,
(company earlier called Wintuition:Net)
Year of publication: 2009
Place of publication: Oslo, Norway
ISBN registration number:
ISBN 978-82-996977-3-6
Booklet in electronic form is since July 31,
2009 verbatim reproduced at yoga4d.com/talks.
[[[GENERAL BOOKLET INFO ABOVE]]]
DEFINITIONS
"Interrational mind" (inter-rational) is defined by
author to mean, roughly, "a mind that aims, flexibly,
playfully, and without desire or greed, to reach the
ever-new golden lively creative mean between feeling and
thought".
(Searching on internet June 28, 2009, when this
definition was made by the author, and published at
yoga4d.com/talks, resulted in no suggestions of prior
usage of the word 'interrational' nor, of
course, on 'interrational mind.)
The concept of "8-spheres" (with organic, or somewhat
interlinked dimensions, and with interlinked dimensions
in physics also as intended domain of usage, in contrast
to the mechanical notion of hyperspheres incl. 8-spheres
in 'mathematics') was introduced in privately circulated
papers while author was in Manhattan, New York, in 1997.
See coverpage. Backpage has what is called 'the digital
version' of same.
PSYCHOLOGICAL: THE 16 DIMENSIONS
1 FANTASY
2 ACTION (INCLUDING NEAR-GOALS)
3 THOUGHT (INCLUDING SIFTING OF FACTS)
4 FEELING (BOTH LOWER EMOTIONS OF JEALOUSY AND SIMILAR,
AND HIGHER PASSIONS SUCH AS PRIDE OF DOING RIGHT,
EROTICISM, ACTION DRIVE AND SIMILAR)
5 INTENT (ORGANIZING INTENT)
6 THE FULLNESS OF EXPERIENCE (BOTH SENSORY & INWARD)
7 LOVE
8 GOODNESS & SILENCE & MEDITATION (THE INTERRATIONAL
MIND, GUIDE OF THE OTHERS)
THEN 8 INNER AS THAT (SIMILAR NOT SAME) (UNPREDICTABLE IN
EACH GIVEN CASE WHETHER ITS PROCESSES ARE INNER OR
EXTERNAL)
"INNER" HERE MEANS:
THE PARTAKING IN THIS WITH OTHERS WITHOUT THEIR NEARNESS
PHYSICAL: THE 16 DIMENSIONS
1 HEIGHT
2 WIDTH
3 DEPTH
4 DURATION, 1ST LEVEL
5 NONLOCALITY, 1ST LEVEL
6 DURATION, 2ND LEVEL
7 NONLOCALITY, 2ND LEVEL
8 SELF-REFERENCE (PROVIDES SELF-REGULATIVE, COHERENT LIFE
TO ORGANIC ENOUGH SUBSTANCIES)
THEN 8 ENFOLDED AS THAT (SIMILAR NOT SAME)
"ENFOLDED" HERE MEANS:
ADDITIONAL ORGANIZING PROPERTIES, CALLED ON AS NEEDED BY
SUPERMODELS.
BIOLOGICAL: THE 16 DIMENSIONS
1 LONGLEGGEDNESS
2 THINNESS
3 MUSCULARITY
4 BEARING (BODY LANGUAGE, DANCE)
5 BREATHING & OTHER RHYTHMIC / ARRYTHMIC OBVIOUS BODY
PROCESSES
6 VOICE
7 GENITALIA
8 BEAUTY (GUIDE TO THE DISCIPLINE OF THE OTHERS)
THEN 8 SUBTLE AS THAT (SIMILAR NOT SAME)
"SUBTLE" HERE MEANS:
INWARD ORGANS AS WELL AS ENERGIES OF A MORE SUBTLE KIND
THAN MANIFEST ENERGY.
SPIRITUAL: THE 16 DIMENSIONS
1 FLUIDITY / PLAYFULNESS
2 AWARENESS / CONSCIOUSNESS
3 RIGHTEOUSNESS (IN GENERAL)
4 CONSCIENCE (CONCRETELY)
5 COMPASSION (ACTIVE HEALING EMPATHY WHEN RIGHT)
6 AGILITY TO FIGHT OFF TWISTING IMPULSES
7 CONNECTION TO NONDOGMATIC FACT BEYOND ALL SYSTEMS
8 JOY
THEN 8 EVEN MORE SUBTLE (SIMILAR NOT SAME)
"EVEN MORE SUBTLE" HERE MEANS STAMASH PRO
INTRODUCTION
I could produce a cut'n'dried presentation of 8-spheres
and the consequences of the definition of an
interrational mind as I gave to the Internet webpage
yoga4d.com/talks at June 28th, 2009, and equip it with
dry academic words and so hope to get a foot within some
ugly academic corridors with their belittling agendas.
But one of the reasons I have not seriously described 8-
sphere theory before is that I don't want it misused,
clipped up, improvised upon by advertising bureaus and
such -- at least not without stating my mind about how
one should relate to such diagrams of power.
This booklet also have reprint of the standard background
text for advanced stamash martial arts students, and this
shows to some extent a part of what I mean by 'practical
physics' -- there is a beauty of self-defence in being
derived from the sense of wholeness that the insight into
the 8-sphere diagram can give, and has given me
continously since I arrived at it by what I will now call
'neopopperian ways' during my long and extremely healthy
and funny stay in Manhattan, NYC, in 1997 [when New York
still had a bohemian slightly buddhist and girl-gay high-
class section living on the dream of doing only what the
heart commands day by day; and USA still had the radiance
of a Walt Whitmannish poetic hope about it, asserting the
rights of human beings to go beyond the anti-sexual
traditions of the past, not yielding whether to islamism
or judaism or anything else -- in what they named as the
'new secular order', giving individual freedom the upper
hand. These features became perhaps more obvious
elsewhere later on.] The stamash diagram I have made also
has features which allows one to say that it is a
particular implementation of an 8-sphere (or 8/16-sphere,
I explain it in the conversational texts).
But as it is, having seen all the quasi-spirituality in
the backrooms of those who in public professional
appearance are strictly, and ugly, atheistic, I do not
believe that the proper presentation of anything
important happens by means of hacking to pieces the
spiritual aspect of something and presenting the dry
material content of it. The advertising bureas -- with
Microsoft Bing/Yahoo, Google and so on as ugly queens --
see to it that the idea is nurtured that only that which
grabs the flimisical, whimiscal, second-oriented, second-
hand attention of as many people as possible as
considered Worthy, and then again only if it does not
offend their hypocritical judgements of what is canonical
and right. This entire paradigm is obviously the relict
of a now dying civilisation, where those who party the
heaviest, and fiercest, with the least respect for
health, tend to get the most votes and are listed on top
of 'winner's lists'.
In the next civilisation -- whereever that is, and it
is unlikely that it is anywhere near or that the bibles
and cold atheistic capitalism of the past will have any
role in it whatsoever except as a reminder of the
monstreous past -- we will have to honor those who
combine rather than exclude, those who sense wholeness
and quality rather than count the hypocritical self-
destructive false winners of false gossip, and I believe,
and feel, that the 8-sphere theory will exist there. It
is presented with due warnings: for it is powerful. I
know these warnings will be ignored, for a while, but I
know also that since I give them, it will be a more
desperate act if the 8-sphere diagram and its derivatives
are misused. And it will be interesting to see how it
goes with those who attempt that.
Meanwhile, in a nicer tone, I look forward to sharing
tantric art experiences with those who acknowledge
sources and origins and who trust that the real factor of
real winning in real life involves good luck and good
synchronicities based on good actions, and this goodness
refers to a higher authority than human civilisation and
their own thought processes, to a deeper authority, to
the tantric authentic authority of all humanity, and
indeed all that is.
The approach, then, taken in this booklet is hugely
practical, and in anything that is practical, one must
not avoid mentioning the various possibilities of action
results which can come to be if one doesn't do it right.
But do it right, and you'll find that the notion of the
interrational mind is exactly right also, and that by
sensing, by being filled with the nondualistic awareness
that knowing something of the capacities of the 8/16-
sphere can give you -- not trying to know it all, mind
you, for it is about a relative knowing, not an absolute
knowing -- you will be able to do art which benefits
humanity as never before. For the 8-sphere is on the side
of the good, it brings to an end the orientation towards
conflict found both in marxism, which is an opium for the
low-brained people, and the other type of conflict found
in atheistic capitalism, in which one believes that God
is 'on the other side', allowing greedy monopolies to
grow rather without limit here on Earth. People who call
themselves 'christians' in the evening, engage in
atheistic capitalism during the working hours, and they
produce a sense of 'money might is right' which is
nothing but marxism, which asserts that 'historical might
is right', with a twist. And then again there is the
quasi-conflict between marxism and atheistic capitalism.
The 8-sphere approach to reality suggests that we must
have an interactive economy, an enterpreneurship of mini-
capitalism, inviting also a generous but not over-
leveraged form of currency trading.
Of all this I produce no proof: except the sense of
wholeness that the avid, glad, deep-thinking reader may
get in herself when she goes deeply into this over
several seasons, again and again, realizing more and more
the rediculousness of the political, economical and
religious alternatives.
CHAPTER 1: 8-SPHERES AND THE INTERRATIONAL MIND
: What is an eight-sphere? Has it something to do with
mathematics?
/ Perhaps you know that I am not so enthusiastic about
the proposal, as a whole, called 'mathematics'. It tends
to get into a lot of presumptious thinking about
infinities in ways I don't think is coherent. Some would
say, perhaps, mathematics is just a collective term for
wildly different branches but I'm not so sure; I see it
as a rather gathered structure, although huge. In this
structure, there are many interesting elements which can
be picked out and reimplemented in a clearly thought-
through language like Lisa GJ2. There are also
inspirations for free visualizations -- including the
thought, also by Descartes, about dimensions. And it is
in this area that one thinks of 3-spheres, or ordinary
spheres in three dimensions, and then higher-dimensional
spheres, including 8-spheres, also sometimes called, as a
collective term, 'hyperspheres'. But these dimensions as
they speak about are different than the dimensions I
speak about.
: How so?
/ Conventionally, if you can measure up a thing by
height, width and depth -- say -- and you can vary, in
some kind of principal way, each of these entirely
independent of the other two, you can speak of the thing
as having three dimensions. Now this idea of fundamental
independence is -- plainly put -- atheistic. In a roomy
negation of that very complicated proposition called
'atheism', for instance in that broad category
'pantheism', we do not assert, just like that, that
anything is fundamentally different from anything else.
We do not even feel at ease with postulating it as an
abstract thought. Rather, we feel far more at ease with
sensing the possibilities of abundant interconnections,
and give the burden of having to produce proof to those
who assert clear-cut essential divisions.
: You mean to say, you want dimensions that are not
entirely rigidly separate.
/ Exactly.
