Merry Christmas and a Great New Year

I think it shouldn’t matter whether I am a believer or not. I find Christmas a beautiful celebration. I love the decorations and warm atmosphere.

So I wish you do well these days, and the rest of the days too. I do well too.

Also, may your most pleasant wishes come true.

I wont be writing much from now on, as I feel I have more than already written what I’d like to write, and I could create unnecessary complexities by overanalyzing things. Like I wrote in a previous post, ‘focus on truth’.

I tried to pass a message to different kinds of people–people with different viewpoints. It can be quite interesting and challenging.

I’ve also considered putting the essential things in a nice, understandable sequence, and make it a handbook, so that those who seek what I used to seek can find it. I’m just not sure whether it’s needed. Those who are aware of the most basic thing that I talk about (the source) might agree that even that could be unnecessary.

Thank you for reading my stuff.




59 thoughts on “Merry Christmas and a Great New Year

  1. Spyros, I was going to write a comment to you before the day was over to say Merry Christmas! Believe it or not I feel just the way you do about this holiday. 😉

    I was also going to tell you I’ve been enjoying your blog posts. Loved what you wrote about your purpose regarding art. Didn’t surprise me! 😛

    Have a wonderful holiday season. 🙂

    1. Thank you. I wish you great holiday season too! 🙂

      I do believe it. And maybe I would also expect it, knowing about your ideas…

      I’m in doubt about the (free) book. I have a lot to write, but I hate the idea that some might take things too seriously. Can you imagine anti-Spyros websites and people complaining about what I’ve done to them? 😛

      1. Yeah, I feel I know you pretty well too by now. 😛

        “Can you imagine anti-Spyros websites and people complaining about what I’ve done to them?”

        That’s a funny thought. But, no, I can’t easily imagine it. I don’t think what you write would be upsetting to anyone – who understands it! 😛

        You may remember that Geir did a similar thing (if you go back that far with him) – he complied a book from the blog posts he had written during the first 6 months of blogging. He titled it “Six Months in the Open,” and published it on his own blog. Sometime later, he also published it on the Linkedin website, I think articles and books can be published for free there, and readers can download for free (at least some things).

        1. I see. I haven’t read it. But I don’t think that a book written by me would be anything similar. You guys (plural) are more democratic, while I’m more solo. You (plural) are like ‘let’s see what is good.’ I say that too, but to myself, then I talk about it, or not. It doesn’t have to do with ‘what’ we end up talking about. It’s more about different approaches. I can imagine some becoming very upset by reading from me, while others the opposite.

          1. I didn’t mean your book content would be similar to Geir’s – not at all. Just that you would be doing a similar thing of publishing a book from blog posts.

            I guess you’re right that some people might get upset with what you write. A few days ago, a poster on Geir’s who calls himself “Still Awakening” made a comment that I think you would like:

            “True understanding is the equal to all enlightenment. Is that not the outcome desired? Whether it matches another’s ‘truth’ is not much different than does it match ‘dogma?’ ”

            1. I guess it’s the price of not filtering your thoughts, of being honest–to upset those who cannot tolerate it.

              I cannot comment on what he said, as I don’t know what he means by enlightment and truth. For me ‘truth’ is not a mindset, like a dogma would be.

              I think when we refer to spirituality and awakening, the solutions are as true as the problem–not true, that is. And a quote from the science killah “today’s solution is tomorrow’s problem”

                  1. Doesn’t surprise me. 😛

                    Yes, very interesting topic. Another practice I’ve learned about just recently is similar to Advaita and other systems, with respect to continuously going inward to free oneself. This is the ancient Hawaiian practice of Ho’oponopono, which is supposedly the oldest spiritual system in the world. Instead of describing enlightenment as freeing oneself from the “I” or “ego” or “human personality,” it speaks of freeing oneself from the “subconscious” or the “inner child,” using their own type of meditation. I get that it does the same thing as Advaita, for example, but goes about it with a little bit different perspective. Here’s a meditation session showing how it’s done:

                    1. I watched the first 5 minutes. But conscious, subconscious, superconscious, divinity…. I don’t know exactly what he means by it. I’d need to dig into it first, to understand the process. But yes, I understand that proper arc with an out-of-control thing can bring about results. 🙂

