Entry 2,526 - Entry 2,531

Entry 2,526

Real savant acting is when someone allows themself to be possessed by the character they are playing. Now, in Christianity, the word “possessed” pretty much carries a negative connotation and can definitely rub many from that tradition the wrong way, so I’m going to help define it in a way that honors the art of real acting. A personality, at its core, is a set of pre-defined, pre-programmed ways of responding, acting, and living in our world. It’s not that mysterious. Who we are behind the personality is mysterious.

Now, there are a lot within mainstream religions who believe that when you are possessed, another personality comes in and takes over your body. Since they are equating themselves at the personality level and not the mystery behind the personality, they believe possession by another entity is what is happening every time someone switches in ways that are not predictable or are different from their default personality.

But really most often than not, what they call “demon possession” is, in my opinion, still them (the mystery) putting on a new personality that represents all the repressed, pushed-down, and rebuked elements of the opposite of the personality they wear on a day-to-day basis. THEY are still wearing the personality like a mask, and, at any moment, they can take it off and try a new one on.

I knew this one gay guy who told me he couldn’t help but talk extremely feminine (your classic valley-girl accent on a white male who’s never felt having a man make him feel less than him based on him being a woman because he’s a man). He acted like he couldn’t change it, and I had to try to teach him how to talk without the extreme valley-girl accent.

I knew the mothertrucker could definitely calm down the exaggeration in his voice, but he pretended like he couldn’t. He may have truly been convinced that he couldn’t, but that is part of the personality and the configurations of that personality that he is wearing. The belief in the inflexibility of his personality is his own limitation he has prescribed to himself for whatever reason. 

Whether it’s to protect his identity as a flamboyantly gay man, or the fear that if he changes maybe he will lose some of his identity, that could be part of it, but only he knows why he put those limitations on himself. Others are very flexible with trying on new personalities; hence, actors.

When an actor studies diligently a particular personality — that person’s worldview, their likes, dreams, wishes, fears — and then allows themself to put on that personality as if it were a mask, they know they aren’t LITERALLY that person forever, but that they are allowing themself to surrender into that mask for the time being.

It’s sort of like a computer. In your computer, when you download software, it changes the behavior of that computer in a particular way. When an actor “downloads” a new personality through careful study and analysis, they are changing their behavior so they can play that character not in the default way they feel most comfortable in their normal waking lives, but in the way that respects and honors the story of the writer. 

---

Entry 2,527 - The Argument Against IQ Being Fixed at Birth

In my opinion, those who claim that IQ is fixed at birth and people cannot raise their IQ are, in my opinion, holding a stupid belief, because it attempts to set a limit on human advancement within a lifetime.

Within the field of Computer Science and when applying for jobs, I’ve had to take many tests: tests on algorithms, data structures, and even IQ tests. Since I’ve taken many IQ tests and become familiar with the questions, I’ve steadily improved my scores each time. So if IQ is really “fixed at birth” and doesn’t change much beyond a few points, why is my IQ steadily increasing by many points each time? Technically, my breaking through the limitations of that preconceived notion that IQ is set at birth shows it’s a false limit that should be done away with.

I see the human brain within each person as a limitless set of human potentiality. Yes, I understand there are some extreme cases where people are born with legitimate intellectual disabilities, but I believe even those people can break through their own limitations within that subgroup that contains that particular issue. 

Maybe people thought those with Down syndrome couldn’t hold a job, and then they do. Or maybe people assumed they wouldn’t be able to be a successful accountant, but they do become one. Or maybe someone assumes they cannot be a millionaire on their own, but they do. That would be breaking through the barriers of preconceived limitations.

I see things not in terms of IQ but rather in terms of how many neurons you have for that particular area of expertise you are working on. Since we haven’t been able to find a limit to how many neurons we can actually have, which shows the absolute awesomeness of our brains, there is no limit to how much our intelligence can increase in a given lifetime.

For me, I spent four years in college studying Computer Science after two years of switching around degrees trying to find something mentally stimulating that worked well with acting. I had built a ton of neurons around problem-solving very difficult problems, learning how to communicate in computer talk, and creating programs from the ground up. After doing that, really simple things like going into settings and turning on notifications seem incredibly easy to me because I have a ton of neurons already pre-exposed to extremely hard problems related to computer science.

