Thursday, December 9, 2004

Stand-up comedians and the Internet

Did you know that the craft/art/whatever, "Stand-up Comedian" is a very recent development - that prior to about 50 years ago, there was no such thing? Oh, there were examples (Mark Twain, Shakespeare through his plays), but in general, it did not exist as "something humans do" until the 1950's.

People have been walking this planet for hundreds of thousands of years, but only in the last 50 years or so, has there been a "class" of people called, comedians. Why?

Was there nothing to laugh about 100 years ago, 500 years ago, 1500 years ago? Think about it... maybe there was not. That is, maybe the craft/art/whatever, of comedian, is a very recent phenomenon only because the general level-of-consciousness of mankind, today, is equipped/evolved/developed to the point that outloud, upfront, in-your-face humor, can even be expressed, let alone, directed at another human - or group of humans - without fear, without guilt, and without shame.

That, prior to that, if one was to actually stand-up, in front of other people, and MAKE FUN OF THEM, sometimes in an overtly hostile way (which is exactly what all stand-up comedians do, no matter how they color it - even Seinfeld, if you can hear it), they might not "see the humor", that is, they might "take offence", that is, they might kick his sorry ASS!!!

Check this... there is a direct relationship between the "art" of stand-up, and the emergence of the "science" of electronic communication (the internet) - and, that without the capacity for the one, there could NOT be the capacity for the other. Man's consciousness had to develop the ability to laugh outloud at himself and others, BEFORE, he could invent the science of electronic communication.

Huh? Consider the >>opportunity<< that the internet/email affords millions and millions and literally hundreds of millions of people today - the capacity to make fun of other people, without fear, without guilt, and without shame (cloaked and concealed, as they are, behind an utterly impenetrable veil, safe and secure in their "musings".)

You DO see that, right? It also affords people the new-found/acquired capacity, their ancestors (and most probably their parents, and very likely even most of their peers not "into it yet, if ever") were almost totally INCAPABLE of experiencing, to laugh at themselves, to not take themselves >>sooooooo seriously<<.

With the increase in communication between people, comes the increase in making fun of them - because, what on earth is FUNNIER than a talking ape, who says... "I am enlightened, and you're not!", or "I am such-and-such, and you should worship me, and honor me, and take what >>I<< say, seriously!!"

Don't take my word for it... Don't take ANYBODY'S word for anything...

Just look into what's going on - between your own ears - once in a blue moon, and you too, might become your own... favorite... STAND-UP Comedian!

HA, ha, ha...

Tuesday, December 7, 2004

Talk and the art of silence

It's NOT that you can *not* talk about talking (or it's bigger brother, think about thinking), because you are >>un-able<<, because everybody is perfectly ABLE to do it, nor because you don't want to, because everybody wants to.

It's that 1) nobody ever does it, as 2) it's NOT acceptable "social" conversation, to be continually referencing BACK TO the speech (that just occurred, and is now occurring...)

Do you know what the reason is, that talking about >>the talking<< is unacceptable "social" conversation?

Because as soon as you start doing it, you are confronted with the realization, that 1) you NEVER do it, 2) the only thing you can possibly SAY regarding it, is the exact same thing you can ONLY say regarding >>death<< itself. What can you say after confronting in real time, your dead mother there in her death-bed? Beyond, "well, that's it for her, she's 'done'."

That is, nobody on earth could EVER have come up with the notion, of "life after death", simply by THINKING about some dead person, or even their own impending death. Anything anyone could say after that: "well, that's it for her, she's 'done'." would be in the realm of BELIEF, and though it's necessary and makes one feel much better (to believe she is now alive and in heaven, etc.), it did NOT come about as a direct result of your THINKING about the situation.

That's why, precisely enough for those who already see this, nobody does talk about talking (think about their own thinking, investigate their OWN consciousness). The instant one begins, their ordinary consciousness, their flaw-finding and comparison-making "I's", from memory, >>beliefs<<, abort the process of investigation in realtime. That is, you are momentarily speechless.

There's only one way to investigate consciousness, and that's to THINK about it (not believe about it), and thinking means, original (not from your own memory) thinking - new thoughts - overcoming speechlessness.

The only way to investigate consciousness, is during the process of Thinking (not believing) New (for you) Thoughts, the "state of" overcoming speechlessness.

The investigation in realtime, is not thoughts self-referencing thoughts (which is the memorization and memory-recall process), it is the laying down of NEW track for the train to travel, because in order to observe the landscape, there must already BE landscape.

Monday, December 6, 2004

On the outside looking in...

...versus, on the inside looking out.

Those who deal in ideas, concepts, stories they read or heard about, are on the outside, noses glued to the glass, peering in. Those who don't deal anymore in thoughts from others, but create them for themselves alone, first and foremost, are on the inside looking out.

Any sufficiently complex nerve nexus established primarily as an observational *outpost* will disintegrate within 24 hours if not interlinked with at least one other similarly established outpost.

When at least two outposts are interlinked they immediately begin the triangulation process, thereby providing a triangulated attention whorl in the neural neighborhood - like whirling dervish watch dogs.

Sunday, December 5, 2004

Ordinary uncertainty

The difference between the ordinary mind and the certain mind, or upping the ante, ordinary enlightenment and extraordinary enlightenment:

The ordinary always produce a biography, one page or several, describing the causes and effects resulting in the claimed enlightenment. In general, they all have one central thing in common: they detail a moment when they "became enlightened" and then describe the events and circumstances following that nameable event, leading up to that present moment of writing it all down. (there's a little clue there...)

After that - once the book is published, the school is started, the followers are paying monthly dues - it's all "downhill" from there, because there are no more such moments when they newly "become enlightened." For the ordinary, it's a lifetime of redescribing that first, seminal event.

Now, in your head, how would you describe extraordinary certainty?

ps- watch how the ordinary mind deconstructs the terms used, in order to invalidate the premise, piece by piece, thereby avoiding the question entirely.

pps- note how such intellectual endeavors amount to nothing more than missing out on the fun of the exercise; having been presented with the "rules of the game," you "choose" (but, really, that's a laugh, isn't it?) to avoid the playing, and justify the avoidance with copious reasons, which you instantly believe as true and correct... "I might get hurt," "I don't have time right now," "I don't see the point of such a silly game,"

ppps- and the list goes on and on you still remember the question?

Saturday, December 4, 2004

Are you remembering your condition... right now?

The scattered 1% of humanity - who naturally believe they are "on the inside track" when it comes to waking up, attaining enlightenment, becoming liberated - also, >>usually<< (though certainly not always) believe that it's a combination of practice/methods and ideas/concepts that will inevitably result in their ultimate success, and the attainment of their aim, however they define it to themselves.

So they read their "bibles" (books, whatever) every morning, sit in meditation (count breaths, chant, whatever) every afternoon, talk for hours with friends and strangers, and after many years or decades, believe they are making considerable "progress" though defining that "progress" in specific terms, still eludes them as it did many years and decades earlier.

The specific causes of their "condition" is described in the books in many different ways - depending upon countless factors, including date they were written down, nationality of the author, etc. - but always amounts to the same thing, once you get the hang of This.


This: being able to determine the difference between the literal and the metaphorical, and not just linguistically (any 15 year old can do that), but consciously - that is, be able to SEE what a metaphor (such, man is asleep) is literally, in realtime, without all the associated bullshit (read, ideas, concepts, parables, similes, symbolism).

This: an instant act of will in the physical moment, as opposed to thinking about acting in your head.

This: is much bigger than two short paragraphs, of course, of course, but expands exponentially as your ignorance (of your true condition) reduces, in the same way the grand canyon expands exponentially as your distance from the edge reduces.

Friday, December 3, 2004

Are you asleep... no seriously... right now!?!

The mystics said, and some even wrote it down, that men are not fully conscious, that they are asleep even while walking around, and that something can be done about that, but, only in those who want to wake up - and that it doesn't just happen automatically, by virtue of the fact that you're "all grown up now," nor even that you've got a college-education and read hundreds of books, nor even that when someone asks you, with a straight and non-accusatory face, "Hey, bub, are you asleep right now?" and you react with, "Me? No, of course not, that's ridiculous." and know that it IS ridiculous (right then, you're not... know why?).

99% of the planet couldn't care less what the dead mystics said, of course, but it's interesting - don't you think - that a few people here and there DO care what they said?

What do you think that "interest" is based upon? Have you investigated the idea that you are, in fact, *literally* asleep (not fully conscious as you could be), while at the same time fully believing otherwise... (except, as noted above, when you remember/are reminded you're not fully conscious, right then, for an instant, you are?... and then, like everything else, it passes.)

The idea of being asleep, is exactly the same idea as, man is unenlightened, and that man lives as though in a prison, and "waking up" is exactly the same as attaining "enlightenment," and becoming "liberated."

But, again, what do you think those metaphors are >>specifically<< referring to, when they suggest "you" are "asleep?" Have you investigated the idea that it is not "you" that is asleep, it is the conscious part of the brain that is running totally on automatic, and that 99% of your day - each and every day - all that flows through the mind, are thoughts you neither planned, decided to think, or invited therein? It's all - up there, between your own little ears, in the gray matter - an accidental affair, morning till night, and during dreamsleep too.