                    2. Just for you:

                      consciousness: the state or quality of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself [from Wikipedia]

                      subconscious: existing in the part of the mind that a person is not aware of; existing in the mind but not consciously known or felt; (full definition) existing in the mind but not immediately available to consciousness (“a subconscious motive”) [from Merriam Webster online]

                      superconscious. 1 : transcending human consciousness. 2 : of, relating to, or possessing the highest consciousness or a margin of consciousness above that within the ordinary range of attention — compare subconscious. [Merriam Webster online]

                      I think he’s using the usual definitions as above, except that the subconscious is extended to include everything ever thought or done by any being, not just oneself. In other words, it’s the Akashic record. That’s an Eastern term but I’ve read that the same idea exists in the bible and other places. And to me this makes total sense because it explains so many “paranormal” things. 😉

                    3. Thank you.

                      Yes, I figured that’s what he meant. Then he also threw in ‘divinity’….

                      I just wasn’t sure what HE meant. It’s strange to combine psychology terms with spirituality, while in psychology it’s all about brains, you know.

                    4. |I’ve also been told about a kind of meditation, by a person who appeared to be very interested in Buddhism, or w3as a Buddhist: To unite the left and the right side of the brain, being the emotional and the logical part of the person. And there is also a sort of a meditation about that…

                    5. I’m glad you brought up the subject of right-brain–left-brain supposedly being related to different personality characteristics. I watched a video on this not long ago, and when you reminded me of it I thought of a question I had. So I did a google search and found out that scientists say this is a myth! Here’s a link to a very short article (just a few paragraphs) on the subject:

                      As for a meditation for the brain, there might be one for balancing the “brain” (or, more likely, the mind) but I highly doubt it has to do with the supposed personality traits of the right and left sides of the brain.

                      Also, in the Google search, I found something pretty interesting that I wanted to share with you. Once again, I’m glad you got me thinking about this! 😛

                    6. The first link you posted doesn’t work. As for the second, I don’t know what to think about her theory. But you know, you can mock up your headach getting handled, and your headache can so be handled. And a technique can also work as such. Maybe hers some other basis, I don’t know, I haven’t done it. But I had a terrible inflammation a few days ago, and it was hurting badly, and I didn’t do anything to my body. I did some Mooji-like stuff, and gone. As-isness is not only for the mind.

                    7. Well, my friend, not everybody is a Spyros and can do Mooji-like stuff. 😛 Besides, there are certain things that happen to the body that even you Mooji types might not be able to as-is – like a broken leg.

                      If the brain is being overwhelmed, as these bodytalk practitioners and many others claim, then it might require a physical universe handling. I think there is probably a lot of truth to the “theory” of this technique, which that the huge amount of radiation in modern life, both indoors and out (from cell phones, computers, etc.), is too much for the brain to handle and damage is slowly done to the nerve cells wherein they get disconnected – and the bodytalk Cortices Technique is supposed to gradually reconnect them. The woman in that other vid gave some data, and this guy gives a little more. (Note, I looked it up and “cortices” is the plural of “cortex,” which is the outer layer of the brain.)

                    8. Well, it might work like an assist. I don’t really know about the brain. Ron said it was a throb (might not be the appropriate word) absorption organ–too much significance for nothing 😛 But yeah I guess that’s the back of the brain, that also looks like it an absorption mechanism. Anyway, if that technique works well, it works well. That solves it 🙂

                    9. Yes – somewhat like a nerve assist. And just as valid, it would seem.

                      Re the brain, I think the word was “shock” absorption organ. But we have to remember that Ron didn’t have the advantage of all the studies that have since been done on the brain. 😛

                      Well, I guess when you read this it will be New Year’s Eve over there. So let me tell you now – Happy New Year!! 🎇🎇🎇🎇🎇 ;P

                    10. I’m in Greece, not in Australia 😛 It’s still morning of the 31st and I just saw some microsnowflakes. They suit the day…

                      Well, I don’t really know about neuroscience. I have a friend who is a neiroscientist, and I don’t know what he knows. But I don’t fancy his certainty. They know all about thought, but they’ve never seen any. They’ve seen reactions on parts of the brain in accordance to thoughts, and they think they know all about it.And of course if you bring you anything beyond their theories, it’s delusional. You’re wrong, at best.

                      I don’t know what Ron knew either. Just saying that I read about it.

                      I think the GE and later on the spirit don’t control the body through organs directly. It’s some things of higher wavelengths.

                    11. I knew it was early in the day, but it was still the day of New Year’s Eve. 😛

                      My understanding of neuroscience is that they consider consciousness to be created entirely by the brain. I have to admit there was a time I gave their research no credit at all, because I had my own fixed idea about the brain, albeit the opposite of theirs – they give the brain the total credit for thinking, memory and awareness, and I was giving it almost none.