However, I’m aware that others may not have that many neurons for problem solving, and it could be stressful and confusing without the neurons already present to make it easier. It doesn’t mean they were born dumb or stupid and cannot get out of it; rather, they just haven’t built up the neurons for it yet. Maybe temporarily they may feel stupid, but that feeling is only temporary because, with practice, it’ll be much easier. 

I once had a cook at a restaurant I worked at try to tell me that making all those recipes was “easy.” He had been there for over twenty years and would say it over and over, like, “It’s not hard" and that I should be able to do it like him. Yes, for him it was easy, but for me it was a whole new field — I hadn’t cooked as much as he had or worked as many hours. But still, he didn’t understand that.

I had another manager who touted how he was a great teacher but would quiz me on everything before he even taught me. After that day he stopped teaching me. Maybe from his perspective I was stupid, but in reality I didn’t have the neurons yet to make the connections I needed to be as speedy and on top of it as he had been for years. His teaching style and lack of patience with me getting the correct answer elicited a strange atmosphere that only got worse as time went on.

I had a very old professor who displayed the most arrogant and sociopathic traits I’ve ever met in a human being. It was almost as if he took pride in humiliating people and didn’t feel the slightest guilt or shame in doing so. If people didn’t put him in check, he would run rampant, attempting to humiliate and shame people, then say it was because "he wanted what was best for them.”

Most likely from his point of view, he was smart, sophisticated, and wise, and anyone who didn’t act how he thought they should act was overtly criticized to be put into shape. He clearly lacked the neurons in the brain that have to do with empathy because there are a million different ways to give feedback on work done, and he specifically chose humiliating, demoralizing, rude ways to deliver it. I find this often with people who are very miserable. They have the tendency to project their high levels of inner misery onto others in the name of "making them a better person" or "a better mathematician" and so forth.

At the time I truly had never dealt with a bully in a position of power and I’ll admit I wasn’t ready for him. But now, after hours and hours of researching different personalities, understanding personality disorders and how drastically different they see the world, I am now much more prepared. I have the neurons ready to fire when I come across a human being like him.

At the end of the day, it always goes back to how many neurons packed with the essential information you have for the situation you want to improve. Stupidity in a particular subject is only temporary. Depending on the context, there will be new parameters to break through in that subgroup that are unique and special. In the case of my old professor who is most likely a sociopathic narcissist, his goal would be to get therapy, work on mindfulness, and learn how to live as a positive, functioning member of society.

For other people, there will be other limits for them to expand beyond. Based on the context, we could all be stupid in certain areas but smart in others. Yes, there are some people who can act more stupid than smart, but even those people are still temporarily stupid until they choose to be smart in those ways.

I’d say the true mark of a genius is someone who critically thinks in every area of their life with empathy. Regardless of how much knowledge they do or don’t have, or mistakes they make or don’t make, if one is critically thinking with empathy, they will be able to rapidly reduce their number of mistakes and succeed at a faster pace, which is essentially what improving and succeeding becomes. They can do this faster with empathy because empathy has the power to hold us steadily in the present moment, and those who are more present are more efficient. Those who are more efficient get more things done. Beginners in empathy make the most mistakes and need to follow the process of others; masters in empathy make the fewest mistakes and are creative with the process. Creativity, then, can also be seen as an aspect of emotional intelligence. It creates depth and a strong foundation.

People who tend to make the same mistakes over and over are not critically thinking enough to avoid repeating those mistakes. In some ways, yes, that is stupid. In other ways, it is only temporary. At any time, people can choose to critically think their way out of stupidity and rise above the limitations they ran into or personally created through laziness and lack of self-control. Eventually, as people work on learning from their mistakes and improving in whatever they need to improve on, the fixing of errors will become more and more minute in that area.

For example, take a man — let's call him Bob — who is morbidly obese and suffers from musty body odor because. He struggles to wash his armpits and to scrub in places that have folds upon folds of skin and fat, but he tries his best. For him, you wouldn't give him the goal to go to the gym and run three miles every other day because he can barely walk, let alone take care of his hygiene. His mistakes are very dense in weight, therefore he would focus on a bigger goal that encompasses both issues, such as losing weight so he can eventually get back to running and have better hygiene. 