: Which is what? A less mechanical type of dimension?
/ Sure. It is more organic, more fluid: it may not yield
to all the applications of conventional thinking about
these things, but then several of these applications
turned out to give rather inconquerable incongruities
with infinities. I propose that, as for dimensions, the
idea of absolute independence of one variable from
everything else is an illusion, at least at a fairly
manifest level of the universe -- and indeed possibly
also so at the essential level of mind, where we do our
formal thinking also.
: You mean to say, it is like the infinity theorem of
yours -- to use that word, 'theorem', as I regard it as a
proof, what you have done there relative to the
impossibility of closing off the set of all natural
numbers from getting into infinities -- you suggest that
it is incoherent in principle to have dimensions of a
mechanical kind.
/ Yes, it follows rather from the infinity proof or
reasoning, don't you think? For a dimension can only be
rigidly countable as one, two and then three, if we have
a way to count that is definite and fixed forever. But
the theorem -- as you call it -- shows that any counting,
even at the most basal levels of dealing only with some
numbers, implies a sense of infinity and thus of the
indefinite and thus of the possibly bridged and
nondistinct.
: But you work with computers in which you assert that it
is meaningful to work within the boundary of say 1 to two
billion, or minus two billion.
/ I do, but I do not assert that this meaningfulness is
rigidly formal, rather it is practical, and that, given a
lot of grand old pondering -- GOP -- over the infinity
argument I have produced, you will come to understand
that the infinity is implied so to speak between each of
these numbers, and carrying the arithmetic and so on that
we do on them. So, you see, even a computer exists within
a space which has the indefiniteness and thus the
fluidity and continuity about it. It, too, must persist
in what we can call a more organic or less mechanical
space than that which has been the conventional type of
thinking in the field you just mentioned, namely
mathematics.
: I see. So where does this leave us? We have a -- what,
a hypersphere, -- but with softer dimensions?
/ Well, once you admit that we have a certain natural
unlimited possibility of interconnectedness between
anything and anything in any formal thought or any
practical thought, even, then you have a completely
different set of conditions, if that's the phrase I want,
from which to do your thinking. You are negating the
mechanical but you do not automatically get into one
particular alternative. Rather, the negation is a bridge
to a whole, shall we say landscape of alternatives. You
no longer deny the subtle infinity, even as you operate
within bounds.
: Could you articulate what you mean in other words,
please? It sounds a bit up in the sky to me.
/ Sure. Let us admit that once we deny the more
mechanical type of dimensions, we must admit that there
can be various types of organic dimensions. I propose
that the 8-sphere which is of great interest has a
certain type of organic dimensions associated with it,
which have properties of importance both for physics, or
our Grand Old Pondering over the universe and its energy,
and also for practical design, even for prayer. It is all
about admitting that some shapes are more essential -- we
might say more archetypical -- than others. Now however
we do not easily deduce these from some axioms of the
type that Euclid produced; Euclid, as I have pointed out
elsewhere, dabbled with poor integrity as far as infinity
versus finiteness went. I am not saying at all that no
axioms and no deductions cannot be given about this, but
I am saying that the type of investigation we need must
consider it humanly important to start with a well-
cultivated, refined, self-doubting type of intuition --
all the neopopperian stuff -- and regard it as perhaps
humanely impossible to explain, in logical deductive
terms, the entire universe, although there may be in
principle, at some level, for the mind of God if you like
-- in a berkeleyan sense, you know -- something such as
deductions going on after all. But not the stupidly
simple stuff of Euclid, or the whimsically complex stuff
of Spinoza. I think it is hubris for humans to assume
that they can explain consciousness, evolution of life,
or the essentials of design. But it is also hubris to
assert that no features of universe as a whole cannot go
beyond limitations that humans necessarily have.
: So the 8-sphere, you propose, underlie much, but has
something about it that is only to be verified -- if
that's the word -- by intuition?
/ Yes, the word 'verify' literally refers to the latin
word for truth, so it means something like 'truify'.
Popper was well-known for speaking much more warmly of
'falsify', saying that it is much easier to dismiss the
false than provide evidence for the true. But in the
neopopperian approach, we say, let us learn from
instances of confirmation and learn from instances of
disconfirmation but not limit these merely to that which
is picked up by the sensory organs in controlled
scientific experiements; but let us also admit that
intellectual intuition (as also Popper believed in) can
stretch beyond the criterions set by the knowledge
concerning sensory organs. And so, one can ask,
synchronistically or kinesthologically if you like, over
and over again as to whether something is right or not.
It may be that it is righter than much else without being
absolutely right and again I would say that humans
mustn't even try to get at what is absolutely right: it
is a folly to think that human thought would be able to
hold that burning flame. But it may be possible to come
towards that which is relatively right, and in that
process listen carefully without jumping to quick
decisions from instances of confirmation and also
instances of disconfirmation.
: But didn't Popper argue that only one instance of
disconfirmation is enough to dismiss a theory?
/ Well, but it is far more complex in most situations to
associate an experience with a theory than that which one
might think. And so Carnap, I think it was, introduced
the language of instances of confirmation and instances
of disconfirmation and we lean back and weigh the
evidence after a while, and like Sherlock Holmes, we jump
then towards that which effortlessly presents itself,
without prejudices based on idiotic common sense, but
unlike Sherlock Holmes, we do not label as 'deduction'
that which really is -- well, Pierce called it
'abduction' but that sounds a bit drastic, -- and the
word 'induction' is perhaps too entwined with a rather
narrow appreciation of the whole process. Some would say
'intelligence' and that's a grand word but sometimes used
very atheistically and so 'intuition' has an openness
that is the type I seek, and I advise this word to be
used with caution so it is retaining that openness. I
mean to say, we suggest that it seems likely that so and
so but we do not dogmatically shout that so and so is an
intuition: for it would be hubris, again, by a human to
assert a divine revelation.
: You are now excrutiatingly abstract and academic-
sounding in how you talk about it all; but if you for a
moment step out of that type of sceptical thought and
speak shall we say theologically, what is then the 8-
sphere?
/ Why, naturally, it is the most entertaining shape God
can conjure and so he has put it as the generative form
so that all else refers to it, and to its dimensions.
: That's candid.
/ Well, you asked for it.
: So it is much more than a theory?
/ I can frame it theologically if you ask for it, then we
wouldn't naturally call it a theory. But really I do
think that it is worth the while inside a neopopperian
enquiry, where we ask the question: is it not so that
something such as this diagram -- the 8/16-sphere I drew
up [see the sketch at coverpage] during my first long
stay in Manhattan, in February 1997. You see on the left
of it that it has a shape with slash-like lines. This
shape is meant to contain the whole shape -- this is of
course a well-known feature of fractals -- so you get an
extra eight shapes there. You can speculate about
infinity, then, because you not only get a doubling of
dimensions by that, one time, but possibly also on and
on.
If you take out that left circular element with the
slash-lines, and count the number of wavish elements --
or gestalts -- then remaining, it is eight. In the
gestalt theory of the subconscious, we speak of
contrasts, similarities and resonances involving gestalts
as the atoms of consciousness, when coupled with
durations and sensitive forms of matching operators (see
also yoga4d.com/dialudes for The Compassionate Anarchist
which has some notes along this line). In the supermodel
theory, as well as in the berkeleyan philosophy of the
universe, we might speak of such gestalts as going
entirely beyond the individual mind. You can then say,
'it's all God's mind.' This, of course, is a thought
found in some flavour or another inside hinduism and
perhaps in all the main religions.
The left counts as one shape, you see, in the intended
way of reading the diagram. Each can contract and expand
in a way that is not upsetting the overall shape. All
visualization of dimensions, at any rate when we go
clearly higher than two dimensions, involves
transformation of form -- and contraction and expansion
is an elementary transformation of form. It is so no
contradiction to speak of contraction and expansions
within a two-dimensional circular shape as resulting in
more dimensions, if we specify that these are not
entirely independent.
: You speak now of 'the interrational mind'. How does
this connect to it? How does your much more recent work,
what you call supermodel theory, connect to it?
/ Let's explore all that. However I want to urge you not
merely to wait for me to produce arguments in favour of
what I outline as a theory or view of 8-spheres, but
rather submit it to your own wanderings, your
peripatetical meditations -- peripatetical meaning
wandering about, how Aristotle sought to convey wisdom to
his pupils -- I suggest you weigh it over, feel its
feelings as it were. And in doing so, you are taking an
element of thought, and you are bringing in feelings; but
the meditation requires you to go completely beyond
thought and completely beyond feeling and yet be able to
relate to both. So you are finding the transcendence, the
in-betweenness, of emotion and cognition, and that is the
interrational mind. The interrational mind is the tool
you equip yourself to do neopopperian study also on the
8-sphere -- put in very simple words.
: But who is this person who equips herself with the
interrational mind?
/ Yes, who is this et cetera. That's all part of the
exploration. It is also part of the exploration to ralize
that it is not humanely possible to predict, in any given
case, whether its processes happen on the external
gestalt or on the gestalt which is contained within it --
the 9 to 16 dimensional area with more subtle properties.
Then again, the digital number of the 8-sphere, 8 -- as
in 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 -- lends itself to suggest we can have
a digitally reduced version of it [backcover]. We can
also get a mirroring of the dimensions into the shape as
we distinguish the four main forms of psychological,
physical, biological and spiritual [initial list of
dimensions in this booklet text].
I suppose, ultimately, the interrational mind means
that you abandon the ego -- just as what happens when a
girl gives birth to a child; she is no longer sustaining
her self-shape, she must let go to produce another of
her. That is what I meant by the little-bit quick phrase
in the MYWEBOOK texts from before 2004, by the way --
where I say it more roughly. It is really the start of a
person if we by 'person' mean something more essential
than the ego.
: That's very beautiful. That's brilliant.
/ Well, in any case we have to give each other a little
bit compliments also to carry on with our explorations:
it is not all hard work and no feeling. It is also about
pointing out -- selflessly, even if it concern ourselves
in the moment -- what we think is beautiful. So thank
you.
: Just one more thing before we complete this round. What
is again the practical physics -- practical aspect of the
8-sphere diagram or theory -- and what is practical
physics exactly?
/ I sought a phrase, when I came up with 'practical
physics', to convey something to those who, perhaps by
realizing that the stupidity of atheism requires a really
brilliant way of approaching painting, architecture and
so on which is not merely producing more of the dogmatic
structures of the past of humankind as of 20th century
and before, but who want to see all unfoldment as in some
way part of a grand prayer of evolution of the
consciousness of humankind through reincarnation and so
on. And so there is the question of physics, of what the
universe is, and that we can have a dialogue, and a
scientific willingness to drop what we like to think in
favour of what is right or attuned with deeper reality to
think, and work hard on cultivating harmony without
resorting to lazy-man's drugs to do so -- but this
physics and this exploration can have consequences when
we do it neopopperianistically. When we do it with
intuition, we get a lot more physics, than if we merely
do it empirically. It might be wrong, but if we are
careful -- and I think you may agree that I am very
careful whenever I do works based on intuition, I test it
in innumerable ways -- we can get concrete living advices
at all levels. Indeed, the stamash martial arts branch
that I have created is a direct emergence of such a
neopopperian intuitionistic enquiry. And I regard it as
an example of a practical physics and we'll see other
examples also as we go along.