                      I probably got that attitude from Ron, but I may or may not have understood him correctly. In any case, based on the data I’ve come across, I’m now more open to whatever influence the brain may have – and I’m learning it’s quite a bit, even though the brain isn’t the whole picture, by far.

                      Here’s an amazing story of what happened to a woman with brain damage due to a stroke. Incidentally, she was heavily criticized by fellow scientists for her “beliefs” about left-brain—right-brain differences (debunked in that article I gave you the link to). But that issue aside, this woman’s experience tells us how much the brain determines our perception of the universe. Pretty incredible.

                    12. That neuroscientists guy was a nice, pleasant friend of mine. But the past year he’s changed so much. He has become fanatic. Regardless what one studies, I know fanaticism is an indication of poor understanding–not of the words studied, but of the topic. And of course if you yourself cognite something, you need not defend it, nor offend others. You just know it, as simply as that. That is certainty–clear, first hand knowledge. And it is not through conviction like they say in those blogs. I try to keep information to a minimum and just know. And what I’d tell you now about things differs than what I’d tell you a few months ago.

                      When I talk about info I talk about info. When I talk about experience I talk about experience.

                      And I see you too study a lot, by the way. And I wonder if and what you intend to practice.

                      Sure the consciousness of the body is it’s own. The spirit is kinda asleep and perceives through it. But it can also perceive as a viewpoint–consciousness, like you say. Whether exteriorized or not. Mock ups are direct perception without body. And MEST is as real as a mock up to the spirit. And Ronnie said the more real your mock ups are, the better your perception of MEST is. 🙂

                    13. “And I see you too study a lot, by the way. And I wonder if and what you intend to practice.”

                      I see knowledge as “the finger pointing to the moon,” as the Zen Buddhists say. In other words, the right knowledge gets you looking in the right direction. I also like Adyashanti’s idea that “seeds” dropped into consciousness by spiritual teachings eventually take root.

                      I think the wisdom of the ancient mystery schools sows a lot of seeds, and right now I’m looking into the “Modern Mystery School,” which is open to the public (unlike traditional mystery schools). I did their “Life Activation” energy clearing and it had a very positive effect on my universe. I’ll post a video at the bottom.

                      Like many ancient traditions, the MMS teaches that we have three bodies – the physical body, the soul, and the spirit. (I think these are the same as what ancient traditions call the physical body, the subtle body, and the causal body.) They consider the soul to be a spiritual body but slightly physical as well, and the physical body to be slightly spiritual – it’s just a matter of different densities. Astral travel (i.e. exteriorization or OOB – out-of-body) is done by the soul body. And chakras are extensions of the soul body, which is created at birth by the “real self” – the spirit. The spirit is the only eternal entity, and the soul is its temporary vehicle.

                      I think their ideas about different energy bodies align with yours and mine about higher wavelengths, and those ideas also align with the theories of biologists like Rupert Sheldrake. Did you see the reply I posted about this and watch that 3 minute vid? It’s here:

                      Watch at least a few minutes of this video, starting at about 40:00. She explains a bit about the Life Activation I mentioned above.

                    14. I see how you think of it. And I also watched the videos.

                      At some point that woman said something that freaked me out a bit. About spirits being over the body’s head and her technique meaning to put it back into the body. That’s exactly what Ron described the chakra’s purpose to be, by the way.

                      I -like I told you- think the best, most direct way to know is through intuition. Data can help when intuition is absent. They can also do the opposite. While in the COS I had positive ARC with much of the data, but mostly the opposite with the org. I also had positive ARC with the org, because the org is many people. I think the best thing was to keep what I liked, and discard what I didn’t like. And so I did. And should I not be considered ‘bad’ by the org, and should they not agree with it, I’d still be in touch with. We didn’t have anything against each other. They believed the org and omitted to trust their own ARC. In other words, self denial.

                    15. “At some point that woman said something that freaked me out a bit. About spirits being over the body’s head and her technique meaning to put it back into the body. That’s exactly what Ron described the chakra’s purpose to be, by the way.”

                      I don’t remember anything like that. Can you tell me where it is in the video (minutes wise)? From what I know of their ideas, she might have said something about putting spirit (theta) back in the body – not spirits (thetans). And this principle is the same as increasing one’s ARC.