Compare that to another fellow — let's call him Drew — who was originally morbidly obese but then lost over 200 pounds, goes to the gym three times per week for weight lifting, and does recovery runs on the other days. If Drew makes any mistakes in the area of fitness, they will be much more minute than Bob's because he's already in a really good place. He's lost the weight. He has good hygiene. 

He has a set schedule of going to the gym and of running that he follows, and so now the attention would focus on the smaller details of making his time in the gym and running more efficient in order to accomplish his new goals. In Drew's case, it may be to switch up what equipment he uses, or to change how many sets and reps he does, or perhaps add a sauna session at the end. One thing is certain: Drew's mistakes that he may make are much smaller than Bob's because he's already corrected the mistakes around being morbidly obese.

Another thing I want to touch on is prioritizing the advancement of tech over human intelligence. I think one of the major epidemics in the year 2025 is that we are valuing technology over advancing humans in their critical-thinking skills and expanding their consciousness in general. Humans are valuing making extremely profitable businesses by creating software, hardware, and technologies that help humans cognitively offload processes in order to make their lives supposedly “easier,” but really what it’s doing is causing them to use less of their brain power, which causes those neurons to shrink and then die out. And now, with the rise in AI, we have people who are cognitively offloading their critical-thinking skills to AI so that they don’t even do it themselves.

From cognitively offloading our mathematical skills to calculators, to memorizing directions to using step-by-step Google Maps, and so forth, businesses are now making money by having AI do everything for people — from helping them write a simple email without any grammatical errors to helping them reply to a hard text. It’s disturbing.

There are so many videos on the internet of people who don’t even know why 1776 is significant for the USA or cannot multiply 3 × 3 × 3 correctly. And these are college students on campuses, supposedly studying… It’s frightening. Why are there engineers who can solve engineering issues but cannot solve basic problems in their everyday life? This is what I hope to fix.

One day I plan to have universities around the world dedicated to advancing human consciousness. Not just teaching people how to critically think, but seeing how far we can push it. How far can we push the boundaries of intelligence? How fast can we teach people a subject? How fast can we memorize information? How fast can we pick up data, utilize it, and retain it in our long-term memory?

My goal is to show people that their ability to learn is limitless. They are mini creators in material reality, shaping and molding the future through their minds. They are capable of extraordinary feats if they choose to stop with the stupidity and choose to critically think for themselves. No more relying on ChatGPT. No more letting Facebook think for you. You taking your life by the reins and go all past the edges you once thought stopped you from doing the impossible — becoming the impossible in physical flesh. 

---

 

Entry 2,528 - August 6

 
We’re always, always idolizing something.

Western and Eastern religions made centuries ago now make me chuckle. You’ve got the Western religions telling you only to idolize who they deem is the Creator, but really the god they made in their own mind, and then you have Eastern religions telling you to have no idols, expecting you to not be human as if having no idols is a possibility.

What I’ve realized in my 29 years of living is that if you’re a human, you will ALWAYS idolize something. Whether you think you are or aren’t, it’s part of being human. Even the notion of not wanting to have idols is idolizing the concept if one holds it above all other concepts to attain. 

Even these later channeled writings from A Course in Miracles are, in a way, not accepting the truth of our humanity by attempting to see having idols as a mistake rather than just a given reality. I used to also view it as a mistake, but now I see it as a fact similar to how, if you’re a human, you breathe, you poop, and you pee. It’s inevitable, and religions that attempt to teach you otherwise are capitalizing on your ignorance and attempting to dissuade you from accepting your humanness.

Being human is idolizing. It is accepting that you are within a torus, within a torus, within a torus. There are levels to it, this I know, and if you are in the human body, you cannot escape the game of levels. You could also see those levels as similar to magnets with polarization. Regardless of whether you like it or not, certain magnets repel each other and others attract. Switch those words out for certain people repel and others attract. Now add a conceptual addition to the idea of repulsion and attraction and you get a more intense definition for more intense repelling or attracting, such as putting down or idolizing. YOU’RE HUMAN. It’s part of the game. It’s part of the motion.