Of course, you may be one of the 99% of the planet who couldn't care less about this - either to SEE it as correct information, or "do something about it, damn it!!" - and why should you or anyone? Afterall, even with all that automatism going on, everything is humming along quite efficiently, you can get dressed, make it to work on time, do your job, negotiate traffic coming home, make your dinner, watch a little tv, carry on conversations with other people just like you, and flop into the sack by 10. "So," you say, "what's the problem?"

No problem, bub.

Just reminding you, you were asleep again.


Friday, November 19, 2004

Soup bowls and bowls of soup

All study of words, concepts, ideas - be they from the mouths or writings of your neighbor, your guru, your philosopher-teacher, or your saviour-god - is the attempt by your own consciousness to conceive of itself, to know itself, utilizing the same thing that gives rise to it in the first place - the thoughts swimming around therein. It's like legs trying to conceive of walking, while being legless, or eyes trying to conceive of red, while being totally blind from birth.

The mind, the conscious part of the brain, gives rise to thoughts, and whether those thoughts arrive from external sources - email lists, books, or other humans - or internally - from memories, which were originally external, or just after-thoughts about them - is irrelevant. Once the mind is in it's automatic-running operation, the thoughts being produced therein have about as much chance of conceiving of the mind, as the legs or eyes do in their futile quest mentioned above.

The soup can't know the bowl, the soup is soup. Take the soup out of the bowl, and there's nothing with which to conceive of the bowl. That's why, not realizing this, everybody seeks external soup to fill their bowl, so that they can swim in the soup while believing they are "coming to greater understanding of soup." Well maybe they are, but B.F.D. Soup is not the bowl, and knowing more about the soup (the bible, the teaching, the words from your dead hero/saint/guru) is not what consciousness is attempting to do, it's what the fictional pseudo-hero it setup to be frontman (strawman) believes it is attempting to do.

Thursday, November 18, 2004

Your being attracts your life

Simple sentence, easily understood. You hear it and to one degree or another think you understand it.

Within that triad, exists all possibilities - from the creation and destruction of universes, to the creation and destruction of thoughts in your head, to the creation of destruction of "I's to think them."

Let's play a game of deconstruction, and see if we can connect the process to feeling, to some kind of otherwordly (not sic)sensation.


People believe that teachers and students, gurus and followers, saviors and disciples, arise in one specific way - an individual, by his presence, by his "being" attracts those who can value and evaluate that experience to a degree necessary to willfully gather around that individual. Jesus gathered his flock by appearing to those who could evaluate him. Gurdjieff gathered his students, by appearing to those who could evaluate him. The leader is the active force in this duality. The follower is the passive force. The neutralizing third force, is the Word, the teaching, and in that triality, the teacher provides the follower with the Words to evaluate him (his actions), and them (his words). >>His<< being has attracted His life, and He remains the primary mouthpiece within that new duality. It is a top-down creation, or as some have termed it, the ray of creation. It begins by someone playing the role of speaker seeking listeners.

But there is another way - in fact the only way, unknown by most -that groups are grown in the culture within which they arise. (You can here insert the image of a pure culture in a petri dish.) A small group of friends, already to a point in their studies - of Life and themselves - **look for and find** a suitable mouthpiece, someone who can and will take on the role, of Teacher, Guru, Savior. The key phrase herein being, "look for and find". That is, someone in the already established group of friends agrees to take on the role and task of Teacher, becoming the Primary Mouthpiece. The rest agree never to talk about this direct way, never to talk about This direct way, never to talk about This Direct Way.

The leader is the passive force in this duality. The followers are the neutralizing force. The New Teaching is the Active force, and in that triality, the chosen teacher provides his friends, with the Words to evaluate consciousness in realtime. >>Their<< beings have attracted their lives. It begins by several playing the role of listeners seeking a solitary speaker. He becomes the primary mouthpiece (the only one who can/does talk about The Direct Way). It is a bottom-up creation, or as some have termed it, the ray of evolution.


Now, back to the initial statement: "your being attracts your life" -a statement which you already completely and totally comprehend, as it is pre-wired into the DNA of everybody, from the molecules out, from "the bottom up".

See if you can get a handle on this hook: all indirect ways, from christianity to buddhism, from fourth way to theosophy, from psychology to spirituality, are Top Down. In that, for you, they literally begin with the Word, as spoken by a Someone. Therefore, you have never and almost CAN never observe and participate in a Direct Way, as it is bottom up.

Why would anybody want to be your teacher? (You can here re-image that pure culture in a petri dish... you didn't forget it did you?)

Wednesday, November 17, 2004

Characters in a dream

"Man is asleep in a dreamworld, but can awaken" is more than just titillating for a few, here and there, who run with it - to the book store, to their best friends, to the numbers on the bookmark, to the home of one of your special friends - and then attempt to develop the feeling further, for sometimes decades.

But, until you realize you are just a character in that dream - of someone not in that dream - there you remain.

All these stories you were told about your many I's, and your personalities - and even the false ones - and your soul striving for the spiritual life, is the dream that mankind continues to reproduce in every book written about it, and quickened into the temporary, pseudo-existence, by every head reading and talking about it - and that is the dream being referred to above.

You are still quite asleep in the dreamworld of others' making, and the only possibility for switching that duality into something akin to triality, is to invent your own dream for those pesky many I's you think exist "in you." (What a laugh that is, people who knowing nothing do things like - identifying different "I's" within themselves and others. This is so laughable, but laughing would spoil the joke. They don't even have one I.)

You don't even have one I in there, let alone many; only transient spikes of neural energy and no one at the SWITCH!!

Tuesday, November 16, 2004


You all know the word, and you also understand the difference between, literal, metaphor and symbolism, yes?

Unless you begin to comprehend the source and origin of those concepts, you remain bound by them, bound to them, as Brer Rabbit is bound to the tarbaby. The more he tries to extract himself - his limbs - from the tarbaby, the deeper and more tightly he is consumed.

The metaphor that man is living a life in darkness, but can emerge into the light, points to something existing in literal reality. When the light in you that shines on, and on, and on each day you arise from your bed, is but an ember, it's glow is like the reddened eyes of a monster emerging from that darkness.

The embers existing in reality - from the caveman's fire at his feet - exist first somewhere else, that only metaphors can suggest. The metaphor is not the literal reality, except in one and only circumstance, then it becomes the living history of the sun itself.

The same holds for all other metaphors, and all language is built upon the wordrock of metaphors - this is like that, and that is like this, and so metaphorical life begins... AT the redburning ember existing in the only reality it can know.

This is a three-way switch, somewhere, that allows all of tangible and non-tangible reality to take form.

The two known directions the switch can be moved to - by forces man can only imagine (metaphorize, symbolize) - is a union of opposites, and metaphors and symbolism are those opposites. The third direction, is the literal (as in, finding the source and origin of those linguistic-only (intangible) devices), made Glowing like the Sun.

All these metaphorical representations of man's **apparent** condition - that man is asleep but can awaken, or that man is living in the dark but can step into the light, or that man is existing in a kind of inner captivity from which he can escape, is beautifully poetic and as useful as they can be, but, gawd are they FAT... slovenly overweight, wastefully hefty. The key-phrase being, from above, "as useful as they **can** be" - being only for you and every human who's ever lived, metaphors and symbolism - for there, is no the 3rd direction, the 3rd mode of human existence - awake in the light of freedom, in a KNOWN literal reality.

ps- the tarbaby story was intentionally written, and the several metaphors freely represented therein, were intentional, and the briar patch is a real existing place, etc., etc., but you do get the drift.... right?

Monday, November 15, 2004

Thrust and Parry

In any group of people - being social creatures - there are always the more powerful and the less powerful - though this can also be stated, the less submissive and the more submissive, depending upon how one "sees oneself" - but the end-result is always the same. Someone takes control, and the rest vie for control (or shudder in the background), utilizing certain techniques that society has taught them - head bowing, fawning, taunting, trickery, subterfuge, teasing, direct bodily confrontation, etc.

Being civilized creatures, no longer living in caves, and killing their neighbors for food and sex, that drive - of the powerful to remain in power, and the powerless to strive to overcome the powerful - has shifted, from the realm of the body to the realm of the mind.

Today, we are still driven to take control, utilizing whatever methods and techniques we've been taught by the society, but with certain safeguards and protections in place, laws, social norms, religious tenets - primarily for the sake of the continuance of the body - but, curiously, with no such safeguards and protections in place to protect the mind.

Picture, if you will, two men trying to become the most important man in the group - however large or small, from head of the bird-watching club, to the head of the state or country. Neither will directly attack the other man physically, but will engage in all manner of personal attacks of the other man mentally - and without shame or guilt. It is actually expected that if a person can't defeat someone intellectually, then it's perfectly acceptable to attack him personally (attacking his reputation, his associations, his present and past actions, etc.), even while it's unacceptable to attack him physically.

By taking another's words (and, his verbalized or written words are necessary - that is, you can only attack someone for what they've said or written, never for what they think), and turning them, spinning them, altering them in some way, they can be used as weapons against the other. It's the time-honored and age-old warring technique of, "thrust-and-parry", only applied in the realm of thought.

By the time a person has graduated from grade-school, at the latest usually, s/he has become a master technician in the art of thrust-and-parry in order to become the most powerful kid in the house, the neighborhood, the schoolyard, and this includes females, who in fact are more deadly than the males.