: It does seem like the 8-sphere is very, well, tantric!
I mean sensual.
/ Yes, doesn't it? It has been with me all that time
since I truly began to respect intuition through and
through in all features and levels of life in 1997, and
started for real to throw away the petty conventions and
conditions of my mind. And see all that has come out of
it -- coherent stuff, and I have heard many, many say
that it is intensely beautiful stuff. It is not merely
something I promise to deliver in the future; it is
already there. And so the 8-sphere is in that sense, by
'the proof of the pudding is in the eating', somewhat
vaguely proved. By all my other works since then; and
intensely so with the resent art and Lisa GJ2
programming.
CHAPTER 2: BRIEF VISIT OF THEOLOGICAL THEMES
: So what is this 8-sphere diagram exactly? An instrument
for magic?
/ Absolutely not! Anyone who tampers with an important
piece of reality towards trying to twist things to a
result they have not naturally earned, by strong goyon,
get the opposite of what they wanted. Magic is self-
punishing. Any attempt to affirm by excessive use of
similarities and contrasts and resonances and such
anything which is not gained as a result of good actions
lead to ugliness within and on the outside, lead to a
withering of the present incarnation.
: That's pretty strongly stated, is it not?
/ That's definitely how I see it. The clever tricks are
stupid folly tricks, that cut away the ground of good
living for those who try and engage in them.
: Which is to say that they never work?
/ They work perhaps a little so as to provide a wrong
temptation, as a test of the person's ego. Then the
person starts get going into magic, and it undoes the
person swiftly, it eliminates the person, in this
incarnation anyway.
: What is goyon? Is that a neopopperian concept?
/ Well, neopopperianism is something I have introduced a
bit more carefully than many other concepts, because I
wanted a context in which we learn eclectically the best
of the scientific open attitude of sceptical wonder while
not blocking intuition as we proceed further. But in
applying such spiritual open intuition over a long time,
I felt that the word 'karma' is a bit inadequate to
explain why good actions are worth the while, why it
matters what we do instead of, as is the ultimate
atheistic perspective, Kant or not Kant, that nothing
really matters.
: Karma being the buddhistic word for action, or for
fruit of action.
/ Yeah. But karma is also entwined to the notion of
causality and it is a bit unclear, for some buddhists
speak of getting rid of the cycle of karma altogether and
so on. Nirvana is supposed to be the passification of the
desires of the ego: good, but what about the activation
of the natural passions of the spiritual heart? And so,
if we leave karma behind as a word that is a bit
entrenched in past patterns, we need a word which speak
of the building-up of the nest of good synchronicity
potentials, good luck potentials. This is something which
follows from a supermodel theory if we also have
something such as a coptic worldview and belief in a
higher authority and source, whose intent is to drive the
evolution of the universe in a certain probably very
complicated direction. Then that which coheres with the
intent of this direction has goyon, very simply put.
: How can we know whether something has goyon or not?
/ That is something each has to explore with a great deal
of care and conscience and logic and instinct of
intuition, and there is also this very important thing
called prayer, or improvised dignified silent
communication within with the higher beings of reality
than one's own thoughts. One cannot command a higher
being but one can respect them and regret one's past and
ask for forgiveness and assert that the future won't have
more of such bad actions of that type from this
individual and if one is honest and really shows that one
has learned, then suddenly goyon can increase; one gets
better at currency transactions, at all things which
require luck, also art, programming, what not. Over a
long time, of course, goyon is health-providing; up to
the point where the body has to be left and the goyon
says it is right for soul to incarnate; and this is a
complicated process, I sense it is about five thousands
girl-souls and only girl-souls and that they enter into a
new-born twelve to eighteen months AFTER physical birth
of the infant into the world. This is perhaps said before
in some spiritual traditions but I do not think so; also
I do not think it has been said -- at least not often --
that such souls can be relating to one body in plural, or
one soul to several bodies in plural, and such. But now
we are rather a far way from questions of physics. These
are mine intuitions and if you doubt them, doubt them,
but allow me that I say quickly and easily here what has
taken very serious consideration in total freedom from
all dogma and all past over a very long time to reach,
and not reach as dumb conclusions, but as active patterns
I implement and check in daily life.
: Say something about the 8-sphere relative to prayer,
then, if it has nothing to do with magic.
/ Well there's a magic of love, there's a natural magic
to what the muses and God can do if you pray, there's a
natural spirit of magic in surrounding oneself with
health-affirming beautiful artworks which truly have
goyon in them, but the forced magic, the magic of the
little clever shoddy ego that thinks it can benefit from
playing the ugly role of a devil or a satan is self-
defeating at once. There is no such thing as devil, demon
or satan. If you look at those words, they simply mean,
ethymologically, such things as 'deviating', 'inner
being', or 'adversary'. But these things, these ideas,
are of course but fragmented processes of thinking,
boredom grown sour into ugly cunning and goodness and
beauty twarted into shallow insincere purposes by
withered people who think they have nothing left to loose
for they have been so bad already -- but it is all
existing, insofar it exists, in a universe which is one
whole and one created whole and a whole that is ruled by
its origin and that's total. There is no adversary within
that. There is just that beautiful totality and very
temporary elements of idiocy and then only when that
idiocy and egotism and self-centeredness and cunning is
actually something which eventually, against the imagined
result of the idiot engaging in it, will play to the
advantage of goodness and everyone else. One cannot fool
reality: it is watching over every thought, every
impulse, every motivational system, every hidden agenda,
as well as every action and all the results of actions.
This reality is a vast God-mind which has a great deal of
apparent freedom, but the real freedom is the feeling of
fresh freedom which is being a total slave to this origin
and its commands.
CHAPTER 3: REPRINT OF STAMASH UNDOGMATIC DOCTRINE
AS AN INSTANCE OF APPLICATION OF THIS 8-SPHERE
[[[this is stamash_undogmatic_doctrine_copyright_at.txt,
found at
yoga4d.com/stamash_undogmatic_doctrine_copyright_at.txt,
license for further distribution is at
http://www.yoga4d.com/cfdl.txt,
author is Aristo Tacoma, and menu with
context is at http://www.yoga6d.com/stamash.htm;
the letters "s-t-a-m-a-s-h" are intuitively
constructed, one by one, originally in the
scifi context of same author's Manhattan
Transformation papers, cfr the Firth234 Lisa
platform which since 2006, with updates 2007,
has been available at http://www.yoga4d.com/download
with extensions at http://www.yoga6d.com/city
and with the Lisa GJ2 programming language
operating in other platforms including iMac,
Windows 7, Red Hat 8.0, Ubuntu, Fedora and
many others (given a fast enough PC), consult
the notes associated with "hints6" rather on
top of the http://www.yoga4d.com frontpage,
where relevant downloads are also given.
The use of the word stamash in a martial
art context is strictly copyright Aristo
Tacoma who is Stein Reusch, and any teaching
of stamash must happen by contract with him.
Any reading of the notes as follows is not
necessary for the beginner student in stamash,
but can be a useful background for advanced
students.
AFTER JUNE 18TH 2009 THERE ARE NO ADDITIONS
TO THE STAMASH TEXTS -- ONLY THE PRICE AND
LOCATION AND DATES AND SUCH ARE UPDATED.
This pertains to the http://www.yoga4d.com
and http://www.yoga6d.com sites as a whole
-- only the yoga4d.com/talks section is
updated, also with more books and programs.
]]]
PRELUDE
I wonder if it is possible for you and me, in this
text, to let go a little of all those strict,
strong, big categories and big meanings and
big postulates that the past of human cultures
and world religions and what not have associated
with words such as "love", "sex", "God", "creator",
"human rights" and so on and so forth and just
have a kind of poetic flow, musing on these
themes? FOR THAT IS HOW IT IS WRITTEN. Not at
all as a logical argument. Not at all within
the context of any particular system of belief.
Yes, there are recurrent strong good intuitions
penetrating all my most mature works. You may or
may not like them. I speak of God as male, whereas
I give the role of the female polarity which I
mentioned in the Compassionate Anarchist at
yoga4d.com/dialudes to not one, but three, not
goddesses but "muses", -- I even name them;
and do so without excuse.
Perhaps you will say then: okay, these notes
may be fine for you, but you have your little
truth and I have mine little truth and let's
not bother each other with them.
But then, if I say, look, there is a great
martial arts ethical self-defence practise,
a blending of jiu-jitsu, aikido, karate, yoga,
qi gong, but eclectically so, -- and your body
will shine wonderfully with it -- it has been
proven! -- but it won't really do its good work
without certain foundational thoughts WHICH
INCLUDES THE BIG THOUGHTS; then am I merely going
to chuck these notes aside and say, stamash is
purely physical, and what each person think
about the world, about life and God and love
and sexuality and rejuvenation and euthanasia
and what not is entirely irrelevant? But that
would be making it into a purely physical
discipline of shoddy techniques; that is impossible,
for stamash is also ethics and ethics is also
worldview; and this ethics may be part of the
energy of stamina which is perhaps the ethymological
essence of the word "stamash" -- the "sh" being the
sound in the word "action" when pronounced, -- put
very simply.
So if you can let go of the big categories and
be willing to meditate with me, then read on;
but I will not explain why I say what I say here
except that, to my knowledge, I do not offer lies
or illusions here; and, to my knowledge, I do
offer some views on reality which have not been
heard before in this way, at least; and, to my
knowledge, there will be a greatness to a human
life which relates with dignity to these words.
Beyond that, it is not a dogma.
THE STAMASH APHORISMS
What is done elegantly is done well, and
indeed stamash exists as part of the fountain
of warm-hearted elegance.
But this elegance depends on the dissolution
of the ego -- and we can only dissolve it when
we know it -- and so we must not skip the work
of understanding something of the ego; and this
work comes first.
The structure of deceit, disappointment,
greed, craving, self-pity, bitterness, resent,
idiotic schemes of selfish revenge, can be
called, as a sum, the "ego".
When this sum, the ego, is dissolved,
there is a much more grand sum, the spirit,
and this spirit can act in the muscles and
give them sudden strength.
The spirit comes forth in generosity.
The ego is the antithesis of generosity.
Generosity also means generosity to oneself,
but it doesn't mean generosity to oneself
unless there is a spirit of goodness setting
the priorities right.