You cannot escape what you are until you change what you are, and as of now, if you’re in a human suit, you will idolize something. For roughly five years I have refrained from having a significant other. Do you know why that was largely possible? Because I stopped idolizing relationships. BUT that doesn’t mean I stopped idolizing altogether, because, like I said, if you’re human you will ALWAYS idolize something, whether you like it or not.

Instead, I idolized my alone time with myself. I idolized silence, solitude, musing on the thoughts, ideas, and inventions that come to my mind when I am alone. I began to see this as the epitome of my humanity, and so it was actually very easy not to be in a romantic relationship with another human being. 

Back when I was  drinking the kool‑aid of Fundamental Christianity, I idolized the version of God Fundamental Christianity worshipped, which was really the god Fundamental Christianity made through particular beliefs that was a product of man’s invention. In a way, all our creations are extensions of ourselves and can even have their own life to us in strange ways, but it doesn’t mean our inventions of beliefs are the ultimate Creator of the entire multiverse either.

Within religion, ironically, the beliefs around god carry their own limits and limitlessness. Saying God demands animal sacrifice is limit. Saying God is omnipresent is limitlessness. Advocating for limits are mis-creates fragmentation, but they try to make up for the myriad of loose holes by saying, “God’s ways are higher than our ways.” In reality, their logic is obfuscated and they need an escape route. A perfectly coherent God would have perfectly coherent logic around it, and the incoherent jumble of a mess of Christian Fundamental doctrine speaks for itself on where it stands. 

But anyways, back to idols! These Christians idolize their particular version of God that they worship. If they switch religions, they switch beliefs, which paint a new idol with new tenets to follow. What I’ve realized is that really life is a game of many games, one in which we have fun by switching what we idolize. Right now I can sense I am on the cusp of idolizing a relationship with a woman. I made the idiot decision to watch “The Summer I Turned Pretty” and could feel myself starting to turn the balance from idolizing my solitude to idolizing being that guy who gets a hot lady.

Or, in other words, I feel the attraction toward the idea becoming one day a manifestation in reality, and I can feel the magnetic pull. Before, that magnetic pull was largely toward my peaceful solitude… my time in meditation… my many head orgasms that are weird but also very satisfying. But now the tables are turning again, and you know what, I’m okay with that. I accept that. I accept my humanity for what it is: dirty, messy, strange, and one that often catches me off guard with feelings I’d rather not feel but can’t help feeling because it’s part of my humanity. 

---

 

Entry 2,529 - August 17

Major Problems with Religion

One of the biggest problems I’ve come across in religion, from Christianity to Vipassana, to Zen Buddhism, to Yogananda’s sect of Hinduism — pretty much every type of religious group I’ve explored — has what I call the toxic hierarchy.

Whenever something happened, it was never the people at the top of the hierarchy who were wrong. It was always someone lower on the totem pole. If you tried to be discerning and point even a moderate finger in the direction of the leader and whoever else was involved, they would say you were the problem in how you were viewing it and the leader was not in the wrong.

There was such a deep emphasis on the importance of continuing the ancient tradition of their particular lineage within their particular religion that any attempt to healthily criticize or stand up for yourself along the hierarchy was seen as “wrong” or “bad,” or as someone who “is sinning” or “not living in the present enough.” Whatever verbiage of words from whatever tradition, I noticed a very toxic hierarchical system.

I would point out how criticizing me for being open and honest was put down because he simply had been in the tradition longer than I was. No matter my argument or my position, he would be right and I would be wrong — not based on positions of perspective, not based on the ability to perceive different angles. It was black and white, strangely already set by the structure within the religion.

I saw this in EVERY single religion I visited. With Yogananda’s group led by Ananda, they would mention story after story about how you just had to trust your guru even if it didn’t make sense. Critical-thinking skills were subservient to submission to the leaders for those who followed the religion and its gurus. Obedience and submission were expected, and when you didn’t do those two things, you were the problem through and through.