This is not learned behavior, believe it or not; it is built-in to the organization of the brain, with it's two competing hemisperes and the never-neverland between them, that is virtually off-limits except to the most most powerful. This is where the established tyrant and his trusty strawman setup their strategies for dominating, both the individual and the environment at large.

Everyone's inner life amounts to nothing more than monologues by a tyrant, or worse, the dialogues of a tyrant and a strawman. And EVERYBODY is in this condition if they are not presently conscious without thought - or, if not "without thought" at least not within thought.

Friday, November 12, 2004

The joy of sex, oops, I meant, conversation.

Would you rather have a conversation with someone who was smarter than you, or with someone who is dumber than you? (I will leave the definitions to you - hey, what else, right? - and you'll get no such from me.)

But, back to the sex-talk, oops... The question is totally irrelevant because the answer is immediately known by everyone, and it's so in-your-face obvious that to mention which one would be, almost, insulting. So you'll get no such from me. But, why? What's up wit dat?

When you are discussing, or "conversing" with another human - or even yourself (you still do that, right?) - you are inevitably speaking to someone dumber than you, for one very in-your-face reason: but, to mention it here, would be almost insulting.  So I will do it.

They can't know one iota, not even one micro-iota, about what's going in at the conscious part of your own brain, when it's discussing/conversing thoughts.

This is the physical description, can you but feel it, sense it, of the dumbing down (transforming to a lower intensity of vibration) of neural energies. The more "heated" (read: rapid-fire) the argument (all discussion and conversation is argument), the more dumbing down is occurring in the parties.

Ordinary humans are fueled by these dumbed-down energies, in the same way your 87-octane Toyota is fueled - and 94- or 95-octane fuels are either unprocessed, or wasted. As long as a person is tuned to operate at 87-octane (reading books and bibles and philosophy texts, and then discussing them ad nauseum), then what is possible in the utilization of 95-octane fuel goes by either, unnoticed, or as usual and then argued with, blah, blah, blah.

You've heard it all before.

Thursday, November 11, 2004

Who knows?

People think they are so damn smart - hey, check with yourself, don't you? - but, nobody knows what they are talking about, especially when it concerns matters which are entirely intangible in nature. Regarding matters which are tangible, like how a waterwheel works, or how a gasoline engine carburetor feeds fuel to the cylinders, or how to build a nuclear bomb, many people know exactly what they are talking about, and can back up everything they say, or not, and can then be proven to be talking through their hat.

People think they are so damn smart, but, nobody knows what they are talking about, especially when it concerns non-scientific, cultural matters like which religion is superior, which style of art or music is superior, or which president would be superior. These are NOT physical matters - though they refer to physical things in some cases - they are entirely non-physical intangible matters, and this is the glaring reason why nobody knows what they are talking about. Just opinions, theories, talking to hear themselves talk.

But, that is not surprising at all, and certainly not an indictment of anybody - since everybody is included "in that rowboat" - but, what is even more interesting, is that nobody - whether they be uneducated or have two Phd's - realizes this. The closest anyone ever comes to it, is thinking everybody ELSE is clueless, except themselves, of course.

There is only ONE thing that anyone can know anything about, though even when knowing this one thing, most can't even begin to talk about it, because they haven't truly experienced the knowing, beyond sensing it, or feeling it. Not until a person knows something, feels it, and senses it, can he discuss it at all.

Wednesday, November 10, 2004

Astrology and philosophy

There are large groups of people studying astrology and philosophy trying to understand what's going on inside them (and everybody else), and they spend many hours everyday talking about them, defending their viewpoints, "developing" their viewpoints, flitting around from cafe, to cell phone, to email list.

Of course, there are just as many studying cosmology and psychology trying to do the same thing.

But it's all top to bottom attempting to overcome a limitation (your "mind") by means of the limitation itself.

This is the basis of all indirect ways - filling the centers with external energies and massaging and caressing and calibrating those energies - never caring how the energies got in that empty bowl, only swimming in the bowl of soup therein.

The direct action that one can take, is never mechanical, and never automatic - unlike the filling of centers and calibrating of energies - and sounds more like silence, than cacophony.

Tuesday, November 9, 2004

"You will know them by their fruits."

You know where that one came from?

Ahh, ah... no you don't.

Consider this question: do you believe that western civilization (the one you personally "know", and "by extension" the rest of the world - based upon your being alive on earth at this time) - is being run by the least intelligent and least enlightened maxi-bunch in the world, or conversely, by the most intelligent and most most enlightened mini-bunch?

"You will know them by their fruits."

That statement pertains to a "you", a "knowing", and "fruits."

The "will", "them", "by", "their" is entirely superfluous and unnecessary to the conscious mind that would first think that statement.

Remember the first consideration? Where is the "you"? Where is the "knowing"? Where is the "fruits"?

"You will know them by their fruits."

That statement could only come from the most most of the few of the few, and be referring to "conscious creations". Done on purpose and for a known and knowable reason, without prior regard for results - Action for the sake of action, or >>living<<.

So, here's a final question to ponder: IS such a "thing" as a "conscious school" (meaning nothing in particular, except a place with a living leader who speaks about "knowing") possible on Earth, our current and most favorite planet?

How would >>you<< >>know<
By their >>fruits<

Sunday, November 7, 2004

Higher and finer

The essential realization that the universe can make - at present (without us... er... me I guess) - is that energy is "what I am, that am what I am."

But then came life, on earth apparently - as far a human can know - and, well, you KNOW what happened after that, right? (I'll wait whilst you go look it up...)

Transformation of energy, conservation of energy. That's the name of the game, and the only essential realization that the universe can make, until Life provides "an update."

For about the last 5000 years of updates, do you seriously believe that the whole story has been told?

(Note: all religions say they know/speak the whole story including the final act, presumably from some "fat lady.")

Tick, tock, and someone *still* believes the whole story has been told!

Anyway, back to the story. Energies transforming in a human dreamed up the story it's telling to itself - coming out >>your<< mouth, and everybody >>else's<< mouth (that, friends and neighbors, is the environment in mind, the second reality - as distinct from the material environment I'm writing this upon and you're reading this upon, the first reality).

Remember now, you have two hemispheres in your head, a right and left, an east and west, an old and new, and the energy conversion occurs between them - in the corpus, callosum.

Both sides fail to realize the significance and importance of the corpus callosum: The arched bridge of nervous tissue that connects the two cerebral hemispheres, allowing communication between the right and left sides of the brain.

Typing and Reading occurs in one or another hemisphere.

The two branes (M-theory is a good place to interject some spare mental energy right about now) are in a stable state of continual-approximation and occasional-contact at multiple-points.

Knowing this, in it's entirety, having made it up, IT continues: the intentional transformation of energy cracks the molecules releasing raw nuclear/neural energy crossing the great divide. The communication between the spheres is conducted through the contact of higher hydrogens, finer substances, which can see through walls, BE through walls.

The essential realization that the universe can make - at present (without us... er... me I guess) - is that energy is "what I am, that am what I am."

Saturday, November 6, 2004

...row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream...

...merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, life is but a dream...

Ever heard this one: "We are all the same, really; we are all in the same boat together..." and when you hear/heard that, what does/did your consciousness do? Do you remember, can you observe yourself to the degree that you can hear yourself reacting even now?

In the first place, the song is a lie - inside and out; you are not in a boat, you are not rowing a boat, and the only dream is merrily - somnambulistically - believing you are. There are no boats, there are no rowers...

...there are only songs, and sleepers singing them...

Of course, if you are following along - for the ride, so to speak - merrily singing the same refrain - then you probably believe mystics ride in the same boats as followers; if so, then you don't understand a thing about boat construction, water and wave dynamics, surface tensions, topologies, planetary gravity, and special and general relativity. (That is, mystics don't ride in no damn boats - they fly, or more preferredly, dematerialize/rematerialize at will.)

Can you get even a finger-hold and then a toe-hold, and then some stability on this rope-ladder to the stars? If so, send down some star-food if you don't mind.

Friday, November 5, 2004

The grand unifying theory of everything...

...well, pertaining to man and his little part of the universe:

It's not that there is no such thing, or that there can't be such a thing, it's that if you reveal it, there's not. Keep your hands off it, don't reveal it, and like a source of energy in an otherwise VOID, creations that can only be called by an idiot, "god-like" are birthed, in non-ending ever-expanding big bangs of something, the after-effects of which are clumsily termed, consciousness, awareness, beingness, and a few other-nesses.

ps - the "gut" is 'in-play' - and you can hear it - but only if you don't reveal it - that is, stop the play, burn the script, walk off stage, and other performance related terms I won't allude to here.

Thursday, November 4, 2004

Waking up - mechanically, versus, on purpose

If there actually ARE truths, TRUTHS, correct facts about life, humanity, humans, the universe - thoughts and ideas that you can't immediately "put your finger on" right now (of that, you are pretty certain), but when you hear them, you recognize them AS truth - then, why do you think you need to HEAR them, in the first place, to acknowledge their existence?

If you hear a truth, or more correctly represented, a tru-ism - like, "honesty is the best policy" - then why does it need to be stated, when, at the time you do hear it, you instantly go, "yes, right, that's correct." That is, you already KNOW it, you already LIVE by it, it's already a part of your ordinary consciousness.