                      “I – like I told you – think the best, most direct way to know is through intuition. Data can help when intuition is absent.”

                      I would agree. And I would add that data can be a stepping stone – and it needs to be for many people whose intuition is not yet developed.

                      “They believed the org and omitted to trust their own ARC. In other words, self denial.”

                      You’ve probably named the biggest outpoint and where Ron went off the rails.

                    16. In the code of honor it is clearly mentioned to not compromise with what you like, agree with, nor to communicate with it, should you not want. While the subconscious mind mentality appeared to suggest that one might like, agree with etc could be false, and due to that subconscious mind. That’s how I took it, and that’s how others took it too. And so it was assumed that some were more capable than others to judge right and wrong.

                    17. That was an unfortunate and incorrect assumption. Ron would not have put the individual at such effect. The Code of Honor is based on personal integrity, which is defined as follows:

                      “knowing what you know. What you know is what you know, and to have the courage to know and say what you have observed. And that is integrity and there is no other integrity.”

                    18. Oh, wait – now I remember what you’re talking about in that video. Yes, she was saying that we need to be in the body in this existence on Earth. Their teaching is that we are here to experience the physical and learn from it in a way that can’t be done in the spiritual state only. Watch a few minutes of this video, starting at about 40:00, for an explanation of that idea:

                    19. To be honest I don’t have a solid viewpoint about this. I’m more on the ‘I don’t agree’ side, without meaning I agree with something else.

                      Moreover, there are some things that words cannot describe adequately.

                      What I’ve been holding as dearest in terms of words lately, is what is described in the factors, about beingness and becomingness. Only recently did I understand the factors. I don’t think ‘beingness’ is a plural, yet all viewpoints (spirits) are it. And beingness solves it all, for a viewpoint. At least so I noticed in me. It’s the unknowness of it and altering it that makes problems.

                      I think the body’s higher wavelengths sort of emulate that, but are not quite it. A viewpoint in search for truth can fall for anything that might approximate it, in MEST. But MEST is not it. It’s part of it.

                    20. “And beingness solves it all, for a viewpoint. At least so I noticed in me. It’s the unknowness of it and altering it that makes problems.”

                      That seems right. One datum I learned in the 2-day class I took (called “Empower Thyself”) was that spiritual growth comes with true knowledge of the self. This indicated as truth, because sometimes knowledge alone can straighten out one’s universe to one degree or another – and it seems that this is the way you can know it’s true.

                      I figure these people at the MMS must know something if they can produce the kinds of changes they do – such as feeling happy for no “reason,” happy with just being alive – with aliveness. To me, that particular “beingness” directly relates to the “beingness” described in The Factors where it says:

                      “There IS beingness, but Man believes there is only becomingness.”

                      It took me the longest time to make sense of that! Until I decided it must be referring to time / no time – becomingness would exist in the stream of time and beingness “outside” of time.

                      “I think the body’s higher wavelengths sort of emulate that, but are not quite it. A viewpoint in search for truth can fall for anything that might approximate it, in MEST. But MEST is not it. It’s part of it.”

                      As far as I know, there isn’t anything you’ve said in the above that would conflict with this new philosophy I’m learning about. If I understand their idea, it’s that there are lessons to learn as a physical being – spiritual lessons, that is. What is learned here is to be taken with the spiritual being when it departs the body. And ultimately, all spiritual beings are One.

                    21. Also, another thing about beingness is trusting, allowing. And that actions to change something are not needed. You just allow/grant that beingness and let things work out. That’s why -isms, and generally acting against, leads to failure. You act against or try to change yourself (beingness). And we’ve both noticed people who don’t let themselves be, don’t let others, either.

                    22. “But what he says at 6:00 haha… it’s happened to me a few times.”

                      Good indicator for you!

                      The same thing was happening to Lester Levenson. Go to 26:20 in this video and watch at least a couple of minutes.

                      Do you remember me commenting about Lester over at Geir’s? I’m glad you reminded me of him – I should get back to the book of his that is a collection of transcripts of his talks. His “pointers” are much more simple than those of the Modern Mystery School and many others too.

                    23. That’s why I liked the PDC so much. It was a higher perspective, and to the degree you understood it, you sort of had it too. If you read/listen to it, you will understand. It’s mostly about what a being can do, not about problems. But I think it wasn’t as real to people at that time.

