Mythical Conversations // God Descends As A Woman

Krishna & Sophiachus - Pt. II

S: How does capitalism, as it’s grown to be, in this way circumcise the life potentials of the individuals?

K: Well, interesting point about the individuals. Beyond the hierarchy of needs, from survival to societal relevance and social approval to individuation, even discounting the psychological and physical requirements / necessities of the citizens themselves, even beyond the exigencies of their needs as people, and beyond even their sovereign constitutional rights, what we can say with absolute certainty is that the economy is an ocean that becomes itself by the flow, flux, and waves of the people as they command and will it to be. We are, what, trillions of dollars under the debt ceiling and we inherited this from the junky and military past generations? Give or take, yes? Okay, so say this is so, as the humans claim it to be, within this system, this game, this dark money magic, that they’ve conjured or at least, put into play within the play of human affairs, on the level of working societal constructs. All this killing so that we can sit down in our comfortable four walled structure that shields us against nature, so that our wife can make us a pecan or apple pie at the end of the day. Endless debauchery a justification for the end net result of our wholesome and well-coddled lifestyles. Clotted cream and scones while 95% of the rest of the world is up in flames, searching pitifully for its next meal, doing countless disingenuous things to just put a meal on the table and get the boss off our backs. Nothing but pawns and henchmen to the billionaire ruling class that was raised on silver spoons and milkshakes. Well, and by the way, constructs, entire paradigms even, can be changed. There’s no doubting that. But working with the idea of the economy, let’s just point out the obvious here which is that the money of the people, individually, as a whole composite make up the collective money of the nation. So if every person represents a drop in the pot, the people as a whole, as a collective, represent a whole jug of water, like picture those jugs that the Dominicans used to carry on their heads for miles, or that the ancient Greeks and Egyptians used to fashion from clay with ornate patterns, pictures, and poetics inscripted all down the sides like fancy tattoo artistry.  There are what, over six million people in the US now, right, so six million drops of water… that’s at least some kind of body of water, I suspect. Let’s give everyone’s drop the weight of a large droplet of rain, and now we’ve got at least a lake, if not a tributary with many intersecting, interweaving channels of multidirectional flows depending upon the locus of one’s attention and economic contribution, let’s say. 

If we were to greatly expand that concept, extrapolating it say to the realm of consciousness itself (where “friendship” is the culmination of various back and forth patterns of energy that form a bond of a sort, a counter-transference of energies, a real current, like a trade port between one country to another), then we’d actually see evidence emerging of a greater collective consciousness and if we combine only the data of the supraconsciouses involved excluding junk data (mistakes; glitches; OCD patterns, etc) and even magical yet unordinary incidences of subconscious phenomena (like astral traveling), we’ll see evidence of a collective supra-consciousness emerging that guarantees magical abilities as well (telepathy, timing, synchronicity, greater planning and organizational capacities, evidence of PK and clarisentience, eventually even, extended supra-human extra-ordinary magical capacities like omniscience, other forms of astral travel, possibly even time travel and types of flight and climbing and swimming abilities etc.)

S: But we all just want to cuddle at night and find people to laugh at our jokes.

K: Well, sure, the demands of the ordinary individual self are really actually very straightforward and simplistic. Extremely so. I think a lot of the time our supra and sub conscious selves are, in a way, overwhelmed by the stillness and simplicity that the real self requires. It’s easy to settle down and just appreciate the simple life in a way? I know I’ve myself spent hundreds of thousands of years in limbo just simply, floating in the outer most tropospheres, listening, not engaging, watching, not delving, nor interfering simply… well, simply existing, unencumbered by demands and unesconced in all of it. Within the dramatics of you know, the fluctuations of life - not only in economic and societal affairs and activities but just you know, in moods and the ups and downs of having a body with a pituitary gland and like, a pineal gland, multi million count networks of flora and fauna, a system that essentially composed of muscle, tissue, bone, and blood, conduits of water and electricity, such a profound piece of consciousness, of spirit, put into such a rudimentary vessel, it’s no wonder that people really go to extremes in their life trying to overcompensate and prove themselves through being of value to society, amassing material or economic wealth to benefit some theoretical structure or arbitrarily pronounced ethic, simply bending over backwards to fuel the machine that feeds on human souls. 

S: You really think that? Of society?