Not your leaders. Not your gurus. You. Critically thinking about what your guru said you should do versus just doing it? Terrible. They would say you aren’t trusting enough or you are the issue. It was always strangely warped in a way where, once again, you were the issue. The religion never was. And if they were humble enough to admit the religion’s pitfalls, it was on an individual basis. I rarely, if ever, saw it in a collective and sustained way, especially in terms of the beliefs.

It reminded me of how humans identify heavily with their ego to the point where they will make justifications for believing in atrocious things rather than realizing they are more than what they identify with. They won’t suddenly die or cease to exist, as the ego likes to attempt to convince people, if they don’t identify with the ego’s position.

Similarly, I’ve realized that religions are a reflection of humans’ ego in the current state. Religion is a direct correlation of one’s current level of evolution because it sets the precedence of what one accepts into their field of identity or rejects.

Many religions act pretty much like egos, but in bigger clumps. Religions are literally egos clumped together in a bigger system, which some may compare to a larger entity. That bigger system, ironically, has its own identity that it feels it needs to protect, just like your personal ego can convince you that you have an identity attached to the ego that you must protect. 

This is why I have been saying over and over that I think we should let the old religions die out like people naturally die out, and that just like it’s not normal for cells to become cancer cells and live at the expense of killing the whole bodily system it gets its energy from, it is not normal or healthy to have religions operate like cancer cells and kill people in wars, kill the earth in polluting and destroying it, etc., at the expense of the religion surviving for more humans to engage in its activities, furthering the destruction.

And this is not to say that there aren’t clumps of egos within religions that are doing good things. But a little good does not do much good compared to a whole lot of bad, and religion has most likely murdered more people on this planet than most other things that naturally kill humans off. Most religions nowadays act as cancer, destroying people and the planet with few benefits, few and far between.

It operates more often like a cancer cell with its toxic hierarchical structures, murdering in the name of their god, and strange doctrines based on the current conditions of the egos that lead the religion, which can most certainly be volatile.

Not to mention, those who lead those religions have been following a certain way of doing things set by those before them, and most often do not make big enough changes within the religion to actually make it into something predominantly beautiful rather than destructive.

What is humanity’s fascination with holding onto dying, old doctrines that were the cause of billions of deaths? All in the hopes of appeasing a god that man created out of desperation due to their fear of what lay after death, which only came about as they became more and more separated from their connection to Earth.

Look at the indigenous people and their relationship with Earth! If there were any religions worth keeping around, it would be those of the indigenous that honor the sacredness of Earth, humanity, and animals. I’ve heard of indigenous religions that sacrifice people and animals to their gods, and those are no better than the popular religions of our days that attempt to justify their religion’s atrocities throughout the centuries.

But what would be the best way to go forward, in my opinion, is to LITERALLY go forward — clean slate. I’m talking let it all go and focus all of our energy on advancing the masses’ consciousness, so that, naturally, as we stay more present and continue to advance, we don’t get stuck in this weird desire to hold onto something that was meant to be left in the past a long time ago. We can come up with new traditions, religions, fun ways of celebrating, and also let them go.

Yes, maybe some of these traditions and religions come from very enlightened individuals and last longer than others, but understand they can only stay uncorrupted as long as the people who follow them are also uncorrupted. Look at Jesus and his crowd. How long did Jesus’ words stay true to his original intention until they eventually turned into Christendom, where after they had a council, if you believed “not how the official church believed” you were killed? What absolute baboonery is that???

So even if you have someone who has a great idea, it may have to be recycled until another person with a superbly advanced consciousness can direct it and push it forward without corruption. They could do that with an old idea or tradition, etc., but it’s way more fun to create in the moment and in a way that connects to your soul.

Some people only take the traditions of their countries, cities, towns. Others take it from the stars, from within, from the heart. There are so many ways. Some may follow traditions for thousands of years and enjoy them. Others may find new ones from a few years ago and keep them for a long time. There is no right or wrong way to do it. What matters most is that you are advancing your consciousness at every moment and honoring the moment if you feel you’ve grown out of something, whether that be a religion, tradition, idea, concept, belief or so on.