The ego shows itself especially when more
than a quarter of one's total resources are
asked to be given away by another or others.
For one who has a billion euro can easily
given a million, as easily as one who has
a million euro can easily give a thousand,
but the ego manifests itself if one who has
a billion has to give two-hundred and fifty
million away, at once, without return.
And yet money attachs to a body, not to
a soul, and will not incarnate with the
soul, and so all attachment to anything or
abstract concept such as money is total
illusion.
Yet without the factual existence of
wealth and beauty and lovely hair and
smooth skin and skills and all such things
connected to the body, there will be no
society, no laughter: so one must be
generous to oneself, yet ready to go also.
The readiness to let go does not mean
apathy, but it means that one flexibly
adapts aims to what is called for by
something grander than the ego.
It is this greatness which is called
for in that stamash exercise which is
taught under the name of Creation.
And the ending of the ego is further
done throughout the day in smaller
exercises including Energy and also
Interception (the latter being the
actual attack and self-defence format).
The stamina called generosity then
flows through the whole being and gives
radiant insight, faster than thought,
and power greater than even that which
training has built.
But the force of generosity needs
an instrument -- this instrument is your
honed body and mind, your muscles who
have come to know what it is to move
lovely and rightly and fiercely and
in respond to what is needed.
One does these exercises at first
slow, then faster, and at first kindly,
then fiercely, and at first one by
one, then several rather together,
and this is so for the beginner relative
to the advanced or stamash pro practioner,
as well as so for the beginning of the
day compared to the advancement of the
day.
One must force oneself to always
do some stamash exercises but one
allows the body and the sense of energy
or laziness determine how long, how
strong, how deep these exercises go
from one day to another.
One is showing great kindness
to body and mind in the morning,
and never do quick rapid strong
movements in or right after getting
out of bed, but rather cultivate
the smile of the body.
And the stamash practioner must
each month in the middle of the month
one day look very carefully at all
features of the body and decide what
must be done more of, and less of,
as for exercises and all other things
affecting the body directly, such as
food and vitamin types and sun or
photonic nutrition, for upcoming
month.
The stamash individual aims at becoming
stamash pro but doesn't declare herself to
be stamash pro -- it is just as with intuition,
one speaks of what one senses or feels but
what is an intuition is shown later on.
The stamash student ensures flexibility
by good stretching when the body is warm
enough to allow such stretching at all such
areas -- legs, toes, arms, in various ways,
as it is called for, but do not pursue
over-flexibility.
For stamash is always about knowing
the proper boundaries.
But the toes must bend well up when
one is kicking or the toes will get hurt.
And one must have enough flexibility
of leg position that one leg can go
somewhat up in the air without one
loosing balance, with the other somewhat
bent and behind one.
So one finds the stance that radiates
beauty, balance, and which is also ready
to both protect -- with hard flat stomach
-- and kick as well as hit.
Yet one cannot practise hard on one
another because of its danger, but one
must practise hard on something because
one must learn what impact does to oneself,
in terms of balance and what the knuckles
can stand and what the knees can handle.
Those who have thin bones must aim
at accuracy and swiftness more than hardness
or they will break themselves in trying to
break another.
The role of paperballs suspended from
a wire, when subjected to kicking and
hitting, is that of training precision
aiming at a moving target, which is
important also for kicking right.
One must be good at as many
combinations as possible, as at many
sides of oneself as possible, yet
it is better to execute two successive
rapid precision-movements hard and
quick than make two half-good such
motions as one bundle.
Slight pains will arise -- that
is natural -- but one heeds them
by calming down for the days or
weeks required till the body
superrepairs itself.
Stamash is nothing without the
control of one's own bad temper:
for even one stamash action against
another can permanently undo the
beauty of another, and so, perhaps,
the life of the body of another:
this, then, is never to be unleashed
unless absolutely called for, in
ways approved by the society's laws,
for instance in the role of police,
or in direct justifiable self-defence
of direct physical attack.
But verbal attack, no matter how
fierce, should in all private
circumstances be met by words or by
a respectful enough silence, not by
physical actions: for a stamash
individual has tranquility, is not
provoked, but does what is good.
The tranquility of the stamash
warrior is such that she knows what
pathways in the night which are safe,
by her nonchattering mind, the heat
of her gut feeling.
The stamash warrior smiles easily
in fighting, and does the glow exercise
and water exercise to maintain smooth
skin and is not wrinkled with concern,
ever.
And goes deep into silence, praying
for truth not illusion, prior to asking
questions of a yes/no kind, so that
intuition override fiction and wishful
thinking.
In leaning back, a slight nod of
head or lift of finger or toe will
indicate a 'yes' from gut feeling and
one asks clearly from various angles
and receives answers and asks again,
later on, separating intuition from
fiction but not cocksure about it.
The stamash individual is moderate
on any alcohol or drugs, is varied in
music, is good at dance, avoids needless
mockery of weaker ones, and moves rather
with the good than with the popular when
the pathways of these divide.
In doing the creation exercise, begin by saying
'this is creation exercise', and similar for
energy exercise and other stylized, practise-like
exercises.
In completing the creation exercise, -- which
we also can speak of as 'doing the creation',
'completing the creation', -- there is a pure
consciousness meditation in elegant pointing
to the third eye.
The other hand connects to below navel, the
force of creative life force there. The hands
then shift, after a certain while. One points
first to the third eye with the right hand.
There is 'a spring in the steps' which is
entrained and trained, and which leads to more
shapely feet, in completing the creation, in
that it happens while standing on the balls of
the feet.
In being in solitude, walking between various
activities, such as washing, eating, reading,
and concrete stamash exercising, and also
outdoors, one reminds oneself regularly of
'beautiful footprints'.
The beautiful footprint involves having a
lightness in the touch of the ground which is
based on beautiful muscles there, grabbing
ground with toes, allowing the balls of the
feet, and their outer periphery, and to
some extent the heels, to be engaged.
As the foot is lifted, so also are the
toes lifted, unless there is a particular
stylish reason, or functional reason,
why one should walk in a different way.
But it is not about doing everything
right all the time; and for long walks,
which are important, one must allow a
certain laziness to come, shifting the
intensity of the muscle use and elegance
to a considerably lower level to allow
distance of the walk.
One thinks better after a walk, one
sleeps better after days with long
walks, but one is alive and must relate
to each day and each week and each
month with creative sensitivity and
aliveness.
One aims, righteously, at rejuvenation
for the body as long as the body is
righteously alive, but trains on accepting
euthanasia for the soul will not feel pain
in exiting from the withered frame of the
body when it does so righteously.
The soul is always young, and the body
one works on keeping young after it has
grown up.
But at such time as it is making little
sense to keep the body young, one will look
to what is acceptable in society. If the
society is of the 20th century type, one
does not do euthanasia but totters along
into agedom with dignity, demanding little,
and do not cause disharmony for families
by pursuing a lonely path of euthanasia.
But in such societies as the truth of
reincarnation are clearly understood and
the ease of letting go of fear of death
is, samurai-like, emphasized in order to
put righteousness and obedience to God
before selfishness, one does not resist
euthanasia when the time is right.
But the soul is taught within and
between each reincarnation to be less
and less selfish by the experience of
pain.
For human beings do not necessarily
learn much by rewards by doing right --
however important it is to give comfort
and not pain at all, nor any punishment
at all, to tiny children.
For a reward can lead to a clinging
to the reward instead of to a reinforcement
of the joy of doing something right for
its own sake.
Whereas severe pain felt as a result
of pursuing arrogant pathways of selfishness,
power, mafia-like gang structures, and other
fear-invoking schemes on others to bully
more resources out of others, then this
pain will lead to the soul asserting to
itself: Not to do this again!
But the growth of enlightenment in the
human being as a result of realizing that
bad actions -- actions which are not
obedient and humble to God, who is love,
and not written truly about in any
propaganda scripts of the past such as
quoran, torah, new testament, upanishads,
bhagavad-gita, tao te king, dhammpada
or any other such pompeous book -- this
growth of enlightenment by nondogmatic
fresh intuition into the deep will of
God, is a growth which is always incomplete.
But the fact that it is always
incomplete doesn't meant it is not
a growth of goodness: it is less and
less incomplete, but subtly so, in
the sense that there is always an
infinity more to understand.
The healthy human being attains to
greater, richer, more beautiful, more
startling, more ecstatic sexuality
with each incarnation, and, on a
level which can be felt, also increased
with each month of beautiful, intense
living, as long as the body/brain is
young enough to learn, aspire and
be innocent and curious and blush
at the new.
In the coolness of the night or
in a cool day the brain may partly
conserve energy by regulating normal
actions on a kind of 'autopilot' which
is so that certain finesses of
artistic intuition -- which is necessary
in stamash fighting -- may take longer
time before they surface.
The stamash individual should
therefore check with art and with
experience of sexually exiciting images
and stories how awakened one is in the
moment as a whole before undertaking
any complicated enterprise.
The action of copulation with
others, especially when there are
threesomes or foursomes so that the
level of personal attachment is
smaller and the focus on the body
beauty and face beauty and dance
beauty of sex is greater, can
build up the wakefulness and the
energy for a stamash action in
the upcoming hours.
But one cannot haste one's
wakefulness if one is truly
going to be artistic: yet,
the stamash pro individual
must know urgency by heart
well enough to be able to
step -- when it is called for --
straight into stamash force
without the preliminaries,
even if deep sleep occurred
the minute before.
But such sudden energy
awakenings are exhausting
if they occur often; and the
rejuvenating life-style involves
then a lot of sexuality and art
and solitude.
A society full of interesting
activities involves a lot of
temptations but one must balance
the addition of energies from
the outside with the build-up
of energies at the inside:
or else the body and face will
show signs of tear and wear
quickly.
Sexuality involves the flux
and coherence of nerve centres
which grow with each great
sexual experience; and the
rich, diverse, lively pursuit
of sexually stimulating images
and words and sounds and motions
together with others or one one's
own builds up the sexuality and
increases the future joy.
So one must look at oneself as
a sexual object not just a subject
out to get other objects; and check
in a camera/mirror how one looks in
the various phases of sex and find
out what the esthetical impulse of
generosity is -- where the smile is,
where the ease is, and not make it
all so terribly urgent. For sex
is a dance.
And the dance of sex connects,
in stamash exercises, the energy
of genitals with the energy of
the brain, the brain being thus
able to charge the muscles and the
skin toning more up, to rejuvenate,
to be great-looking and strong and
firm and smooth, and to act fast.
In studying anatomy, one studies
the mind of God: and in learning about
the beauty of feet, one learns about
the beauty of the future of humankind.
You must see the many forms of
beauty of healthy young anatomy of
the skinny longlegged kind, and learn
to listen to the story of each kind
of beauty.