(Note, you will be very hard-pressed to find someone who goes: "wait, just a minute, I always thought dishonesty and thievery were the best policies - that's how I've been living - maybe I should rethink that.")

ps- doors, are strange and funny things; animals don't have doors, only humans have doors, and only doors swing both ways - the way in is the way out... except for those creatures with no doors.

Wednesday, November 3, 2004

Conscious man

99.9999% of the planet believes instantly they are reminded of it, that humans are conscious, from the moment they arise in the morning till they enter dreamsleep at night.

.0001% or less knows there's much more to this than meets >>their<< eyes (not only their own, but everyone elses, who, coincidentally, don't realize this.)

Conscious man is one who can mind his own business.

Consider, all the rest of the human being - not counting that tiny part responsible for writing these words on this electronic paper -(skins, bones, blood, organs) exists at the pinnacle of "minding it's own business." The heart does only the heart-thing, the lungs do only the lung-thing, as does the liver, the kidneys, the stomach, the arms, the legs and intestines. Unless they suddenly don't, due to disease, illness or other calamity, when they stop doing that. You can not find anything in you, that is not totally, minding it's own business.

Only consciousness in man, can mind consciousness' business, and ONLY when it discovers/realizes that when it has stopped minding everything else's business, and is stable, that the rest of the time what it does has nothing to do with it - >>at all<<. That consciousness does not dictate what it does, it does not script it, it has no influence, nor input on it at all. Non-conscious consciousness is not playing by any script at all, the script is playing it, and the script IS, to mind everybody ELSE'S business BUT it's own, and who do you think that "someone else" is....

Conscious man is one who can mind his own business.

Consider, all the rest of the human beings living or dead - not counting that tiny part responsible for reading or writing these words on this electronic paper - (you reading, me writing) exists at the pinnacle of "minding it's own business." They follow the rule: out of sight, out of mind.

Until you can get your consciousness to not care one iota for any other consciousness but itself - neither living nor dead - you are totally asleep, in that that other human has invaded and captured your mind, entirely filling up that space/time wherein you "care your iotas", even if only in an infinitesimally small location in the conscious part of your brain - when that part is active, that's YOUR present consciousness.

If you (consciousness) are considering anything but consciousness, you are asleep. That is a fact in the Real World, and I don't mean MTV.

ps- now... watch how certain humans immediately invade your consciousness and start >>talking to you<< (G. says, 'man is a sleeping machine, of 3-4 centers, of chief feature and body type, etc. SO, blah, blah, blah.)

pps- or... maybe it (consciousness in you) starts arguing with the definitions of certain words and phrases as perceived by it's recent foray into yahoo email list reading, and starts composing a clever and intelligent retort... chortle, chortle.

Tuesday, November 2, 2004

The test... if you dare to take it...

Whether one has graduated from high school, grad school, or esoteric school (ooops, no one "graduates" from esoteric school, do they... they just keep attending, month after year after decade, or until, usually like clockwork, and the predictable running down of hormones, and sex drive, they lose interest and disappear into the background of their lives), there is a little "test" than one can take, just to see if they are, Real (by now, after all these years) or still imaginary (after all these many decades of talking and thinking about reality and stuff.

It's not a famous test - that is, nobody ever wrote it down, and nobody ever read about it - yet, out there it most definitely is, or more precisely IN THERE it most definitely is, can you but find it, can you but will yourself to seek it out.

There are not many things in life that your consciousness - that day-to-day routine consciousness everyone wears like a foghat around their heads, from the moment they get out of bed, till the moment they enter dreamsleep - can be absolutely certain of, in fact, there's only one thing. What?

Yet, there is one thing that NO ordinary man's consciousness is aware of... what?

That same thing.

The only thing it can be absolutely certain about, is the same thing that no ordinary consciousness can be aware of. How can that be?

What am I talking about?

ps- just because you don't know what somebody is talking about, doesn't mean they don't know what they are talking about.

Monday, November 1, 2004

Exo-, versus Eso-, and other terically-related matters

In the exoteric world, where everybody is naturally born, lives and has their livelihood, homes, cars, families, friends, and everything else, great value is placed upon education. People are put into schools of education from an early age - sometimes 4 or 5, into pre-kindergarten - and stay associated with some school until 20-25, depending upon, apparently, the innate intelligence and drive of the student, and the aims and goals that were inculcated into him by his peers, parents and teachers.

From the very beginning, the primary tool of education is the "test" - tasks which are assigned, and then accomplished by the students, and then graded for performance. From at least the 2nd or 3rd grade onward, tests are used to determine progress. Many argue that this is a poor method for determining progress, but nevertheless, it remains the primary tool for educating students in almost all subject matters, even art, music, and sandbox.

People are tested, and graded, and tested, and graded, and it has become the norm in most civilized societies. Thus is the foundation of society, supposedly, assured. The greatest majority of any civilized society is schooled, tested and graded, and when the age of majority is reached - between 18-21 or so, the person is considered a "qualified member of (exoteric) society."

But what about the esoteric groups and communities and mini-societies that spring up here and there throughout history. Do you actually know anything about them? Do you understand the relationship teaching and learning has to testing and grading in esoteric communities?

(Do you even give a golly god damn?)

Much has been written, mostly from imagination and conjecture of course, about esoteric communities, and mostly by those who never contacted such, and what is distinctly missing from such writings is the methodology of teaching the ideas to students, and grading or judging their performance, or progress.

That is, for example, a person will not advance to the 10th grade without successfully completing the requirements of the 9th grade, and those requirements are specifically known, detailed on paper, and verifiable. If a student fails or doesn't complete 3 out of 10 requirements, then he doesn't advance. Period.

But, in the esoteric communities, not only are people not tested, graded, and evaluated in this way, there are no acceptable means for determining advancement or progress. That is, everybody who calls himself a "member" of an esoteric community (by whatever name), can also, by that claim indicate his level, grade, or number.

The difference is obvious. In exoteric societies, claims can be backed up and proven to be correct. Either a person graduated from high school, got his B.A. degree from U.W., and his MBA from Harvard, or he did not. In esoteric societies, no one can verify anything at all - whatever a person SAYS he is, is taken to be the "truth of the matter," and no claims to the contrary are tolerated. And if they are, the person can always claim, "My teacher verified my attainment."

A Fourth Way person can claim to be a Man#6, and everyone is supposed to accept it. A Buddhist can claim to be enlightened, having attained nirvana, and everyone is supposed to accept it. But if the same people claim to have a Harvard MBA, it must be backed up and proven, to be accepted.

Does anyone here see something, just slightly, amiss?

Life, in general, is more rigorous in it's process-of-educating humanity in the "ways of the external world," than esoteric communities are in the process-of-educating in the "ways of the internal world", and no one sees anything amiss in that.

Now, some might claim that all the above is totally off-the-mark, that the author was "obviously" not in a "real" esoteric school, but they don't know what they are talking about. In the first place, the only esoteric schools anybody knows about, are pseudo-schools at best, led by individuals who make certain unsupportable claims.

There are, of course, real schools or work groups, but they are not documented in history, not yesterday and not today. They are word-of-mouth associations, virtually nothing is written down "for posterity" and operate in ways about which no one writing about them has any knowledge whatsoever, except that which is concocted from imagination.

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Life in the Universe

Compared to the body (our personal universe), that nerve nexus known as the conscious part of the brain - wherein consciousness has at least gained the beginnings of a foothold, tenuous though it is - could be viewed as Life. Life, in the Universe.

The body, for all intents and purposes is a gigantic machine -"alive" to a degree (but only "to a degree"), wheels within wheels within wheels - or, organically speaking, systems within systems within systems - each genetically pre-programmed to perform certain functions within very strict and definite limits, with slack and give-and-take - and well-lubricated - so the entire system doesn't freeze up. Cells grow and divide, and accumulate into larger and more sophisticated structures - not unlike galaxies, or star systems - and there is a very definite kind of communication between the systems, though at a very rudimentary, and quite physical level - unlike the brain/mind where it's form of transmission is electrical. That is, blood and lymph and chemicals and hormones are required to transmit these messages to and from the various systems. However, those mediums-of-transmission could be likened to earth-based vehicles, (in our particular case) requiring burnable-fuel-based engines, which therefore are limited in their relative speeds-of-transmission. Not much faster than racehorses, though today, 300-horsepowered-horses.

The conscious part of the brain, which is the electric spark-of-potentiality in all humans, from birth - though only when naturally developed to the point where the human can speak, both to himself and to other similarly equipped men - could be likened to Life in him: him, the body: body, the universe. Life in the Universe.

It is presumed by most today, that because Life on earth does indeed exist, and it flourishes everywhere - from inside the hottest and coldest places (undersea volcanic vents and arctic ice packs), as well as inside and outside the hardest and softest places (rocks and air), that Life must therefore be assured a long and prosperous duration, here and the Universe. Almost 4 billion years, the scientists tell us, Life has flourished on this planet, but only in the last 120 thousand, has the spark-of-potentiality mentioned above been viable, and perhaps, there is a reason for it, of which we are both not presently aware, and duty-bound to discover. (Homo sapiens sapiens - modern man, "knowing man", first appeared about 120,000 years ago.) Perhaps Life on earth had an "easier" go of it then, for 3.8 billion years or so - it's continuance assured. Perhaps, something happened, when it instinctively realized that more would be necessary to continue and prosper here, i.e., consciousness, thinking about existence, as distinct from just instinctively existing, as it had successfully done so many millennia before.