Look at my own blogs throughout the years! There are times where I look at entries from four years ago and marvel in fascination at how I have left some beliefs go that I never would have assumed I would let go, and I’m glad I did! I also marvel at the thought how forty years from now, I could read things I’ve written from this year and marvel at how much my beliefs, ideas, thoughts, traditions, etc have changed.

Change should be fun, not a burden. Look at it like a journey within a journey. The changing within is also changing that which is without. The two always go hand in hand. Let it be fun. See it as a grand exploration.

---

Entry 2,530

 
Now, when it comes to actual reforms, I understand the desire to keep things as much as possible how they were with the founder of that religion, corporation, system, organization, etc. But the major defect they are not taking into account is that once that founder with those marvelous ideas and ability to lead to higher consciousness dies out, then the followers who are not at that level of consciousness take over, and, similar to telephone, the degradation begins.

Look at Christianity with its followers perverting the religion by murdering disobedient or nonbelievers. Look at Apple and how, after its founder passed away, the company has allowed governments insider access to hack into phones without users’ knowledge, purchasing backdoor zero‑day hacks like Pegasus from the Israeli government for their own purposes, bypassing warrants through the government. The corruption started small, and over time it gained traction. Now an iPhone is just as hackable as an Android if you have the money to buy the malware to do so. 

The stupidity of the governments throughout the countries that purchased these hacks instead of reporting them and attempting to help the companies patch them is that if they have those hacking abilities, then you can know without a doubt that other potentially nefarious groups with nefarious intentions have those codes as well. Just like there are good guys in governments that respect privacy, you can sure as hell know there are bad guys in the government — sociopaths, psychopaths, narcissists — who will take any potential advantage they can over others and use it for whatever reason.

So in that case, I think it’s hard, because I have a strong desire to reform these institutions such as religion, government, and corporations, but I am not high enough on their personal hierarchy to make any notable changes.

In that case, perhaps I do start my own institutions to implement my visions. I would actually prefer that. In my opinion, it’s much better to start fresh from scratch rather than with an old, beat‑up home infested with maggots, mites, roaches, deteriorating wood, mold everywhere, and the ceiling about to collapse any minute. That is the current condition of many of these institutions, corporations, and religions in 2025.

The very healthy ones are, unfortunately, the minority, but they are there and they do exist. The goal is to make the healthy ones the majority and the unhealthy ones the minority. With duality, it’s unrealistic to believe that unhealthy institutions can be completely eradicated, because literally duality is all about supposed opposites coexisting, creating a playground of interesting moments and experiences. If you didn’t want that, you wouldn’t have come to Earth. You would have gone somewhere else. But I do believe in the time that I am alive that we are able to transition so that the healthy ones are the majority and the unhealthy ones throughout the Earth are the minority.

But anyways, that’s how I know I wasn’t meant to be a reformer. I was meant to be a leader, someone who implements their vision in multiple disciplines and oversees them as long as possible until humanity has upgraded its consciousness to a level that does not create massive corruption and greed when I am no longer here.

The issue with the other ascended masters, such as Confucius or Buddha, was the major disparity between their followers and their personal level of consciousness. Many of them worked so hard to help a few elevate their consciousness but then didn’t have that much time to see them out so they were able to replicate the process with others, so the corruption began a lot sooner than normal. They were able to teach, but those they taught were not able to sustain the same level their teachers did.

My goal is not merely to start institutions. Not merely to teach individuals. But to stay around until there is a mass majority who are able to replicate my level of consciousness, what I came to implement, and keep true to it.

See, and that brings up what I’m trying to say. I would have no need to reform Buddha, Krishna, etc. It’s their followers throughout the centuries where the corruption has blown up like a big snowball that has been growing and growing for centuries with little to no proper reformation to redirect it to the leaders’ original intentions. That was the major issue these ascended masters faced. This is also the major issue that ascended masters in institutions face.

It is one thing to start something beautiful that changes the trajectory of the world. It’s a whole other thing to learn the skills necessary to SUSTAIN the institution’s direction according to the ascended master. I am not one to announce myself as anything, and so I appear quite normal to these people. If anything, I experience a lot of older people who are either jealous, upset, or angry when I point out inconsistencies, cognitive dissonance, or issues in their religion, institution, etc.