And when these stories don't work
out, there is conflict, perhaps
violence, and as an artist, you will
know how to heal this.
The artist calls on the creative
power of sexuality to make a surprising
whole where it would not occur to a
less energetic mind that any whole
could be at all.
And so there is a depth of breath,
an ease of being, a playfulness of
mind, whenever there is stamash;
and this is also a characteristic of
great sexuality.
There is a magnet of command
relative to the voice of obedience,
which can radiate from one who doesn't
use it for personal gain nor harshly
but based on getting righteousness
implemented in more and more people.
For all activity in humanity is
ultimately related and brought together
towards a greater common enlightenment
for all humanity, as all souls are
related to one another and none of
these souls very advanced in enlightenment
compared to others.
For when some begins to be enlightened,
then soon enough all others come along;
and when some begins to refine this
enlightenment, then soon enough all
others also refine it; and this refinement
will happen more and more and there is
an infinity to the possible and actual
development to come -- all guided by
God and his muses, L.A.H.
It is in knowing this intent that
the will to command -- playfully, for
fun, for ecstasy, in sex under such
circumstances as when this is sought --
or, seriously, when someone adept at
stamash can quench violence-to-come
by a mere use of deep-voice without
fear in it.
In finding out the intent of God, the
intent of the fountain of love which
anticipates the direction of the universe
and which feeds back to the body impulses
as to what is right to do, one must listen
to the body.
In listening to the body, there is a
cold sweat if one is playing with energies
set on a morbid course of exploitation and
manipulation by severely wrong means.
One who does wrong violence to another
and one who orders another to do wrong
violence to another are of the same.
The only violence that is justified
is the violence that preemptively gets
wrong violence about-to-be away.
But to what extent 'preemptively' is
lawful must be considered relative to the
concrete laws of the society -- and these
laws should be simple so not only
professionals can understand them, but
all can judge by them.
In any society dedicated to intuition,
there must be a whole spectrum of activities
which, each season, anyone who has had a
minimum of schooling in language and thinking,
can cast a vote about.
But in any society which is to endure so
as to provide consistent coherent life for
individuals from one generation to the next
there must be a care-taking of those
foundations that contribute to happy life.
But happiness in human life is always in
glimpses, as a result of focussing on doing
much right and avoiding wrong temptations,
and is not a station one lands permanently
on.
It is not given to a human being to
understand more than in relative glimpses
why a good action is good.
And so it is not possible to speak of
absolute rights for a human being, rather
one must speak of the absolute importance
of all human beings to have as much
relative faith as they can in a higher
authority than their own ego, and which
can, in lucky moments of meditation,
speak through their conscience, their
heart.
Stamash is a series of exercises such
that they call, by a form of bodily
whisper, a physical form of prayer,
on more and more intuition, which is
not just a knowledge intellectually of
what is probably right to do in each
situation for each person but it is
an impulse in the gut to actually do it,
whether it is understood or not.
In dedicating oneself to good actions,
one learns to find the tranquil temperature
of high goodness in the gut which is as far
as can be from the cold sweat of wrong
action.
When a good person feels cold sweat
on encountering another person it is an
indication that it is extremely urgent to
be moderate in speech and vaguely avoid
any further action together before a great
deal of meditation and self-questioning
and affirmation of goodness has happened:
for the body IS an antennae.
Yet the body can have effects of foods
or viruses or bacteria or lack of
exercise or too much reading or unbalanced
behaviour or too little or too much of
vitamins, or other such things, which
mimick and superficially feel like
intuitions -- so one mustn't decide in
a dogmatically blasphemous manner what
is intuitive or not, but rather be sensitive
to what one feels is a probably correct
impulse.
What is correct for one person in
one situation may be incorrect for
another person in a very similar situation;
-- and no two situations are absolutely
identical, and all individuals have great
variations.
It is the full conjunction of the
features of the context (the moment) with
the fullness of the organism (also the soul /
spirit) which must speak of the intuition
in rightness.
And so one must try one's best but one
can still, as human, fail severely even when
one thinks that one did try one's best and
while it diminishes the responsibility very
slightly, possibly, for the devastating
effects of the severely wrong action, one
cannot claim any right to freedom from
punishment according to the society's laws
then, or according to the essence laws
governing all conscience.
It is to provide intuitions but also so
as to challenge the ego to be crushed in
ways it should in order to diminish in
ways it should for enlightenment to grow,
relatively speaking, or progress towards
enlightement to occur, that the submuses
(the muses controlled by the uppermost
three muses L.A.H.) exist around each soul
and spirit.
Intuition must be deserved, therefore,
and can be in humility requested with
improvised words (prayer to God), but it
cannot be commanded and is not a mere
technique, ever.
It is the future which justifies the rightness
of an action in the present, and this future is
known only fully to God and so humans cannot know
fully the rightness or lack thereof of their
own actions.
But a nonfull knowing of rightness, which
grows with each incarnation, is always possible.
But then the mind mustn't chatter all the time,
and all thinking and conversation mustn't go on
merely while one is walking, but also in the
eye-to-eye honest dialogue where it though easier
can become a confrontation of words.
Those who can move a confrontation of words into
a greater harmony before dissolving their contact
are harmony-breeders in a society, but this harmony
mustn't be purchased by accepting common illusions
(collusions), or inventing false points of agreements
because one of the parties are unwilling to face
fact.
Fact stems from God and humans must listen to
them.
And the ultimate fact about the future is the
joy, fun, pure loving entertainment that God
wants by virtue of the creation which is His,
and so all life is set into motion in order
to provide him with ever-better moments of this.
So if the existence of an actual process is
so as to ensure a greater goodness in the future
then this existence has goyon; but if not, it
is removed, and sometimes this removing happens
fast and sometimes slow, but it must not be
challenged by humans to be wrong.
So the ego must tell to itself to bow down,
stop exploiting, manipulating, making cunning
plans, making plans to force things which are
not deserved, or think it can get away with
doing or saying terrible things merely by
throwing out some nice-sounding sweet words
such as 'I apologize', -- however deep
apologizes are extremely important when
uttered in an utterly sincere way so as to
show deep regret and actual willingness
never to fail in goodness in that way again.
It can be part of prayer to get a better
life to include a sense of stated apology
-- to God, to the muses, to their submuses --
of very specific wrong actions, insofar one
senses or thinks that they are wrong, something
which one ought to reserve a relative doubt
about, but not so as to cover up actual regret:
for one must listen to one's conscience.
But when this conscience merely is trying
to give pleasure to another body and ignoring
the vaster perspective of what God wants with
humanity then this is not conscience -- which
literally means 'con science' -- together-knowing
-- with love, with God as the fountain of love,
love of the future, love all good life in the
future in all good ways -- but merely a placating
of another's ego or one's own sentimentality.
Those then, who are not fiercely antisentiemental
inside themselves against rediculous attachments
which are not supported by God-oriented meditation
build structures of justifications of wrong
actions and these structures, in sum, form part
of an ego which is a dark patch on the soul which
must be cleared away by severe pain, and the muses
will see to it by proper synchronicities.
Realism about the future involves a willingness
to avoid mere rethoric in a conversation and
focus, one by one, on simple questions which
have as few questionable assumptions in them
as possible, and neither over-emphasizing
differences in a group nor over-emphasizing
similarities between individuals.
Realism about the future involves a sense of
how fluctuations in actions which easily happens
given such and such mindset and such and such
environmental variations, variations in temperature,
humidity, light, resources, smiles, whatever --
and what, then, easily happen given the presence
of these actions relative to those others who
with some likelihood are present.
But since the slightest change for instance
in the position of a finger or toe of one
person in a conversation can give a radically
new idea to another and thus sway the whole
direction of the thinking, and possibly also
of the emotions, and the following actions
for hours, it is not given to any human being
to predict anything in life for sure.
Rather, these tiny fluctuations with big
effects must be assumed to be at work and
one must therefore have a broad sense of all
likely big effects and a broad sense of which
are most likely, perhaps because they tend to
have happened in the past, or perhaps because
one has seen intimations of them recently,
or are reminded of something said from
trustworthy sources.
To have an honest mind is a mind that
doesn't cultivate dark zones of secrecy but
which knows what it means to be through and
through polite.
The only secrets which can be justified
are those which can be easily admitted to be
absolutely lawful but which arguably spared
a real person for a completely unnecessary
pain, both now, and with big likelihood
also in the future.
So while one must prefer youth and speak
highly of the youth of each one present if
one speaks of that theme at all, one spares
others from listening to one's perceptions
of another's faulting features unless they
for reasons which are clear-cut actually
positively demand to have some constructive
criticism about something in particular and
seems to be robust enough in feelings to
handle something of it.
But in something such as a beauty contest,
one actually perceives who has beauty on the
outside and goodness on the inside to back it
up and votes anonymously with loyalty to that
goodness and beauty and one doesn't then accept
coercion in that vote so that only those who
one calls 'one's friends' are getting the vote:
and by analogy, one fears wrongness but does
not needlessly provoke a wrong-doer, just gets
away from the person.
Beauty is a radiance which is so that other
people are enlivened, feel important about their
existence and about the contact with the beautiful
other and so beauty sparks work, art, fun, love,
good sex, great exercises, good insight and
so beauty leads to much good for those who have it
under the right conditions.
But all this good must be deserved by a goodness
backing this beauty up from the inside.
For rather, if this beauty is sold at the cost
of soul in order to reap a certain type of what-not,
be it drugs, or peculiar favours such as a
particular type of kinky sex one favours, or
a set of compliments from some kind of rugged
monster-ego who without conscience goes around
trying to dominate girls, then this beauty is
no longer deserved.
But then the artist must not fail in seeing
that the beauty of skin is not real beauty,
even physically, unless within that skin there
is goodness, which is to say, humility and
obedience to the fountain of goodness, God,
and to all the muses and their submuses, and
to all souls who channel that goodness.
In other words, beauty is frail if without
goodness inside, and frail beauty is ugly,
and must be seen as that.
But those who have goodness inside and
not beauty on the outside should neither
have the patent on goodness nor should
they be punished for the pain they already
at some level will feel for their lack of
physical beauty at present -- but their
goodness inside will lead to a quick and
painless transition after death to a
beautiful longlegged new girl body.
And that which is healthy has the
right type of symmetries and the right
type of assymmetries and the right type
of strengths and smoothnesses and
richness, such as of hairs, and the
right form of slenderness and longleggedness
relative to torso, and so on, while can
be infinitely varied in subtle ways which
artistically means much -- when we discuss
beauty.
So beauty is an indication of health
and the intent of health is goodness but
this intent must be grand and not selfish,
it must not be so demanding that it is
overruling periods of recovery but it must
have the right blend of patience and
impatience.