K: I’m not the first to think it. Krishnamurti thought it --

S: Sir you’ve come well before Krishnamurti. He’s a creature of the 1900s.

K: Sure, but he’s excellent, and time is… curvilinear? No, more dimensional than that… it’s, uh, kind of like, it oscillates like a revolving pendulum, or a dna strand, or a basilisk, like an infinity sign, sort of a neverending feedback loop through space and time that always crosses back in on itself like a wavering disc, or optical illusion. Mathematically it computes, but it’s hard to spatially iterate. 

S: Right…

K: So, really, no one’s come before anyone else, and all of our ideas are recycled. 

S: …

K: That’s why you get the feeling so often of having written the book you’re reading and being bored and thinking the author is in a way, plagiarizing thoughts you’ve already had before. We’re all one another, in different pieces of time. That’s why … 

S: You’re starting to freak me out, man. You sound a bit like, I don’t know, L. Ron Hubbard, the guy who created a religion on a dare. 

K: There, you see! That’s the perfect example. Take L. Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology. Couldn’t be any less sciency, right? Seems completely irrational. Their entire premise is situated on a myth, right? At least, it’s a story. And science isn’t a story, right? It’s more than that - an outline of sheer, undeniable, facts. Yet, as physics is telling us, there are many dimensions of experience and of fact on top of fact, and that very co-occurrence tells us its truth by way of story, It all does, given the x-dimension, the horizontal depth-radius of time. Time is that totally inscrutably mathematical concept that gives rise to all story, and detail, all manner of description, as conveyed by the y-axis. The x-axis is boring and stable so that the y-axis can convey itself. Without that dimension, the numbers wouldn’t become words, and words and methodology, wouldn’t exist, without the duality of the perpendicular hemispheres, and without the function of the second sphere that creates all the other numbers and spatial parameters accessible throughout space and time (and everything else). 

L. Ron Hubbard fathomed the existence of multiple souls cohabitating singular bodies because of a big volcanic eruption that happened at the beginning of time during teh age of the creator, Vishnu. Actually, he sort of took a bit of Hindu lore and reconciled it (as science fiction only can) with a metaphorical overlay of well, mystical mambo jumbo. Soul talk. Soul speak. In a way, our individual consciousness that emerged from nothingness had to schizophrenically separate into a multiplicity of parts, shapes, and forms in order to give breath and rise to different people made up of the same consciousness. So here we see that the idea of One-God (Monotheism) and Many-Gods (Polytheism) both exist in overlapping universes because across time, this is only how it could ever come to be. The 0 recognized itself and became 2 seeing itself as 1 and the void as 0. 0 and 1 equals 2. With the advent of duality, came the possibility for all of the other combinations and flavors and subtleties and eccentricities of things to emerge. The first things taht did, called themselves gods probably, because they were the closest and only things that were closest to source origins of the dissemination of consciousness available first as mind (in the imaginary negative numbers) and then as actualities (real numbers), possibly from demigods to gods but in any case

S: Woah, woah, woah. Hold on there. Still, I don’t see, what has L. Ron Hubbard to do with anything? And another thing, we’re all each other, in different timelines, and time exists separately in parts but exists also all at once altogether as the overlapping timelines like what, a huge mycoplasma, a cerebrum of total consciousness and world-possibilities? I don’t get it. 

K: First of all, there’s no way you haven’t thought of this option. Everyone’s thought of this, indepdenteldy and all together, right? I mean, who hasn’t thought of this LOL

S: Well…

K: Capitalism takes limitless human potential and attempts to encapsulate it, sign clauses to stop it from working with other parts of source consciousness by many names, lock it down and consign it to working tasks that will make its shareholders happy, and this is why it’s not only ethically but also efficiency-wise, quite flawed. It was created obviously to create a carrot and stick situation, playing the products of duality off one another in competition (reward and punishment, trial and reward, ad infinitum, boring everyone with its lack of creativity) without seeing that humans are already quite driven to begin with and in fact would accomplish way more if they were allowed to cooperate all together and do really cool things instead of constantly having to defend their private tribalisms and interests of security and survival. 

