top of page
Search
  • Writer's picture738

Προφητεία (65)



If you take a step along the path of awakening then you will encounter opposition. It’s what Robert L. Moore meant when he said, “People like to kill these magi.” The main reason people like to kill “these magi” is that they’re against people’s denial—or, as Moore would say, “that’s their first mistake”. This about when you break through the persona and make observations that accord with what you actually feel, think, and intuit—not what the manipulative persona “gets for you”.


It’s like when I observed Russia will not win the war in Ukraine—pro-Russian people got angry with me because I attacked their denial systems (because they know it’s true really); and they also feel betrayed because they thought I was “on team”—so they start to make inflected, menacing statements at me (because they’re full of judgements and don’t have an interest in sight). But I didn’t say I was against Russia: I said I thought her cause was just, I just didn’t think they could win—you can have a just cause and not be able to win, the two are not connected (many just causes have lost in history).


But when reality is against delusion, the people who point out reality have to go—so I’m a “bad person” now. As Moore also observes, it’s because “you’re getting empowered”—people don’t like it when other people get empowered, they just want you to nod along with them peacefully and keep the peace and be “matey”. Now, there are some people who think they’re empowered—Russell Brand is this way—when they say contradictory things, but these people never arouse the hate and reaction formation the magi does. People play along with it, because they know they’re just a gadfly or professional controversialist, or a contrarian—if you say one thing, they say the other (just to balance it out).


That’s never really disturbing—it’s a game that it’s acceptable to play, it’s a pastime (and people enjoy to play it with you—you’re wheeled on, like Christopher Hitchens, to be the professional contrarian but everyone has cigars and whiskey afterwards and it’s all a game). However, if you hit reality, you’ll know—because they’ll be screaming at you to “get out!” (of my house) and never come back again. Sometimes they’ll literally be blubbering or stuttering, about to have an apoplexy, and it’s usually because you’ve verbalised what is a known aspect to reality that is taboo to say (but could change everything if it’s said). In these circumstances, it’s not a game, they’ll sit in the corner with their arms crossed and say “why do you have to be like that?”.


If you really get into a situation like that with someone and they actually engage, you can literally swap minds with them—it’s what psychotherapists call “transference”, you’ll find yourself arguing their part and they’re arguing your part (this happened to me in an intense argument with someone about Brexit). It shows how far the mind is illusory, and what you take to be “your views” can swap into another body and vice versa. Yet most think their views are themselves.


The idea is the same as CG Jung’s individuation—it’s the idea that you have a particular destiny to discover, and that you have a particular self to discover. The reason people say “just be yourself” is because most people don’t do so, because that requires courage—or they get confused and do what Russell Brand does, which is where you think “being yourself” is to do the opposite of what you take to be established social conventions. Generally, to actually be yourself disturbs people and alienates them from you—although it also makes you difficult to manipulate, to be manipulated by the monkey games most people are playing.


Here’s an example: I’ve been into various churches, I stand in silence in the churches—the churches are peaceful, the churches have a higher presence in them. I walk around the churches, I look at the stained-glass windows and I look at the engravings—however, there is a nagging sensation that something is wrong. I go to a stone circle, it has the same peacefulness, though of a different quality, and yet there is no “nagging”—it feels complete, whole, holy. Hence I reject the church for the stone circle.


Now, what most people have around these issues is an argument. They decided that they like men with painted skins and shields and they say “you must be a pagan because it is the religion of your ancestors” or, if Christians, they talk about “the total peace of Christ, less barbaric and cruel than paganism, a force of elevation for Northern barbarians”.


But I have no interest in what are arguments—the people who make these arguments are unreal. They have some idea in their heads about what is “right” and then they have arguments about why they’re “right”—what they really want to say is “I like the aesthetics of primitive Britain” or “I like the smug moral superiority being a Christian gives me, where everyone else is damned and I’m saved”. Then they make arguments about how they’re “right” and you’re “wrong”—which never convince anyone.


All I say is that I have my experience, it is not an argument—it is an experience. It cannot be wrong (or right). So are you a pagan? I don’t know—I am what I am. I mean, I read the Norse sagas but I found they really bored me—I feel Thor is dead, or he is deep asleep; but I feel Jesus is dead too (or deep asleep). I sense Athena and Zeus are alive—they feel alive to me. What does that make me? I am what I am. I haven’t read the ancient texts about these religions, I don’t know the rites—I just know the stone circle is whole, and the church is not. That is enough.



123 views

Recent Posts

See All

Dream (VII)

I walk up a steep mountain path, very rocky, and eventually I come to the top—at the top I see two trees filled with blossoms, perhaps cherry blossoms, and the blossoms fall to the ground. I think, “C

Runic power

Yesterday, I posted the Gar rune to X as a video—surrounded by a playing card triangle. The video I uploaded spontaneously changed to the unedited version—and, even now, it refuses to play properly (o

Gods and men

There was once a man who was Odin—just like, in more recent times, there were men called Jesus, Muhammad, and Buddha. The latter three, being better known to us, are clearly men—they face the dilemmas

Comments


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page