So humanity must accept its role --
viz., to be at the feet of God, to make
God laugh -- and God is an artist, and
by that fact has made the shapes of human
like the shapes of the muses and of
himself, as a sole single manifest
immortal male, the righteous ruler always,
in the present human society.
No human leader must attempt any
absolute power, or absolute leadership,
ever, or get eradicated in severe ways.
So all must, in the name of goodness,
cultivate such words as nonjealousy,
nonsentimentality, plurality, art,
and also regularly meditate on the word
GOODNESS.
And there must be no clinging to another
as a 'spiritual teacher', for God is the
only spiritual teacher, nor must there be
any clinging to another in the sense of
sexual infatuation, but rather one must
cling to God and his sense of beauty
as best one can, and pluralistically
experience this.
One must not in secret try to raise
the seedings of a pompeous ego-bred
new society which will provide freedom
for the ego to gets its way for there
is no space in the universe for any
such society, nor will there ever be:
any such attempts to seal off a portion
of space for one's own pursuits in
neglect of God according to a false
doctrine of God or according to pompeous
so-called "human rights" set up as
higher than the intent of God will lead
to the worst of synchronicities for
each and all involved, and such cliques,
clans, groups, and mafia- or gang-like
structures will be ripped apart in what
is for them the worst of ways in order
for each soul involved to learn, forever.
But when those who have not partaken
in crime are near those who have partaken
in crime, and the ending of the criminals
are near, then those souls of those who
are innocent will be moved to other
bodies, for the soul is the experiencer
of pain (as well as joy), and there is
total justice in what everyone experience.
This then is (as the author Leibniz
in renaissance England said, centuries before
20th century), the best of all possible worlds
and (as the bishop Berkeley wrote still earlier),
this is the mind of God.
In each situation there is a peak
resonance, a top-point around which
everything else revolves, when seen
with a deep intuition.
For instance, when several
currency pairs fluctuate, there is
always one pair which is the focal
point, the one pair which gives the
dance to all the others, so that
on relating purely to this one pair
you can, without looking at numbers
or charts, purely from within,
earn lots of money on it.
And so the stamash individual,
while playfully musing on all forms
of complexity present in each
situation, and not attempting to
dominate or influence pointlessly
and so as to evoke needless irritation,
will always know where the key
resonance is.
This can be in a theme connected
to some people, a sweet theme of
possible refreshed love, for
instanced, -- yet it may be in
good taste not to speak of it,
just have an awareness which
senses the powerfield around it.
And in building such awareness
instruments in ordinary social
harmonious situations, it is
possible to utilize that very same
awareness on encountering also
nonfamiliar persons who have a
violent agenda and make harmony
come more realistically possible
there.
Yet the stamash individual
must train herself in accepting
death of the body and the bodies,
and let bygones be bygones and
know that even with humanity
in an enlightened form, there
will be reckless, terrible
violence erupting on occasion,
and only idiots would call off
intense policing or declare
that they never want their
hands soiled with violence: for
some forms of violence can only
be stopped by fierce violence,
of such a kind that it destroys
much more than only the wrong-doers.
The wrong-doers are wrong-doers
because of the state of mind they
have come into, not because that
they are of different essence.
It is as with a cold or flu
that some people get -- they get
affected, they loose their smile
for a week, or must force it to
come in spite of fever or headache
or troat pain, but it passes: and
in the perspective of reincarnation,
when somebody has become seriously
violently wrong, that person will
-- in time for the next reincarnation
-- come out of it.
So one mustn't loose hope in
humanity if violence suddenly arises
in those who one believed the most
in.
So AMFAP -- As Much Faith As
Possible -- must be in God, not in
any of your girlfriends, -- and it is
to God and goodness you must be
aiming at being fully loyal, while
you can only be loyal to those
human beings who have a goodness
flow going on and only for that
long -- so don't promise too much
relative to humans, promise only
to aim at AMFAP.
But when one has lost faith
one will meditate and force on
some faith again, and the feeling
that the faith has a ground will
grow again, and just like a cold
the negativity will pass, in due
time: this is part of what it
means that human beings must
realistically embrace the
'relative' -- that it comes and
goes.
Which also means that children
growing up near stamash people must
not be taught to have full obedience
to other human beings, but rather
be given a sense that they are
sometimes more wise than at other
times and they must learn to ask
their own heart, and learn to
think about the consequences in
terms of pain.
And rewards must not be given
so intensely that the joy of
doing things right for their own
sake is forgotten in the pursuit
of the pleasure of rewards; whereas
the limits that society must have
on actions must be enforced by
pain, for pain teaches the human
nervous system where the limits are
in a way that is always remembered.
Yet the distribution of pain must
be moderate and not involving needless
display to many people socially, and
one does not administer pain to a
child, and one lets officials
administer pain to lawbreakers --
but the point is to appreciate pain
for its vital importance in the growth
of enlightenment -- both the growth
towards it, and the further refinement
of it.
So the happy state of mind is
not something reached absolutely,
but rather, on living righteously,
more and more such glimpses are
reached, and deeper and deeper,
with each incarnation.
So there is a teaching of pain
when one doesn't find the
resonance: and the sense of sudden
joy when the resonance is found.
It is by this resonance that
stamash is found to be the stamina
which pervades even the mind of
God -- it is not an artefact, but
the real pump of all events,
deterministically (but this
determinism is known to God and
not even fully to his muses).
Good resonances with good
things are deserved by the fact
that one doesn't try to enforce
the perspective of grabbing
fame, power, influence, etc,
for oneself, but rather aims
at honoring God more and more.
CHAPTER 4: ANIMALS AND BEYOND IMITATION
/ I think you write somewhere that humans are
'individualized'. Are animals not? How does that tie in
with the sense of individual dignity a human may easily
read into the behaviour of several not-so-tiny-brained
animals?
: There's certainly a great deal of a kind of real
dignity to some animals and having the type of
individualization that humans have is not a criterion for
that! The individualization I talk about is at a
spiritual level. It involves responsibility for actions
based on an inner dialogue with conscience.
/ Animals don't have that? They don't have conscience?
: They may have, for all I know, a kind of inner
psychology which has some of these features. You might
call it an emulation of individualization, a material
beginning of it. But just as there is a jump in the
manifest world from a computer to the organic, so, by
analogy, is there a jump from an animal type of
psychology to a spiritually individualized type of
psychology with a depth that is reincarnated according to
a greatly complex pattern of justice; a justice the human
can grow to aspire to more and more through the millenia.
/ So you don't apply the notion of reincarnation to
animals at all?
: There are nonlocality features bridging matter and
matter, of course, but nothing more.
/ There can be direct soul-like links between one animal
and another, or between an animal and a human, and so
also possibly from one animal at one time to another
animal at another time?
: Yes. But it is still a category jump.
/ When the 8-sphere theory is applied, is one shall we
say 'allowed' to copy the shape of it more or less into
one's design?
: Definitely no. It has to come from within. You spend
time in meditating over it, -- like I have done. But you
push aside all attempts of copying anything whatsoever
when you create a new shape. What has to be the
overriding concern is that you create the right shape in
each moment in which it is right to create anything at
all.
/ Suppose it looks like it.
: I doubt it.
/ What is natural for humans to express won't look like
it?
: Not much like it. At any rate, that's my proposal.
There's an infinity of figures within it, that it
approves of, so to speak: but you don't get a law-abiding
action merely by copying the law-book. You get the right
action by understanding something of the essence of the
ground with the best of yourself and then acting on the
instinct of your heart, having cleansed yourself from the
debris of wanting to copy.
CHAPTER 5: ANIMALS AND HUMAN SOUL AS EXPERIENCER OF PAIN
/ Suppose I say something like this: It is all very well
what you say but it sounds like nothing but yet another
ideosyncracy, without hardly a bit of any evidence to
support it other than, well, the goodlookingness and
persuasive eloquent tone of the tongue of its author --
so how am I to know that it is indeed distinct from the
more or less similar-sounding -- at a distance --
proposals of which there are thousands?
: I don't know. That's all I can say.
/ You do not say, look, there's gonna be a miracle in
your life within fourteen days if you just get the gist
of this?
: As far as I am concerned, anything true and not based
on illusions is a miracle whether or not it is felt like
that, whether or not anything happens which in the short
run convinces you of that.
/ But is the 8-sphere true, literally? Is it truth?
: It is the question each has to ask. I can only say,
naturally.
/ How can it be in a neopopperian spirit to say that?
Forgive me for asking.
: It is in a neopopperian spirit to assert the reality,
the fierce strong and sometimes even mysterious presence
of intelligent, god-given intuition. That reality doesn't
come in the shape of a human-readable stamp or a
certificate from the authorities in Washington D.C., nor
does it come by gold plates with inscribed enochian
signs, nor is it proven by the sheer magnificent size of
the pyramids nor by the geometry involved by them. All
things that can be concocted by an ego has got nothing to
do with this presence. The presence is what calls on you
as an individual to stand aside from the turmoil of
humanity and demand, require of yourself to listen beyond
your little self, and find out what's what, and leave
what you have to leave to come to what you have to come
to when you are tied into a new truth process.
/ This is also neopopperianistic?
: You see, you ask evidence for something that I feel I
have already done a near-breach -- not a breach, but a
near-breach -- in proposing; I cannot try to make it
sound more convincing; in fact I would be far more happy
to make it sound less convincing. But I let what I have
said stand.
/ What type of breach?
: Near-breach. Of my own solid commitment to myself not
to contribute to new physics, for physics can be so
easily something which feeds new type of military
production. Suppose I say, if I provided evidence for
this the sum total of all atomics and hydrogen bombs and
so on could be superceded a thousand times even with
ease. That's what we gotta not have. So I assert,
humanity won't get any further with anything whatsoever
unless they leave of new physics, for it is no longer a
thirst for important knowledge, it is merely, now, -- and
has been so in part since World War II (and this many of
the pre-and-post-world-war-ii physics writers agreed
heavily in), a thirst for too-dangerous knowledge. Human
cunning must be fought by providing bounds. The bound has
to be set on physics knowledge. What there is not enough
of is ego-transcending knowledge. That knowledge is
different in kind; I'd rather you ask about that. Forgive
me for re-directing the course of the conversation.
/ So be it, let's re-direct. You say, ego-transcending
knowledge? Knowledge of a different kind? Now could you
indicate why someone interested in a hot party and a
swimming-pool before it should delay the hot propositions
for an hour and instead deepen his or her ego-
transcending knowledge?