But what if, in fact, Life is no more than an accident of universal proportions - a coming-together of certain events, sizes of stars, distances of planets, circulations by moons, atmospheric conditions, etc. - and NOT a normal/natural event in Universes at all. This would not be all that surprising when you consider that within the entire planet, earth, there is only one creature with the capacity for intelligent and reasoned speech, and further, the capacity to drastically and dramatically change the environment. Perhaps, what he calls his "consciousness" is as rare an event even in ONE human (universe), as Life is a rare event in the only ONE universe of which we are cognizant.

Becoming fully conscious - as conscious as you can be - assists the great work alright, but the great work of Life, not some arcane system-of-thought revered by the sleeping masses even today.

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

...conscious as he >>could<< be...

If you can be conscious in the immediate present moment of your existence, the way you could be - not the way the "imaginary ones," have you told throughout their dark ages - you would wake up from your waking dream of words, no matter how titillating the self-aggrandizing self-concept arising therefrom.

If you could see the world around and within you in the present moment of your existence, you would not see trees as anything but simply, trees; you would not see birds as anything but birds; you would not see nature as anything but natural, in the same way you would see your own conscious apprehension of consciousness as natural to you, and wonder how you never did before.

Monday, October 18, 2004

Snoring, versus Scanning - you be the judge

Notice, the mystics never said: "Man is asleep but *should* be awake," or "Man is in prison but *should* be free." They said, "Man is asleep but with certain kinds of effort can awaken," and "Man is in prison but with certain kinds of effort can be free." There is certainly a big difference, but to read and listen to most people who write about such things, you'd think they missed it. According to most of those kinds of people (who seem, apparently, interested in waking up, enlightenment, liberation), all men should be awake, and that all men are not now awake, certainly means (according to them and their teachings) there is something wrong, and it should be fixed.

This is an error.

Man is as he is, because Life is as IT is.

You are the way you are, because Life is the way Life is.

There is nothing wrong, and nothing needs to be fixed.

Not in you, and not out there.

If men were "naturally" awake - as conscious as he >>could<< be - as he is, he would probably either kill himself, go completely crazy, or live a much harsher, and much shorter existence. Almost all of technology and science, and all of his culture and civilization is directly the result of his being naturally asleep - that is, NOT as conscious as he >>could<< be. Something is ALWAYS wrong in that state, and technology, science, culture and civilization on the whole, is the full-time effort to FIX what is considered flawed and in error. Good, in general for mankind, "bad" in specific for a person who wants to be awake and stay awake. (Not, "bad" really, just annoying, and then only for a few of the few of the few here and there.)

Sunday, October 17, 2004

Puppet lore

There are, basically, two kinds of people: 1) those who believe they existed before the birth of the body, and will exist after the death of the body, and attribute this feature or characteristic of their "existence" to something they tentatively call, their "soul" or their "spirit," and; 2) those who believe they don't exist before birth or after death, and the present lifetime is all there is, not believing in some intrinsic "soul," "spirit," or "otherwise."

Who's right?

Can both BE right?

Can both BE utterly wrong?

What think you? Can puppets have thoughts, either way, about any topic, whether it has to do with their "essential being" before "The Great WoodCarver in the Shop" had a twinkle in his imaginative eye, or a twitch in his carving fingers?

Or, are the only thoughts puppets can have, those that issue forth from their mouths, due to the electronic device tuned to a frequency known (by the woodcarver) and unknowable (by the puppet) - a radio in their wooden heads?

What think you? Do YOU exist at all, or are you just the transiently anomalistic responses due to causes outside your control, that you react to - on cue, and quite predictable everytime?

What think you?

Friday, October 15, 2004

Two, two, two consciousnesses in one.

Or, Wild monkey love with alien chicks - take your pick (swap genders if you must.)

Let's say for argument, there is just one consciousness, and that it permeates all, from insects and below, to humans and above. That which can be experienced by a being, insect or human, is a direct function of the machinery (nervous system) of that being. Insects have no machinery for consciousness, animals much more, but humans have the requisite type to at least experience self-consciousness -he can recognize himself in a mirror, and a few other relatively useful things.

What if, the consciousness that all people who have ever lived, experienced - could experience - was based upon their inborn at birth genetic machinery. That's the first consciousness.

What if, a person wanted a different consciousness - what could he possibly do to achieve it, since no one who's ever lived achieved it? (How can this be known? Because it's never been talked about, written about, or even referred to as even a possibility.)

The only consciousness ever mentioned, is "Consciousness of Self", which they call "Enlightenment". But, that's only one kind of consciousness, because it's predicated on "self". There can not be consciousness somewhere that is not experienced by you. If you're not experiencing something directly, then for you, it doesn't exist. In sleep, there is no consciousness - not for you anyway.

The consciousness possible for humans alive today, is far more advanced than that of humans 500 years ago. We know about, and can even build, nano-sized things and we also know about parsec-sized things - they absolutely did not, so our consciousness can be aware of a much wider spectrum of possibilities. Five hundred years from now, the spectrum widens further - >>much<< further, perhaps exponentially further.

What if you could achieve a new kind of consciousness, possible only for humans living in that age - wherein their circuitry, their nervous systems, had, through natural evolution, advanced in complexity, to transmit/experience the all-consciousness with that more advanced being.

The primary difference in the two consciousnesses, is that the first consciousness, does not change the capacity for conscious thought, thinking. People think the same - different words, perhaps more directed on-point words, but functionally, the same. The second consciousness, however, expands the capacity to Think - to be able to consider what is around one anyway, but to think to the end of it, to "get to the bottom of things".

Try it out for yourself right now if you dare. Put on your best, enlightened dress, stand in front of your prayer beads or mirror or whatever, and pick a subject out of the hat of subjects that you've NEVER considered before - like, for example, "why are there conspiracy theories?" or "how did the idea of God dawn upon mankind?" - and start thinking about it, from the question to the ANSWER - that is, not necessarily the final answer, but at least final enough for you, that you REALIZE you've gotten to the bottom of things, on that subject (again, for the time being).

Are you still standing there, waiting for someone to say, "Start?"

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Fragment of an unknown teaching

There are, basically, two groups of humans: 1) those who are not particularly interested, nor stimulated by the terms, "waking up", "enlightenment", "nirvana", etc., and 2) those who are most definitely interested and stimulated.

What happens next, for the second group, is the likely accumulation of books, over the course of the next few years or more, about those very topics, and a whole lot of talking about them, mostly to other people.

Now, there are, basically, two groups of humans previously grouped into the second group above: namely, 1) those who study the books they've accumulated, and presumably, the human of which those books are constantly referring (the author and his nearest cohorts - Jesus, Buddha, Gurdjieff, and countless others) and sometimes even, if they are "on the edge" of this distinction being made herein, themselves personally, and 2) those who study the thing which does the studying (the mind), which they somehow innately realize, could not proceed at all, EXCEPT for the thing they want to study - the mind.

Can you see the BLATANT, obvious difference?

One group couldn't care less about waking up, nirvana, self-improvement, and spend all their allotted days in worldly pursuits. Fine.

A second group cares a great deal about waking up, nirvana, self-improvement and spend many of their allotted days absorbed in studying specific books on those topics, hoping often to become experts, professors, teachers, and (hopefully) a few of their allotted days actually studying their "person", studying "themselves," though they do not study their ordinary consciousness, because they don't know how to do that yet. For both groups, studying the ideas is paramount.

But a small minority of the second group, actually a third group, though the numbers are often so small, as to be, statistically near-zero, go straight to the essence of the matter, DIRECTLY to the source of the confusion that initially divided humanity into two nameable groups. (The confusion regarding "who am I?" and "what is going on?", questions which have been "bothering" mankind for 5000 years.)

The direct way to knowledge, is NOT a "way" in the classic sense, as Buddhism is a "way" or Christianity is a "way." The direct way to knowledge is an ACTION - first and foremost - started by the conscious part of the brain, which MUST hear about it, before it can profitably undertake it, and consists of a "sentence fragment" that sounds something like: "...brain here...", which action occurs whenever thoughts are flowing therein, morning till night till death, or until the pooch finally sits down, while realizing he will instantly arise and chase some other attraction, unless you keep your eye (it keeps it's I) on him.

The direct way to knowledge, is the ACTION of branching out in the nervous system, which does not branch out naturally, as it spends all it's allotted days, finding out; (that is, answering questions, which it doesn't even realize are totally meaningless in the first place.)

Sunday, October 10, 2004


The conscious part of the brain is your only hope and possibility. Without that, you can't even be called human. Science knows this, and so does, by now, everybody else.

The heart will not help you, the soul will not help, the spirit will not help. The only thing that can help you is the conscious part of the brain.

Except that (there's always an "except") the conscious part of the brain is in collusion with your hormones and blood to keep you fast asleep. That is, the brain, the non-conscious part of the brain primarily, keeps the entire organism alive, pumping blood to all parts of the organism, and keeping it healthy. The conscious part of the brain has nothing to do with it - though, it most definitely has the capacity to invent science, medicine, intricate and totally astounding tools and to teach human bodies to perform post- and pre-mortem surgery upon humans, including themselves (and other creatures) for the purpose of detailed study of the parts of the organism, and while alive, doing what the non-conscious parts can not, or will not do - keep the organism alive and healthy.