                    24. Thanks for reminding me – I never did listen to the PDC’s, but I should.

                      Tonight, I did a beautiful meditation with Mooji. It was exhilarating and peaceful at the same time. Sounds strange, I guess. 😛

                    25. The PDC was hard language for me, but I made it. I think it contributed in my improving my English or 50s Americanese. Yes, you should read/listen to it, more than anything by Ron, I think.

                    26. “Yes, you should read/listen to it, more than anything by Ron, I think.”

                      Why do you think so? Tell me more.

                    27. I don’t know where to start from. Basically, it contains more everything he’s ever written about, but it also contains things he stopped referring too, because they seemed too unreal. Are you aware of a process called ‘body lifting’? That was just a beginner’s process…

                    28. “Okay. Now let’s move in over that hand again and let’s take a look at it. Let’s pick up the middle finger. Put a tractor beam on it and give it a pull up into the air. And see if you can pull it up…”

                      No I haven’t done it. At least not in the past 35 years 😛

                    29. “…At least not in the past 35 years.”

                      Maybe previous lifetimes? 😛

                      Actually, the subject of spiritual abilities ties in with an awesome website I just discovered. For one thing, it has an article regarding the “higher wavelengths” related to the body, which we were briefly discussing earlier on this thread. Humans have apparently lost many abilities because of factors in our modern lifestyle (i.e. diet and other health detriments) that reduce the many layers of the “subtle energy field.” Below are some portions of the article on this. (I learned similar data in the class I took at the Modern Mystery School.)


                      “The aura is a glow or energy field that appears around all living beings…

                      “Everyone has an astral body (aura), even young babies. In those over about the age of 10 to 30, the “etheric body” develops to some degree in everyone. This is a more advanced subtle energy field, or energy body. It develops as one uses the mind for constructive purposes and as a person overcomes hardships by using the brain rather than by ‘getting by’ using cunning, or cleverness or brute force or laziness.

                      “UPPER SUBTLE BODY DEVELOPMENT. In those who meditate and live properly, as taught on this website, even more subtle and more amazing energy bodies also develop soon after the etheric body develops. This is the first step toward the advanced state of human life that is possible for human beings on planet earth. When this occurs, a person is said to be developed…

                      “Seeing the aura. The aura can be seen by some people naturally. They usually describe a sort of glow or energy around every living person. A dead person would not have much of an aura, although every object, even a rock or a tree, definitely has an aura, as it is a property of all matter on earth. It is a physics property in this sense. ..

                      “The size of the aura. The aura of a person or object actually radiates indefinitely, but it weakens in strength based on the square of the distance from the radiating object. Thus, with most people for example, it is only visible for a few inches around the body. If one is further away than this, it is too weak to view without special equipment.

                      “The aura, however, is far more than the glow or radiation of an object. In living beings, the aura reflects ALL of the activities of the person, from his thoughts and emotions, to the food one is digesting, to the state of health and the state of the energy centers and much more.”


                      Knowledge like the above can be invaluable, IMO – not to accept with blind faith but to determine the validity of it for ourselves, perhaps in the future. You can check out other fascinating subjects on that site too, which might very well interest you. 😛

                    30. Well try it out, if you want, and tell me what happens. .

                      I once knew somebody who could actually see auras, and she told me I either didn’t have any, or mine was white 😛 At that time I was with Ron’s ideas that they were products or byproducts of implants.

                      I don’t know about previous lives. Actually I feel like I’ve never lived before. But from a purely spiritual perspective, I don’t feel like I live now, either. 😛

                    31. Well, the data I have about the chakras tells me that this time Ron probably got it wrong. And I don’t say that too often. 😛

                      You’ve never lived before? Then you are in good company with the Dalai Lama. 😉 He says the same about himself – even though he is supposed to be reincarnated from the previous Dalai Lama and all the ones before that. Many of us may have a misunderstanding about how “reincarnation” works. Listen to about 5 minutes of the video I posted above, the one of the interview of the founder of the Modern Mystery school. Starting at about 30:00, he tells about a conversation he had one time with the Dalai Lama.

                    32. I see. I like and try to talk from experience more and more, like I’ve told you. It’s the shortest way to truth, the way I see it. I have read about past lives, but I don’t really know. And if I think of this subject, the past, I am more fond of unearthly stuff than Earthly. Perhaps you can tell, and I’m not such a down to Earth person :p I wish others knew that I know it, and I don’t take it as insult. On the contrary…

                      Yes, I agree with Ron about his stories about Earth being a prison planet, instinctively. And I also see it in people’s thinking, quite often. And I don’t have that kind of thinking. There has certainly been intentions of oblivion here, and to destroy whomever becomes aware of it.