: Sure, I can do that. When you have a lot of ego, you
don't have humor, you don't understand metaphor, nor
irony, and so you get trouble even at parties, you don't
get the vitality and lovely playfulness of the gay girls
going with you, you get a sense of blocked answers. And
add much alcohol to this, and it only gets even more
sour, the lack of irony is also lack of self-irony -- it
is a mere imposed type of irony in order to win friends,
but one doesn't understand it -- and so the lack of
priorities and temporary distrust in plans that alcohol
gives becomes a severe vulnerability and severe self-
distrust. Similar effects, or after-effects, come by
other drugs I think. Look at the people who don't do the
ground-work but who run to drugs! They have to try ever-
new concoctions of their drugs because their ground-work
of love, of humour, of empathy, of compassion has not be
laid. They get full of the bad hygiencs of inner
aggressiveness, and this inner psychological impurity
breaks down even the brain and its patterns become boring
and soon this shows on the smile. So it is a severe
natural in-born punishment on the human being who denies
the importance of a -- shall we say -- light
buddhistically inspired self-enquiry, or who merely does
enquiry in order to produce words to others with which to
impress.
/ So one must do this in private?
: Like the grand old master said some twenty millenia
ago, don't go meditating while others look at you, this
is something between you and God entirely. Or we can say,
between you and all the other subtle higher authorities,
submuses especially, then higher than that, muses, then
with them, and highest of course, the creator.
/ What role of 8-sphere in this meditation?
: Like this: you can get to know by it that they are
artists. That you have to have the dynamic playfulness of
the artist, who can think in shall we say entwined
tantric terms, who can think many-dimensionally, who can
be self-referential and give herself over to the ocean of
silence and meditation, in order to deserve real inward
conversation with the higher beings. It is not about
getting a better company consultant!
/ Will it rejuvenate?
: The child growing up is given some free space to grow,
the fast-growing-ness of the cells (as I believe Rupert
Sheldrake pointed out well in early Cambridge studies in
biology) is the rejuvenation factor in itself. The
children has the fast-growing-ness because they stretch
and to some extent fill out the right shapes. But the
adult then will have a finely woven balance which is all
the time affected by deeds, even by thoughts, in an
intensely self-related interconnected alocal whole.
/ Alocal? You mean nonlocal?
: With my friend Henrik B Tschudi prior to my work on 8-
spheres we sought for a word sounding like nonlocal but
which can be used in a philosophical generic sense rather
than a strictly physics scientific sense, and so
suggested, to ourselves in a conversation, that alocal
can be used with this philosophical distinction. The
prefix a- is then not used in the sense of 'an instance
of', but rather as 'something beyond'. Whether or not
others had used the world alocal before wasn't the point,
but the point was to generalize over an important term at
the time.
/ And what, then, is the role of the alocal in the self-
transcending enquiry you spoke about?
: Any religious tradition with any element of worth in it
has a sense of unfolding events as token of a greater
pattern of interconnectedness, which atheists cloaking
themselves as scientists love to be sarcastic about. But
it is real, this interrelatedness of all events. It is
even artistically real. But to listen to the music of
events, you must understand that the great challenge of
this world is to explain distance in space, not to
explain how things are tied up, bounded together, bonded,
resonant. For the world is a whole and it is a beautiful
mystery that anything at all is stretched out! And so by
this out-stretcedness of the body, the human body as the
muse body as God's body, we are touching on an expression
from the 8-sphere, which literally is a provider of
dimensionality of an organic kind. It doesn't actually
show the longlegged babe that is an archicon of all
beauty in all artistic activity, but it rather implies
the longlegged babe.
/ Why longlegged?
: Because the future is infinite.
/ The future being where we go?
: Instead of sit.
/ Some would say this is racist. Like beauty photography.
How does it tie in with all-compassionate-ness?
: You must have all-compassionate-ness if you are to be a
really good artist. You must cultivate it in yourself.
But this compassion must also go into the future, and
feel the reality of the existence of a healthy humankind.
If you are so tied up in your narrow focus on the
presently unfolded manifest moment that you deny thinking
about the future, then everything goes and, as a
consequence, nothing matters and nothing has any meaning
and then also the concept of beauty gets washed out.
/ Like the art works associated with late 20th century
and early 21st century and sometimes called
'contemporary'.
: That's all atheist bullshit, of course. It is marxist,
or atheistically capitalist, which are but two sides of
the flip of the coin of putting might of human thought
above the might of God.
/ So you say, you have gotta look into the future to
decide what to be, well, MORE compassionate to?
: Yes. Quite so. Unless you have a distinction between
something and something else as far as beauty goes, as
far as the health-producing potential in the future, you
have merely got a valueless all-embracingness. Now
however that all-embracing-ness is a very important
feature in any spiritually enlightened heart. It is only
that in addition you need the meaningfulness of making a
discernment. This discernment will make you say 'yes' to
an artwork and 'no' to another on something not based on
gossip or market evaluation. It will call on your heart
to decide. You must then not eat too much fat nor drink
too much alcohol for then your heart gets clogged or your
nerves and your sensitivity gets hardened, then death
masks and skulls and bones and so on are the only things
which provide any intensity and any resistance to you;
for you are bored. The morbid individual is not morbid in
essence, but is so fat in essence that the orientation
away from the laziness and boredom of that fat becomes
the only thing which provides a distinction in life, and
that distinction becomes death. So the fascination with
death -- which is, plainly put, necrophilia, becomes the
end-state of the atheist and the end-state of the dying
earth. Which is why we must be willing to be artistically
racist, so to speak: we must not apply a whimsical
criterion like skin color or mother lineage. It is not
about being a jew or not jew. Nor is it about being
against anyone who comes from a background where they
read Mein Kampf or Quoran or similar very racist stuff.
It is rather looking for goodness on the inside --
freedom from wrong conditioning -- and the backing up by
a promise of health-in-the-future by the longleggedness,
not tallness, and skin complexion of shining peach-melba
health and gracefulness of built and so on. The artist
has a taste, and this taste rejects cultures which says
that God has by geneology chosen anyone.
: That doesn't sound much racist. Rather you are saying,
beauty has got to be honored without bothering too much
where that beauty comes from.
/ Well, as long as it is not a fake merely lasting the
day, or that the generous smile is merely a cover-up for
a hidden agenda based on a shoddy book.
: The psychology of the individual must be beautiful as
well?
/ Yes.
: I have heard some utter the view that excellence is
artificial and perhaps not very attractive.
/ Now, do they really mean that, or is it merely that
they live in a relatively constant state of self-
condemnation -- proposing to themselves that they are not
excellent -- and so fear the presence of something which
they would badly want but think they cannot get? I think
there is in all beings a smile of happiness in coming
into even a brief moment of resonance with something
truly excellent, not artificial, something going beyond,
something that transcends.
: But then, the next moment the person may start to long.
/ Yes, and this longing may be felt as a sadness that the
person rejects, if the person is immature, instead of
takes as a leaping-point for an exploration into needless
attachments and so, in a lightly buddhistic sense if you
wish, comes to a greater sense of playful detachment. But
this playful detachment doesn't mean that you strain
yourself to conjure up the image of a girl as old when
she is young so as to avoid seeing her present beauty as
young, as I have seen some rediculous buddhistic schools
-- schools calling themselves wrongly 'buddhistic' --
suggest. It is not about training oneself to be cold to
greatness. It is rather about training oneself to allow
beauty and greatness and excellence and rediculously
attractive women, those excessively pretty ones, to
switch on many lights, perhaps too many lights, and then
one must do what one must do to avoid getting into a
sulking mood afterwards. For beauty has to be deserved in
relatively surprising moments to come, and these moments
are not owned, not possessed, except by the muses and so
forth.
I am slightly uneasy about the residue, if that's the
word I want, about something we talked about earlier.
About animals. Could we go back to that theme for a
moment, please?
: Sure, yes. We talked about individualization. Animals,
you seem to say, do not have soul.
/ Well, remember I am using the word 'soul' in a very
strict sense, to actually denote a subtle and even
immortal body that is actually incarnating into the young
human body when it has had a year or more to show a bit
of what it will be. About the latter, we can note that
infants may, when newborn, look rather like having been
through rainy days. Their skin are soggy, often, you
know; it is quite a complicated process to go from
mother's womb when she does the breathing for you, to go
to breathing on your own and having the naval chord
clipped off. The rediculous proposals of some religions
are that a soul enters a body at this stage; or even more
rediculously so, when the sperm, or babestream as I call
it, meets the egg of the girl, as if that had anything to
do with soul! That is obviously a purely material process
and the catholic church -- which is, as far as I can say,
entirely non-catholic in the sense of the word 'catholic'
as 'straight, right, fundamental' -- has such a
rediculous idea. The tie the material to the body because
they are afraid of coptic divinity and they are afraid of
incarnation thoughts and they are afraid, above all, to
loose their money and their political influence. They are
not the possessors of truth. I would give more truth to
the teen pop-singer, the young Madonna, in singing Like a
Virgin; the fact she got away with it despite all the
idiotic insincere cursing done in the cellars of the
Vatican in mafia-ridden Italy means that the Vatican has
no powers at all, neither in heaven nor on earth, beyond
that which any ordinary corrupt tiny rogue state with
corrupt senile politicians have. The pope is an insincere
member of humanity. Had they had integrity, they would
have closed the shop and announced divinity to be
elsewhere than in their rotten cellars and fat-obesive
and often gay-men-obsessive artworks like those of
Leonardo da Vinci. I have no homophobia, especially not
when it comes to girls doing it with each other, for that
is but beauty meshing with beauty in tantric orgasms, but
I don't see that men messing about with men can be
trusted to come up with divine art.
: Hm. So humans have soul, girl-souls you say. These
girls incline towards God?
/ You may laugh of it but I propose that human existence
is essentially a divine tantric sexual existence, and so
the future belongs to girls meeting up with a coptic
manifestion of God. By 'coptic' I do not mean the
rediculous rituals or pompeous priest manifestos of those
who of this day call themselves coptic, however much I
respect amharic and all that; rather, I say, there is a
form of sensual divine-in-matter christinaity there -- as
an eclectic component only! -- that any individual must
bring up and realize together with an ancient indian
feeling of the immortality of each human soul; and then
blend with understandings also from elsewhere that these
souls acquire experiences at many levels, in several
manifest universes you might say, and that they can be
moved around also after the incarnation into a human
body. This, then, will all make for a justice-oriented
reality; and if you are any believer in God at all, you
will naturally also believe in justice. But justice one
cannot get by a fixed one-body-one-soul-at-all-times
solution. Rather, God creates and God destroys and God
puts souls there then here then around and so on. This he
does by helpers, naturally, or it would be too much
intricate work for him to enjoy anything; and so there is
a hiearchical organisation of higher helpers, higher
submuses lead by muses which are his main consorts at all
levels.
This is how I intuit it and I don't care one shit
whether it is accepted by anyone, it is not something I
say as part of a package that I'm trying to sell to
anyone. Truth takes care of itself. Those who claim
something to be true when it is not are taken care of by
truth. Someone who has this ground-faith don't speak
quickly and without many many seasons of very deep and
very young and very aspiring and very frank meditation.