This collusion, unseen by everybody though it's effect can certainly be seen - just not comprehended - consists of inventing ("creating") a fictitious character to keep itself company, the neurons being as it were, quite alone in there, and to duck blame whenever anything goes wrong. So, when the body gets sick - even though the immune system is perfectly capable of dealing with most external foreign substances, and has daily practice and exercise to keep it in shape - "I" feel bad, and it's probably even "my" fault for shaking that guy's hand, or petting that dog, or smoking that 14th cigarette, or drinking that 14th beer, or eating that 14th cupcake.

And, there's nothing left to do but wait it out, or pray to some god, because everybody ("me", "I") is impotent.

Get that? The brain (that entire 3 pound organ in your skull) is in total charge of the entire organism, from the tip of the head to the soles of the feet and everything in between, yet when IT screws up, and falls down on the job, IT blames "you", or, put in terms you can better understand, YOU blame yourself.

This is collusion, and you are the one fooled.


Saturday, October 9, 2004

CPB, part duh

People hear the term, "conscious part of the brain," and already think they know what that means, already believe they know what that is, but they don't.

All that can ordinarily be known about that, is echoes, overtones, undertones, background noises - the true source of which eluding all but the most persistent investigator.

Let's say someone has said something to you, that "bothers" you, "disturbs" you, and you "find yourself" "thinking about it" afterwards, days later even, and try as you will, the persistent annoying thought keeps arising and you hear it - there might even be images, and certain sounds associated with the thought.

That "hearing" is not the conscious part of the brain, to which I have lately been continuously referring. That "hearing" is memory, stimulated by hormones, chemical, bodily sources - could be anything - but hear you do, and quite likely, identified you become, even if only for a few seconds, until you are distracted by something else.

Most humans, and certainly the greatest majority of humankind -probably 99.99999% - live in this continual state of distraction, and are not annoyed by this at all, as this "result" is the typical "source" of all their supposed thinking. That is, it could be anything: something you recently read on your favorite spiritual or political website, some philosophy text, a chatroom, a tv news channel, whatever, but there it is in you, taking up time and space, and from that instant forward, more time and space is taken up "thinking about it."

The natural reaction to that realization, noted above, is something like, "Well, so what? If it's something I want to think about further, then I've been reminded to think about it further, so, 'that's a good thing'" ("Hey, if it's good enough for Martha Stewart, it's good enough for me!")


Ya think so?

What's going on, is NOT the conscious part of the brain Thinking, it's memory operating, being driven by chemicals flooding the part of the brain where those neural connections were previously interconnected - like ruts in a road - and you are being forced, yet again, down that same road.

Real Thinking, if such exists, does not utilize memory, or it does not need to utilize memory, except for the recall of words, terms, etc. Anymore than a real explorer needs the map (however well constructed and accurate) of where he's BEEN to explore new territory.

The Thinking part, the conscious part of the brain is not word-based, per se, it is more like energy-based, in that you're thinking with energy, while "controlling" the tendency to remember memories. It's quite like being out in front of all that, not back in the past wherein memory is active. It's being "in the Future."

It could be called, thinking something new, that you had never thought before, and it's a FLASH upon the screen of consciousness that is rarely if ever witnessed, and absolutely of a different "nature" than the continuous flashing upon that same screen of all the noise and chatter in you.

Friday, October 8, 2004


If a man can be fooled by others, then he is a fool.

If a man can be fooled by himself, then, is he more than a fool?

Teachings, systems of thought, religions and philosophies invented by others are stories - they exist only in the realm of thought (regardless how much or how often they "refer" to physical, material objects.) They exist only in the conscious part of the brains keeping those teachings alive, generation after generation.

If doesn't matter whether some teaching is encoded into the form of books, and more recently, tapes and videos, if people stop thinking about it, it is forgotten. All you have to do is look at history, and what has made it to the 21st century. Very, very little.

That which has made it, is not necessarily correct, or even reasonable, it's just >>remembered<<. And that is the first test of one who becomes interested in the direct way to knowledge. If a person is only thinking about what others have previously thought about, then they are partially responsible for it's continuation, but IT lives because YOU die, and IT lives because Life wants it remembered. (Not, for the automatic "reason" you think!)

It was suggested by the mystics that man lives in a dream but can awaken, that man is born into prison - a slave - but can escape, and if he is "properly" interested in thinking about that further, then that is the first step toward gaining knowledge.

Most NEVER take even the second step, because they don't KNOW what is the second step. So, they spend what seems like the rest of their lives (or, until they finally give up in despair, or get distracted) thinking about what OTHERS have said about what the mystics said before them.

There's a big difference between thinking about topics - however they "arise" - and thinking about the process of thinking. It's a difference between nouns and verbs. Everybody's got access to the nouns - the terms, the charts, the graphs, the images, the books, the theories - nobody has access to the process of verbalization, or more specifically, how the conscious part of the brain operates.

The grand assumption is that it doesn't actually matter, anymore than knowing how the heart operates matters - as long as it pumps blood, and the blood doesn't clog up the veins and arteries.

That is, ordinary routine consciousness, with which everybody thinks about this very idea, maintains absolute control over the BELIEF that as long as a person CAN think, talk, write, that that is enough to discover knowledge. But, sadly, they are wrong. All that's occurring is memorization of that which is/was fed to it.

Ordinary routine consciousness is clogged consciousness, the neural juices do NOT flow, and direct access to something else is blocked. That is the source of the idea, of the mystics, that man is born into a prison, from which he MAY escape.

The mystics knew that thinking about information is not how the prisoner escapes. Action is how the prisoner escapes. Thoughts about the action are ropes around your limbs, and only cutting the cords will free you.

Wednesday, October 6, 2004

Sex, drugs, and rock 'n roll

The entire life of the body, is a metaphor for the more real life of the mind. Even Religion has this idea, embodied in "You are in the world, not of the world."

Bodily orgasms are sometimes referred to as, the little death. Mental orgasms could be referred to as, little enlightenments.

Bodily orgasms can be produced, by your private parts knowing what your right or left hand is doing there - and every swingin' you-know-what knows how and where, at an early age. Mental orgasms can be produced, by your frontal lobes knowing what your right or left lobe is thinking...but no one knows how and fewer know where. NO ONE! (well, some do!!)

For most, a really good orgasm is about as close as they'll ever come to a connection with the infinite, and most know how. For a few, that connection can be established through proper use of the intellect, but no one knows how. NO ONE! (well, some do!!)

In the ordinary world of human existence, education, "finding out", is the accumulation of Facts that have to be remembered, or the whole education is valueless.

In the revolutionary world of mind exploration, enlightenment, "finding out", is NOT the accumulation of Facts, but an extension by Acts - it is little intentional movements into other dimensions, and nothing needs to be remembered because information from those realms is not codified; it is the intentional extension of the nervous system, in your most private parts between the ears.

In the ordinary world, intellectual growth is called - finding out.

In the revolutionary world, it is called - branching out - into Life itself, wherein moments of insight, intuition, are moments of realizing what Life is thinking at the time.

Tuesday, October 5, 2004

The Itch

Everyone has an itch they can not scratch, and not because it's in an out-of-the-way place, but because it's in an out-of-the-way time. In order to scratch this itch, it requires the proper use of all one's innerprizes.

In the meantime, before the serenetime, they content themselves with talk. Talk is the salve they spread all over themselves in hopes it will ameliorate the irritating itch, but it doesn't - and it can't; eventually, someone might discover that talk, itself, IS the itch!

All teachings are about how to get up to the edge of what you know.

Scratching the itch is about how to stay there.

Monday, October 4, 2004


The Life of Thought, lives within the artificial line of demarcation between polar opposites - good/evil, true/false, this/that.

That's right, all thought - though it constantly and continually makes reference to the terms defining the opposite poles - never even gets close, touches, or goes beyond, the barriers of its own making/thinking.

That's right, and when a person is asked to say whether some action or event is good or evil, right or wrong, he can readily do so, BUT, if asked to say where the actual line of demarcation IS that makes the good go bad, or the right go wrong, he can't even begin to do so.

That's right, everyone KNOWS what's right and wrong, true and false. But, NO ONE knows what the dividing line is, in themselves or others.

This is a monstrous paradox and no one realizes it. Their thought only exists because of the artifical walls, and they only exist because of the artifical line of demarcation.

This twilight zone of unreality is at the absolute center and core of all reality.

To summarize for the dwellers of thought elucidated above: People box themselves into a prison of their own making, actually constructing and maintaining the walls of their own private cell.

People can see the walls, but can't see outside the walls. People live IN THE WALLS.

Saturday, October 2, 2004

Think for yourself!

Why do people study (not to be confused with, reading for enjoyment which is another matter entirely) the words of others?

There is only one reason and it is this: because they can not think for themselves. In fact, the unknown, at-the-core concept of all teachings, IS, in fact, to learn how to think for oneself - though none ever state this categorically, like on the first page where it belongs... something like: "If you really want to learn to think for yourself, don't buy this book." (Too much honesty is not often a very wise choice, economically speaking.)

Consider seriously: would you, personally, study this, or that, or any system of "thought" (and I'm NOT talking about air-conditioning systems repair, or four-barrel carburetor rebuilding), if you were capable of discerning the true path for yourself? If so, why - curiosity? Or to become a "teacher" of sorts? What a waste!