This is why many times ascended masters prefer to start with a clean slate rather than attempt to submit and conform to standards in order to rise up in the hierarchy before finally being able to change important matters. But even if an ascended master were to do that, it would take a very long time for people to actually implement the change because of the practices already implemented by the followers, the potential resistance to change, the potential splitting off, etc.

People will be people. They will dissent ascended masters, and they will properly dissent sociopaths, psychopaths, and narcissists, and even those with borderline personality disorder, who are selfish with their emotions but obviously cannot help it because it is a mental disorder. In my personal opinion, I think diagnosed sociopaths, psychopaths, narcissists, and BPD work very well as “cogs in the wheel,” but they do terribly and are a danger to society if they get too much power and are elevated to positions as leaders, CEOs, etc., in any type of institution, whether it be religious, corporate, or organizational.

If you look at a majority of companies now, there is a statistic that says a majority of them have personality disorders such as narcissim, and then it actually makes sense why they are so corrupt, greedy, and selfish with profit over what’s beneficial for the Earth and others. There is a certain order to society that benefits the whole, and when those diagnosed with those disorders serve the system in a lower position and resist the desire for more power and control, they are using their personality to the benefit of helping others and are more able to be held accountable by leaders above them, which helps the whole system flourish. 

---

Entry 2,531 - August 18

Certain Level

I will say it is quite fascinating how my conceptualization of what people label “God” has changed as I’ve risen in levels, especially after the orgasm in my neck, or what some would call Kundalini awakening, or what I like to call my “death day” — a celebratory moment where one merges with their Higher Self (you remember you chose to come here, a major part of your blueprint, your mission, what you intend to get from your time on Earth, etc.).

I think even since my death day, five years later, the idea of “God” has become more magical, beautiful, and colorful… kind of like a kaleidoscope. I can recognize other people’s perspectives of “God” as valid — maybe a color here or a color there — and my own perspectives throughout the years of my life as another color here and another color there. 

From when I preferred to see God as the Father I wished I always had, to the best friend who always had my back, to the energy that is all and becomes what we need from it, and then dissolves back into energy when we wish to have it do so.

I remember calibrating my consciousness eight months ago and I was somewhere in the 600s, and that is a trippy place to reside for a while. It’s one thing to take drugs and enter that area for a short period of time, but it’s a whole other thing to live there perpetually.

I don’t know if I’ll be able to fully explain “God” in the way I experience it until you experience it yourself at this calibrated level of consciousness, and I hope with my writings I will be able to help elevate as many people as I can to that level to experience it as such.

But everything I see in physical reality, in my dreams, meditations, etc., is part of this thing we often label as God/Energy/I Am, etc. Whether it is hidden somewhere deep within and expressed dramatically, as with murderous psychopaths, or expressed abundantly by saints like Mother Teresa and so forth, it exists, persists, and can never be wiped out.

It is everything and exactly what we need at any moment in time. It shapes, molds, and becomes that which we desire, and therefore desire is intrinsically related to the concept of God. Within the Abrahamic faiths, the very story of God and our reality is linked by desire (God made humans so he wouldn’t be lonely, yada yada; it depends on the religion).

In a more precise manner, my experience of that which people label as “God” is never ending. It is always there in everything, so it never stops. When I see division, I get dissociative, ungrounded, and existential because I’m willingly turning off reality. But when I see God as rightfully everything, I am so grounded, so magnetic, so filled with love — it’s euphoria beyond words.

BUT then again, to stay in that state is not always beneficial or helpful, because one realistically would never want to leave it. One would stop work, stop daily duties, and stay in that orgasmic oneness that pervades all things that are perceived separately. It destroys the fun of the game if one is permanently subbed out on purpose.

As Hawkins mentions, many of the people who do try to stay in that euphoric state to the maximum degree all the time become like babies again, where people who willingly go in and out of participating in the game (living and meditating) have to take care of these people who have selfishly forfeited the game but kept their bodies, and live in that pleasure nonstop.

To me, these people are no different than drug addicts. They are no different than flies who get obsessed with a light bulb, cling to it until they are burned alive. Their obsession with having God be the permanent orgasm in their life is their demise.