What is then said has the integrity of truth and those
who have any enlightenment at all will pick it up and not
come with stupid questions, and there is no nead for
yellow or orange or brown robes and dangling incense
boxes and peculiar forms of religious languages to back
it up, or peculiar names of bodhisattvas and mysterious
forms of reasoning. It is all about speaking about what
is seen when the ego is not blocking. And what a human
may see is always in glimpses and so it is not really for
anyone to speak about with sureness.
We were to say something about animals.
: Yes. Would you say it is possible to be cruel to
animals on behalf of rescuing humans? Is there any
meaning to a value comparison?
/ Oh, there's tons of meaning to value comparison, and
humans are infinitely more important than mammals, I feel
it is right to say -- and I do not claim that I do not
see immense beauty in the natural world, or in the sub-
oceanic world, or in the other types of life-oriented
spheres of this universe. There is fantastic beauty and
it is all 8-sphere oriented. But humans are the real
quintessence of the artwork of the divine. That is not
something an ant can say to the other ant. It is
something a human can say to other humans. It is not
something an atheist will agree in, but then the atheist
won't last forever, will he? He will be wiped out and
incarnated in what is deserved so as to be taught better
lessons; and this is part of the justice, part of the
faith we have gotta have, that all moves on and on and on
but it is not the type of evolution that is clearly
depicted in human statistics in the news. Rather, it is
an evolution that is on the scale of many millenia at a
time. So in your spirit you must feel the millenia to
come, and not merely look to weather forecasts for the
upcoming day or imaginary weather forecasts for the
upcoming decades. It doesn't matter whether Earth will
persist or not, it won't for long anyway, but it is
entirely important that human beings physical keep on
reproducing themselves. So they will. So they must.
Nothing can stop that, not a dying Sun nor climate nor
nothing. It is bound to happen and only when you take a
cosmic perspective of time and on the immortality of your
soul and on the justice of reincarnation and of goyon
will you lift to the dignity of having a morality that
says yes to the right temptations and right painful
actions and no to the wrong temptations and wrong pains.
Without the cosmic perspective, one is merely withering
away in senility. With the cosmic perspective, you pray
in earnest to know what is right to do in each situation,
and you not merely go around by habit attending to your
committee and your bank account and your party plans.
As for animals, the old bibles got it right at that one
point, that humans are far more important to God. And so
one must make a distinction. One has no right to say that
it subjectiveness or unfairness when a human has
priority. Animals have no instrinsic rights; but a human
has the duty to have a sense of conscience to protect
humans in their evolution towards God. Humans must not
cling to animals at all. I am not saying, go kicking
meaninglessly at animals. I am not saying that there
ain't anything like pain sensors in animals but I'm
saying that the pain there has a practical function in
the nervous system rather than there being a soul or
spirit that feels that pain.
So if you trample on an insect which is trespassing
your house, you do something which is an act on hygiencs,
protecting your house, and so very slightly enhancing
your goyon. The buddhists who gently brush insects to the
side before treading on the road are merely clowns
performing an atheistic ritual, in which nonsensical,
nonunderstood consequences of their little aphorirms or
sutras are taking more seriously than the grand truth of
freedom from attachments and obedience to the essence of
nirvana or joy or God or truth. And this essence says,
pain is important for human growth, so don't do
painkillers, rather punish quickly any somewhat grown-up
who does something wrong but only at fingertips, don't do
anything against health, against dignity, don't do it so
that needlessly many sees that punishment, don't do it
ever against genital areas, don't disfigure a person, and
get over with a punishment in minutes. That teaches a
soul to be law-obedient. And without that, egotism gets
free, and sour, conditions to unfold its ghastly content.
So allow bounds for the city to be strictly overheld but
in very elegant quick punishments. Humans feel pain in
spirit and soul and learn when this is justly applied.
Now an insect has a fantastic function far out into wild
nature in breaking down last season's productions and
converting it to soil. One doesn't want to tarnish their
activity there, for it is right. But it is right in being
part of a completely ordered nature, in which everything
is design and nothing is coincidence -- really -- as I
see it. It is not about insects or dogs or fish or birds
or horses incarnating or anything like that. They don't.
They never have and never will. They are but matter, put
crudely but I think, rightly.
So there is a goyonic freedom -- a moral justice, I
would even say, in a human being eliminating the living
body of one animal in favour of something else, perhaps
in favour of another animal, or in favour of humans.
CHAPTER 6:
: You speak of 'small is beautiful' when it comes to
organisations, entrepeneurship and so on. Is this a form
of capitalism, would you say?
/ On a very small scale. You see unless we have, humans
have, a lot of diverse options there is no real
experience is there? Entertainment need be diverse and
shopping or massage or food options need be fairly
diverse and the music must have an inner diversity or
arrhythmicness and elections must have a diversity of
options and so on. Without diversity, there is not the
suffusing of human consciousness with the sense of
potential out of which something new can emerge; and
without this sense, the human narrows down and withers
and leaves the experience for the next incarnation. And
so I speak of something such as free capitalism in a
minimalistic sense. It has gotta be minimalistic because
if it is not, -- it must be warmly, hotly minimalistic,
with tons of diversity, maximal in diversity -- for if it
is not, the companies will by greed make all things
uniform, more or less, or destroy all alternatives but a
petty two. The dualism of parties in the USA elections,
all excluded by two near-identical productions of the
political establishment -- I am not saying the small
differences don't matter hugely, but they are similar on,
oh, so many grounds. That is not diversity. That is not
what the promise of democracy is all about. The promise
of democracy is to apply it within a zone that is rigidly
controlled as to its foundations, and it is part of this
beautiful rigidity to set an upper limit to capitalism
and, if need be, by police force make it comply with
divinity.
: Rough words.
/ Yeah. I guess it is.
: Well, how can anything in the commercial world, where
money and more money and yet more money tend to be the
rule, be tied up into -- what did you say? -- divinity?
/ You see it is here we have to say NO to atheism, and
YES to 8-sphere. We say by 8-sphere that God is an artist
who day-dreams all reality by injecting
interconnectedness but in a flud, dynamic, richly lively
way. So all is related to God and each action is either
relatively supported or not to the intent of the more
long-term unfoldment of the patterns. Each little money
transaction is either right or not. If you do currency
transactions, it may not be right to earn money every
time. It is foolish and illogical for one who is even
slightly enlightened to say that capitalism is all about
more and more and more money. Rather, the righteous type
of capitalism is about right action in creating money-
related diversity and sustainable, interesting events
which encourage more righteousness, more goodness, in
people. And such. It is not just any set of words but the
general religous feeling. We cannot put it all into the
form of law-books. We cannot have the self-centered
asberger-syndrome-like sharia laws, so-called laws, which
are really just the intent of putrified men to chop the
hands of girls who want to masturbate each other. We must
have real laws. Real laws must be realistic as to human
greed and say no -- a clear-cut, fierce no -- to too big
structures in human society. They must be small.
Otherwise all first-handed-ness goes out of the society.
The structures must also relate with tremendous respect
to the foundations of this society. For instance,
elections must be run by the society not by a company,
for elections must be trusted. So also the currencies,
which should be four or something, otherwise there's not
enough to do currency transactions of an interesting
kind, must be maintained in a way which is dignified in
terms of the total quantity of money by the society, not
by companies. So banks should never be privately owned,
of course. It is an absolute folly to try to apply
private ownership on the things which are the foundations
of the game. And it is also a game. That is also why I
use the phrase 'Yoga4d v.r. Gamemakers' and all that. If
you don't understand what a game is about, you don't
understand anything of human society nor then therefore
of human enlightened existence.
: This thing about currency transactions. How does it
come into a mini-capitalism like the way you say? What is
it all about?
/ The fluctuations of how you convert, say, yen to dollar
or dollar to swiss franc or franc to euro are determined
as a sum by the liveliness of natural human market
interactions. This liveliness is, like the grooming of
plants, something which the banks must see to that
happens with frankness. This frankness involves the trust
that humans have in money and such. The fluctuations
always occur when there is the wanting to pay in yen by
what has a price in dollar, there's a difference which
may vary minute by minute, say. If you are eager on
having a certain service, say, you want a fantastic leg-
massage, and the price is 10 dollars and you have only
yen on yourself, you can check with a bank for the
current going rate of conversion and you are so eager you
couldn't care less what the rate is, unless it is
horrific. If it so happens that a lot of people line up
to pay with yen for dollar things -- and then take this
yen to the bank to get dollar -- the dollar gets more and
more expensive for the bank runs out of bills and want to
limit this tendency, want to check the whole thing from
running out of balance. So the banks are balance-makers.
But this balance must be fluid and playful like a song or
dance. It must be willing to move but not move beyond
certain limits. When these limits are pecked at by a
restless market, they have a vault of extra reserves and
can go in and do a slightly artificial transaction, say,
with yen and dollars, so as to correct a tendency; but
they must evaluate whether to do some other restrictions
as well.
But then, when you are in the mood to simply increase
the money in your bank account, which, say, you earned by
being the one that gave that fantastic leg massage, with
free masturbation on top maybe, you will want to sit back
and just study these fluctuations. Is it not so that the
swiss franc or whatever tends to grow in value relative
to the euro or whatever you are looking at? So suppose
you ask the bank to assist you to do a leveraged
transaction in that direction, you put a bet, throwing
in, say, a hundred dollars with a leverage of a dozen or
so, meaning that the bank is willing to lend you a dozen
times as much money as you have to make the slight
fluctuation be expanded a dozen time to income for you if
you have betted right, and loss if not. The responsible
bank -- and, fortunately, such exists!!! -- will clip the
transaction for you automatically if it strays too far in
the wrong direction so that you don't get a minus on the
account, ever, from doing a CT or currency transaction.
The responsible bank will also offer you to cash in
automatically if your bet comes right by a parameter you
enter into a computer program.
: You get money this way?
/ Sure, with ease I increase what I have by more than
twenty percent each week when I give it enough meditation
and time; or slower if I have too many other activities
going. And that is after I have substracted the losses.
But before I have paid the taxes. Remember though that I
have not really had any big sponsoring to start with -- I
have barely had enough to pay for a week's food and so
on, in addition to acquiring all the means to do my
sometimes very expensive projects with lots of
electronics and so on. So I have just put aside minuscle
sums and learned to make money out of these and this
again I have just started with. I cannot claim therefore
to have a wealth based on this work as yet, which really
started just months ago, but I can claim to have a
wealth-creating percentage.
: Suppose now we say, shouldn't money be earned the hard
way? Is this gambling-like thing real?
/ Look, if you have any sense of the entertainment that
the human mind craves, and to some extent deserves, you
mustn't deny the fun of getting something out of what is
almost nothing. Definitely there are such things in life
as a free lunch and yet it is deserved if you have the
cosmic perspective.