The formatory (read: common, automatic) reply to this notion, is "no ordinary human CAN do that, therefore, some external teaching is required." But this is only half-right. True, one must begin by reading something, or at least hearing something, which can enable the person to "get started" (on the "road to find out"). But there is no cosmic law that demands one stays with that, for any particular period of time - once one "gets it," he can and probably should move on. Of course, most don't - get it, or move on - and there are very specific reasons for this, having to do with human genetics, the wiring of the nervous system, the construction and operation of the brain, and the resulting level of consciousness producing and maintaining personality.

For example, most "suitably interested" people have read TONS of literature on the subjects about Awakening, Enlightenment, Waking-up, Liberation but nowhere in the literature can be found specific information about HOW to think for yourself - without the need of the literature. Yes, many claim you will eventually learn how, and there are suggestions to "focus attention", "stay alert", "be intentional in your thinking", etc., but these methods do not help at all. Look at yourself. All they do is strengthen the connection of the person to the literature. More study of a particular system only produces more firm believers.

Heres what Mark Twain (Samual Clemens) had to say about it: from: "What Is Man"
"I told you that there are none but temporary Truth-Seekers; that a permanent one is a human impossibility; that as soon as the Seeker finds what he is thoroughly convinced is the Truth, he seeks no further, but gives the rest of his days to hunting junk to patch it and caulk it and prop it with, and make it weather-proof and keep it from caving in on him. Hence the Presbyterian remains a Presbyterian, the Mohammedan a Mohammedan, the Spiritualist a Spiritualist, the Democrat a Democrat, the Republican a Republican, the Monarchist a Monarchist; and if a humble, earnest, and sincere Seeker after Truth should find it in the proposition that the moon is made of green cheese nothing could ever budge him from that position; for he is nothing but an automatic machine, and must obey the laws of his construction."

"Growing up" is all about a "way of thinking," not "what to think." The constant referring to "Things" - ideas, terms, unverified "facts", theories, dead and revered people, mysterious foreign places - all keep formatory people locked into a mind-set that leads to nothing fruitful, and certainly not to discovering the truth which exists inside them, leading to a grown-up version of "thinking for oneself."

These "Things" mentioned above, are all simply the contents of ordinary consciousness, and continuous adding to, deletion and rearrangement of those contents is tantamount to intellectual death - or professorship. And nearly all people who discover a non-ordinary consciousness might be possible, immediately feel the need to "get connected" with some group, some system, some Thing - to "belong to something" - because they fear "walking alone", for something they usually believe is so damn "IMPORTANT" (though they don't really understand why they think that.) Maybe enlightenment is no big deal, after all, EXCEPT for those who already lost their joy-of-life, their sense-of-humor, their ability to think-for-themselves, and are today, just too damn SERIOUS!

This is why it is necessary to remember ALL the work, ALL the time. And when you can, you can move on. Not before. And you'll have no need to look backward ever again. But if you spend your entire lives, mulling over ideas which were made up to begin with, by people you don't know, for presumed outcomes you can not demand, expect or predict, with a Mind you can neither control, nor direct, you will simply become another Monarchist, Republican, or student of some way-of-Enlightenment. This is not growing up. This is remaining stagnant. This is remaining a child.

Some, reading this, of course, will belittle and insult this entire line-of-thought. But know this, their resistance is based upon fear, and too many decades of prior investment of time and energy, and they are quickly running out of time, and know it. So they MUST resist, the more strongly because it's too threatening to personality, which calls itself a "work personality," but is not. One, who can think for themselves, could read this entire post, and remain calm and unaffected either way - before, during, and after - not taking it as a personal affront, and not needing to correct it, to fix it or the writer.

They might even strongly agree.
They might even suddenly see something new.

Thursday, September 16, 2004

People are funny

You know, people are in a similar relationship to themselves (individually), as the mass of humanity on earth today is to the planet earth they live upon. That is, neither has a clue, nor any tools whatsoever, to effect meaningful changes, though it certainly appears otherwise, both to the individual, and to humanity in general.

Some obvious examples.

Hurricanes. They do, and threaten to do, tens of billions of dollars of damage every year, yet humankind - and of course we're talking about, scientists - have no, even foreseeable possibility of controlling them; they can't keep them from forming, can't keep them from growing, can't alter their course once the engine is up and running, and can't protect themselves once they make landfall (except, like the little cowards they are, to run away.)

Need we mention, earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, epidemics, plagues, floods, etc., etc?

Same with oneself.

Bad moods. They do, and threaten to do, considerable damage to one's life - if not physically, though they do affect one's physiology, as they are generally due to one's physiology - and one's relationships, since they are most often expressed in angers, tempers, outrages, outbreaks, hostilities, and other sorts of "hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, and afterwards (in many cases) floods (streaming from the eyes in faux or real "sorrow for what I've done").

Get the picture?

People are funny.

They think they can start or follow some religion, some teaching, some guru, some psychological or philosophical system, and effect real and lasting changes within themselves, but it's a joke, and nobody realizes it. Their "inner scientist" (the one following the religion, teaching, system - the one, "in the know") is virtually at a total loss, as regards changing anything about themselves - and that includes physiologically as well as psychologically, and especially (the really Big One), their consciousness.

Oh sure, medical doctors "seem" to have gained a handle on certain illnesses, and people DO live much longer than they did 200 years ago, but they still can't cure a cold, and also can't cure your bad temper, and also can't cure your constant, continual (day-in and day-out, whether standing, sitting, reclining or sleeping), dreaming (daydreaming, and nightdreaming.)

The changes doctors have made have been, almost at best, simply cosmetic, "of the body". But as to any changes, "of the mind", people are today exactly the same as they were 5000 years ago: that is, they are asking the SAME QUESTIONS today, as they were asking 5000 years ago!!


"People are funny." (Art Linkletter, 1954)

Sunday, September 5, 2004


From the viewpoint of humanity, or even one human, 'civilization' is the crown of creation. There is no such thing, in thought or speech or reality, as 'civilization' for only one man, or even a couple of men, or even a small group of men.

'Civilization' becomes a word, concept, form-of-reality, only in the midst of much larger groups of humans, and then the definition of that word, 'civilization', evolves and evolves in much the same way that ordinary life-forms on planet earth evolve. Survival of the fittest, strongest, meanest, baddest, hungriest, and most powerful, and the overarching will to live, to survive, is literally hard-wired into the DNA of all life-forms.

From the viewpoint of humanity, physical evolution on planet earth has culminated, so far, with the invention/creation of Civilization (both as a word, and as a reality).

Now, from the viewpoint of that same civilization of humanity on earth, what is evolving, is Civilization It Self.

Life on Earth, has evolved into, believe it or not, Civilization.

Now, there are 4 Forms of Civilization, which can only be extrapolated from the information presented above, because as such a form, we, our civilization, are still only at Form 0 - that is, we are more like a New Born, than as an Adult (Form 3).

The 4 Forms of Civilization

Form 1, 2, 3 Civilizations: and the relationship to the planet upon which each emerges, the star system in which it exists, and the galaxy within which it is but a minor part.

Form 1 – this civilization harnesses the energy output of an entire planet.

Form 2 – this civilization harnesses the energy output of a star, and generates about 10 billion times the energy output of a Form 1 civilization.

Form 3 – this civilization harnesses the energy output of a galaxy, or about 10 billion times the energy output of a Form 2 civilization. (10,000,000,000 X 10B = 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 - 100 quintillion times the energy output of a Form 1 civilization.)

A Form 1 civilization would be able to manipulate truly planetary energies. They might, for example, control or modify their weather. They would have the power to manipulate planetary phenomena, such as ****hurricanes****, which can release the energy of hundreds of hydrogen bombs. Perhaps volcanoes or even earthquakes may be altered by such a civilization.

A Form 2 civilization may resemble the Federation of Planets seen on the TV program Star Trek (which is capable of igniting stars and has colonized a tiny fraction of the near-by stars in the galaxy). A Form 2 civilization might be able to manipulate the power of solar flares.

A Form 3 civilization may resemble the Borg, or perhaps the Empire found in the Star Wars saga. They have colonized the galaxy itself, extracting energy from hundreds of billions of stars.

By contrast, we are a Form 0 civilization, which extracts its energy from dead plants (oil and coal). Growing at the average rate of about 3% per year, however, one may calculate that our own civilization may attain Form 1 status in about 100-200 years, Form 2 status in a few thousand years, and Form 3 status in about 100,000 to a million years. These time scales are insignificant when compared with the universe itself.

Humanity (the civilization which IS Humanity) is like these Form 1-3 civilizations.

Humans are Form 0, in that they can't control their natural energies, nor their weather. (these are symbols - energies: blood, hormones, neurons; weather: emotions, feelings, passions)

Humanity is on a similar course (as it is a major part of the evolution of civiliation) though it can only be seen - witnessed - in and by individuals, here and there, in every generation. For example, while the rest of humanity was still at Form 0, Jesus was a Form 2 or Form 3. And earlier, while the rest of humanity was still at Form 0, Buddha was a Form 1 or Form 2.

Thus, the New Man, who has not emerged yet, while the rest of humanity is still at Form 0, New Man will be a Form 3, and "may resemble the Borg, or perhaps the Empire found in the Star Wars saga. They have colonized the galaxy itself, extracting energy from hundreds of billions of stars."