                      As for the chakras and kundalini and auras…from what I know they pertain to geographic locations in the body. Whatever they are, they are a different kind of spirituality than what I’m into now.

                      I’m going to check out that video…some time. Now I don’t want to 😛

                    33. “I like and try to talk from experience more and more, like I’ve told you. It’s the shortest way to truth, the way I see it.”

                      I don’t doubt that this is the way it is for some – those who can actually do it. But others seem to benefit from a mentor of some sort.

                      “And if I think of this subject, the past, I am more fond of unearthly stuff than Earthly.”

                      Yep, that’s our Spyros. 😛 I think it’s cool.

                      I used to have a similar liking. But in my case, it came from Ron’s ideas about existence – which caused me to not give much value to the earthly and the physical. I see now that, for me, it was a fixed idea based on his philosophy and world view (or my interpretation), rather than my own observations. Ron knew a lot, IMO, but not everything. He wasn’t perfect; he was human. And there may be truth to what some critics have said about him not wanting to give credit to knowledge that he himself hadn’t come up with or adopted, including that of many traditional teachings.

                      From what I’ve learned about auras and how much they determine a person’s awareness and spiritual abilities (which is well described in that article I linked) and also the data I’ve learned about the brain (neuroscience), I get that the consciousness/awareness of a human being is hugely dependent on the brain as well as the aura or “subtle body,” the vibrational energy field around the body.

                      “As for the chakras and kundalini and auras…from what I know they pertain to geographic locations in the body. Whatever they are, they are a different kind of spirituality than what I’m into now.”

                      This gets into terminology – particularly the meaning of “spiritual.” Ron said that mental energy was no different from physical energy – that it IS physical energy, just of a higher, finer wavelength. It seems to me that the same is true of the aura/subtle-body, i.e. that it’s just energy – although scientists are working on instruments sensitive enough to measure it. Those who call the subtle body spiritual are probably doing so because they categorize only the denser energies as physical – that is, the energies that can be perceived by the body’s five senses.

                      It has been said by many that this is an energy universe composed of various densities of energy. The spiritual being is put in a different category from energy. But that category may not be entirely separate from the physical universe, since quantum physics tells us there is a “field of potential” out of which energy particles come into being. The “spiritual” and the physical seem to be completely intertwined. 😛

                    34. I’ve also heard many times about Ron being human and not perfect while in the fz. And some have implied more by saying it, and others less. Sure, there was a sort of fanaticism in the cos about him, although fanaticism doesn’t mean understanding. On the contrary… But some in the fz just seem to have something actually against him, although they will still fanatically defend their tech that they deliver. This seems a bit too out-of-sequence to me.

                      Ron pointed out to me, even if indirectly, very extremely obvious things that I always knew, and it was also obvious that I had altered and covered those things from myself by believing other things frome xterior sources. He was good at that. However, I haven’t felt the same about everything I have read, and it would be kinda A=A=A to say that all data are the same. Generally, I hold him in high esteem, but I avoid to fight for him, for his ideas etc, aka fanaticism. I believe he wouldn’t want it either. To grant beingness was something I’ve read by him too, anyway.

                      As for the Earthly existence, I believe it can be brilliant. But not in the way that it’s commonly taught to be. I don’t like that. It’s my own dislike/disagreement. I know both on Earth and beyond, other greater things can exist.

                    35. Also, to be honest, I don’t think he was that roaring angry guy that some describe. I know some who have been, in the name of Ron and SCN. And I think he was capable to be angry and use force too, and at times he did. I just don’t think he was irrational about it, and he didn’t do it to keep people scared and suppressed.

                    36. (More additions) There a lot of shit connected to his tech. And I’ve seen it with my own eyes. Some really stupid people doing really stupid, harmful things. I wouldn’t object if he got mad at them, even if temporarily, for example. Those guys seek to and actually some have been bosses of his tech.

                    37. “I think the GE and later on the spirit don’t control the body through organs directly. It’s some things of higher wavelengths.”

                      I agree. I’ve seen this idea expressed in different ways – from ancient teachings to modern theories. And to me it makes the most sense that there are “vibrations” controlling things, because I see the universe as consisting of energies of all different densities.

                      Here’s a modern theory about these “higher wavelengths, ” which I think is compelling (I found the shortest possible video – under 3 minutes! 😛 ).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s