We also see this in religious churches where people are addicted to singing worship songs because of how it feels. People who are addicted to the power and control they have as a pastor over a congregation—obviously in a different sense, but potent in a different way.

These grown-ass adults who are so enthralled with the permanent ecstasy of God and make others take care of them have their own issues and their own benefits, but in my opinion they need to get off the God‑cane (God + cocaine) and be independent in taking care of themselves and actually help others out.

Being a dead weight in society at any level is hard on the community. Some of these people never find helpers, and you can see them wasting away or rotting in corners over their desire to experience God as a perpetual orgasm. They have no ability to control it, and, like a fly addicted to a lightbulb, soon they go to the other side.

I have felt the urge before to be like that, but I’ve shifted perspectives. I realized that GOD will become whatever I desire it to be. And if I have no desire for it, GOD is nothing but energy, the foundation of everything before it manifests into something.

So in a funny way, I’m an atheist and a spiritualist. I’m an atheist in the sense that I don’t prescribe to there being a God how religions perceive God to be, but I also admit that this energy, which exists, cannot be created nor destroyed and can become whatever we want it to become, which makes me seem like a spiritualist, as I’ve gone rogue from religions and have found a definition of the idea of God that resonates for me.

So in a sense, that means your future selves become the God you desire to become. It is the closest thing to a “God” religion can conjure, but even using that word could make it into something it isn’t. All one needs to know is how I experience God now is essentially this: God is what I desire in this moment. At times, that is my future self giving me advice. I desire for my future self to give me another perspective on a past moment that I still don’t understand, and I need help making sense of.

Whether it’s just present me doing it, or I’m actually conjuring the wisdom from future me, it makes no difference to me because, in the end, it is still me. Sometimes this future self is forty years older than me, sometimes two hundred years older than me and still in the Ky body. Other times it is beyond multiple incarnations and so high frequency‑wise, it freaks me out. 

I don’t focus on God solely as what it can give me in the sense of pleasure as I used to, but I used to, even before I could put words to it when I was in fundamental Christianity. I think many in religions and rave spaces focus on making that happen for them, but are also shielded from that realization because they wouldn’t want to admit their selfishness, especially if rising in ranks within the religion is contingent on strict morality (don’t be selfish).

They may not even realize it, but they chase a good feeling and call it God. They chase the idea of being forgiven and call it God. They chase the idea of having a perfect Father who will always love you and call it God. These people are chasing feelings and run the risk of making them longstanding issues, where it’s really hard to let them go.

And I’ll tell you, it definitely is not easy to shift one’s perspective of God from desiring good feelings, orgasms, and chills to essentially experiencing God as coalescing more and more into oneself, becoming more and more whole. Integrating your multi-dimensionality into your one experience. It’s not as “sexy” as the century-old religions make God to be, but I can tell you it’s trippy, mind-blowing, and a whole new season of exploration.

That is my experience of the idea of God. If I attempt to condense God to a feeling I am chasing (God is my father, which invokes a particular feeling; God is a king; etc.), I get extremely existential because I know feelings, pleasures, and chills are fleeting, and my own connection with my Higher Self is way beyond that. So essentially I would be making myself God over all, as in a monarchical way rather than as a healthy, interconnected way, and would become very existential.

That is another downside of Christianity: there is only so much you can push that type of view of God in a forward direction with their mainstream doctrine before you start going backwards. Chasing God as feelings, as confirmation of growth, creates confusion because feelings are contingent on your current relationship to everything, which is contingent on your calibrated consciousness, or current level of viewing reality from.

It would be the equivalent of running a marathon, and when you think you’re getting close to the finish line someone hands you a bike and forces you to go the opposite direction. Then, when you get to the beginning mark again, someone takes the bike and says, “Run back to the finish line.” You never get beyond experiencing God as feelings when the century-old religions never got past it themselves.

It’s a terrible loop, and I remember being so confused within it. I knew, deep down, there was something more to it, but I didn’t know where to get that knowledge. I hadn’t been taught how to search for it within. But now I’m telling you: it’s not through century-old religions; it’s by going within. So simple, but so utterly life-changing.