Now, of course you must understand, the descriptions above of the Form 3 New Man, would read quite differently and resonate quite differently in other Form 3 Men. Thus, the word "Borg" above - signifying to Form 0 humans, a "bad thing" - really just suggests, an integrated form-of-life, where ALL parts of the being, toes to nose, are conscious, aware, and participate in the entire life of the life-form.

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

"Self centered-ness"

This is a strange term, when you think about it beyond the typical, pop-psychological spin it has acquired over the last 100 years or so.

People have been "self centered" for at least as long as they could talk, if not a day or two before that. When their brains first started talking to them, and they could hear it (that is, when Life first started speaking through their higher cortex... that is, when their higher cortex had evolved to the necessary point that it could pick up Life's broadcast).

I believe that people today are just too "self centered" to ever be able to do themselves "justice", let alone fulfill the promise Life has in store for a few people here and there, with the necessary "brain power" (referenced in a few earlier messages) to "help out with the chores".

Running the show on this planet requires much more brain power than any one human can possibly imagine, and even if you multiply that by 6+billion, to include all living humans, it's still not enough! Life is at least as big as all living, organic matter on this planet, and we can NOT say with certainty that it's any bigger than just that -it may be isolated here, and actually "struggling" to retain it's foothold here.

A possibility certainly exists, that the Universe is a gigantic machine, and Life is a foreign entity, and NOT a natural outgrowth of this Universe. Perhaps it is an accident, due to laws which were certainly built INTO the machinery or else it could never have developed, but that development may have been a 1 in a 1000 trillion or greater chance of occurring, yet, given the long time scales involved, that 1-1000 trillion chance occurred - like some nag horse that barely even made it to the starting line, but suddenly by some happy set of accidents, all the rest of the horses fell limp or something, and the old nag made it across the line - and the rest, as they say, is history. And here we are, I am, to write this story!!!

But, just because life is here, doesn't mean it's a sure thing forever - and NOT, NOT, NOT because humans could bring the whole game crashing down, as the idiots and unwashed piles of wasted brain matter loudly proclaim everywhere at the drop of a hat. That's absolute NON-SENSE. Life is simply broadcasting THAT message and some poorly tuned radio receivers are picking it up and speaking it, blah, blah, blah. Humanity will not, can not be the end of life on earth. If Life needs to make certain adjustments to the workings of organic life to allow itself to continue here, healthy and ready to rumble, then it will. So don't go being concerned about nuclear winters and stuff.

It's the same as you and your body and your t-cells and your immune system. They are all working and keeping you alive, and they will continue to do so. A minor eruption here and there, will simply be dealt with, by the immune system.

The common misconception which is about 6000 years old, is that you have to improve yourself, fix yourself (because as you are, you're all screwed up), to ever be of use to yourself, let alone to something greater than you - like, generally, >>the state<< (The King/Tyrant/Ruler/God). Since that misconception got a foothold on humanity, it morphed somewhat to now read: you must wake up, or get enlightened, etc.

But, it's all the same misconception. Life doesn't need people to fix themselves OR wake up. HONESTLY!!! It doesn't need that at all, and it also doesn't need a handful of individuals here and there to wake up. That is not the help it needs to do the chores here.

What it NEEDS, is for large (enough) numbers of living humans to increase their capacity for conscious thought, to think more, and to think better. The chief thing that interferes with all of that, is the self centered-ness mentioned above. You are NOT, NOT, NOT trying to wake up for your own benefit, or someone else's, or to save the world. You ARE trying to increase your capacity for conscious thought, as that is what LIFE is making you do, whether you like it or not.

Humans interfere with this rightful result, by remaining self centered, by thinking only about themselves (which, in case you haven't figured it out yet, is a >>direct<< result of poor thinking, inefficient thinking, and ordinary consciousness). This does NOT mean, as some religions have perverted it, thinking about other people - helping them, feeding them, clothing them, sheltering them, and all the rest, though there's certainly nothing wrong with that, if that's your hobby! It means, thinking about Life and what IT is up against here on earth (that's what IT is thinking about, afterall... did you know that? do you understand that?)

That is, LIFE is the most self centered monster you could ever imagine in your wildest LSD hallucinatory mind trip, and if humans are also "self centered", is it any wonder? However, seeing that reality, is also the key to breaking out of the prison of your self centered-ness.

You need to inject yourself, in a very specific and KNOWN place, with a fat needle, the idea: "What is going on here? How are things so arranged that such-and-such is going on here?" You need that to be what drives your consciousness, supplanting the pissant idea, paraphrased here, but you know what I'm referring to: "What is happening to me, why me, Woe is ME!!"

This is a never-ending story, of course, and I only have so many minutes at the keyboard, but >>someone must continue this...<<

"Working" groups

There are many groups of people, here and there, studying the "great works" associated with such things as "conscious evolution", "waking up", "enlightenment", even "non-dual philosophy" of all things, and with the advent and worldwide popularization of the Internet, including Usenet and email lists, especially Yahoo and Google, large numbers of people find it incredibly easy to communicate with many other people, from all walks of life, and many different ages and levels of experience, all talking about their presumably "favorite" form of mental masturbation, oops I meant, intellectual time-wasting, er, I meant spiritual discussion.

These groups, while previously only possible in physical locations, and usually only once or twice a week, and then with only a small number of participants - except on the "really big weekend gatherings" where a bunch more would show up, and blah, blah, blah...- are now easy to get involved with, by simply rolling out of bed over to the pc, and logging into the favorite (in our case) Yahoo Groups, or Facebook Pages, and experience forms of mind tingles they ordinarily can't produce for themselves. Which, of course, is the key thing here.

It's a lot, and I do mean a LOT like taking drugs. Think about it. Would you really take drugs (alcohol, pot, or your favorite drug-of-choice), if you could effect the desired changes in your brain, on your own? Hell no, besides, they cost money (for one thing), and you have to have a supplier (for another thing), each of which are often out of your control, not to mention the legal issues involved.

Extrapolating, would you really join, read, and occasionally participate in these spiritually-based lists, if you could effect the *desired* changes in your own brain? The keyword being, of course, *desired*. There is a desired change, in all who join physical groups, and in all who join email lists, and everybody realizes this to some degree, though they often can't discuss it. At best, most people say "I enjoy it", or "I need it", but have no clue why they enjoy or need anything, let alone getting involved with other people and talking about spiritual stuff and other nonsense.

As inevitably happens, there are the pleasant folks and the unpleasant folks, and the two always meet - there seems no other choice. Just as there are the smart folks and the stupid folks, and the passive folks and the aggressive folks, and etc., etc. The reason for all such gatherings, first and foremost - whether they realize it or not - is the brain changes that result. NO ONE will continue with anything, when the changes therein become either unpleasant or boring or dangerous or any of a number of other adjectives. People remain because the brain changes they can personally experience for themselves are (usually) pleasurable, and when we're talking - as we now are quite specifically - about the conscious part of the brain that can talk, those changes are quite specific, and usually come down to something like, "being interested" and/or "excited", even "passionate!" in the subjects and the manner in which those subjects are discussed.

Quite often, personalities start battling it out publicly: either physically, though usually much subdued and amount to little more than "funny looks", and "cold shoulders", and other emotionally-tinged behaviors; or mentally, as on email lists, where the speech often becomes quite abusive. People can always "get away" with a helluva lot more meanness and sarcasm and criticism and aggressiveness on an email list, Yahoo group, Facebook page, than they would EVER allow themselves in a physical setting - else they would likely get their face bashed in, or worse.

Anywho... to make a too-long story, a little shorter (though probably still too long, eh?)... If it wasn't for Internet email lists and Blogger sites (such as this and many others) many people would not have such a vibrant intellectual life at all - which is not a bad thing; au contraire mon ami, it is a good thing. For that, is just about the only way those many people can discern any movement at all, up there, in there, behind their facemask.

In general, that movement is either outer-directed, or inner-directed, other-directed, or self-directed, and all four - which are really just two, with a color-shift, or a phase-shift - are but mirror-images of each other, and circular. Start well, End well, but go Nowhere. A whole lot of much ado, about a whole lot of nothing.

What is really needed - and the promise of internet email lists, MAY be one of the only possible ways for many people to perceive this - is for there to be a kind of "turning the corner", a right-angled movement distinct from the natural opposing tendencies you might have, which in the area of intellectual energy flows, seems to ping-pong back and forth ONLY between agreement and disagreement ("truth", and "falsehood").

It's the "itch to tell", turned upon itself, instead of reacted to.

What the hell is the "itch to tell?" You know, you already know, and so does everybody else. It's what drags people to movies, concerts, study-groups, email lists, and all the rest of the gatherings of human brains parading around as something else. People don't attend these gatherings to "find out" anything at all. They attend them, to be able to "tell themselves" (and others) what they want to hear, because that experience is a "drug" in the brain, that everybody has instant access to in great quantities, and when accessed it gets you reliably high, and it's oh, so, pleasurable - and cheap, and legal.

The "itch to tell" gets everybody out of the bed, and it gets them fed and fucked when necessary, so that there is enough free time to feed their own brains, with either physical hard-to-get drugs, or for the few, neuropeptides and similar chemicals that are easy-to-get once you know how - and where. (Just another of those heretofore mentioned "skills and powers" that the great unwashed - by those same wonderful chemicals - have no understanding about, and even less interest - they'd rather study books and talk about them, blah, blah, blah, and then die.)