And in fact, the human drive is so indefatigably strong, that the only things that the rules and circumstances stand to do is to limit them by the anxieties of the subtle and direct demands and pressures set upon the individual in order to coerce him to produce, produce, produce, more than he consumes, as though this has any bearing upon his worth or standard of production. Because let me tell you something: a man’s ability to produce is so negligibly thin in contrast to what he stands to directly, operatically, put out into the universe simply by the nature of his being himself.   Every single dystopian erotic film or piece of literature posits that man becomes a part of machine, and stops being himself, is when the machine takes over. What is the machine? It is not the supra-self, nor the ubermensche, but something far more sinister, created by the fear-driven ids and superegos of the world as  part of archaic branding of human conscious tech that drives itself into walls in order to create an impact. 

Yea - Let’s look at the way that Power is defined. Power, I don’t know if you’re aware of this or not, is not defined by the kilojewels of energy that is burned in order to fuel your daily life. This being an element of consumption, actually. It’s also a demarcation of power. Power is actually a full spectrum of that which is used up, plus that which is created. So, according to modern definitions of power, a corporation is the most powerful thing in the world because it is as inefficient as it is efficient. It produces and consumes a megalith of data and energy. (Light is energy is data is knowledge, it is all the same thing, which is why euphoria can lead to revelation and by way of revelation and light entering the vessel, much information can be channeled, gained, disseminated, etc. etc. etc.). In fact, part of the Dark Agenda is to condemn joy and light as frivolous and pointless and even to make people ashamed of it. That’s how they convince you to kill off your inner child, or at least, to sacrifice it to the machine, to make of you addicts of gambling, of drink, of smoking, of disorder, of chaos, of mayhem, or of order itself, perhaps even yet more insidious and unworthwhile of its own accord and agenda). Anything that separates you from your emotions, or from your inner sense of joy, is going to attempt to reassemble your parts to suit the whims and directives of the regime. So, the death cults of the Illuminati are fed second hand by people who it doesn’t even have to pay or relegate contracts to. Just your adherence to cultural mores that tend to addict you to things that waste your life energy and convince you that your joy isn’t of the highest good to all, (which it is, by the way, your mere unique expression being extremely worthwhile and positively impactful, passivity itslef being a vibrational form of currency in the universe anyways) 

L. Ron. Hubbard who painted some core truths in the version of a parable we could all consciously relate to, bears the same name as Barbara Marx Hubbard who is an evolutionist and futurist, the one who coined the phrase “Conscious Evolution.”

S: Oh. Thought I coined that phrase.

K: You did as well, independent of she, but technically she did it first. 

S: Oh, that kinda sucks. I had it on my f*******: page and everything. I came up with it when I was in high school. I came up with ‘no one knows what anything is or is all about’ and ‘everything is a simulation’ when I was literally 6 years old, as God knows, and my parents know, etc. 

K: Like a computer simulation or a mental simulation? Time is irrelevant, though, and we’re all each other experiencing ourselves as ourselves but also, were we to don a bird’s eye’s perspective of everyone (which some substances actually allow us to do, from an aerial and empathic understanding and vibrational outlook) you’d see we’re all living out everything simultaneously, at least, if you collapse the x axis into a single capsule of data. 

S: That is trippy af. Are you high?

K: I’m actually not. But let’s keep going

S: Sure. Well, computers evolved only as a product of the mind. So, in a way, if that theory holds any water at least, Descartes is right. Something I’ve never taken seriously before but returning to this original theory of mine, maybe he is. I think, therefore I am.

K: At least, that’s no doubt how it originally was.

S: So the universe was created by mind? LIke… as a figment of the imagination?

K: And we’re all here, many of us to make sure of it, holding the ropes, holding it all up. 

S: So if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it…

K: Well, it’s not just us. It’s spirits, ancestors, fragments of consciousness in the bardo, recalculating, ready to take form again. It’s magical mystical mayhem in between the lines. I first re-remembered this when I saw the poetry of a rather sexy celebrity recently, after I told her I loved her, she wrote some really kickass poetics that reminded me deeply of my own self, and caused my re-remembrance once again that I’ve been her, and she’s been me, to whatever extent our paths have crossed or even overlapped, in this lifetime and in others! 

S: That’s cool, Krish.

K: Thankiuu.

S: All that and only 13 and a half pages, huh? Just me or does it seem like it’s getting harder and harder to write books these days? 

K: Lol, well, you still have your second book of short stories. But yea, I mean, we’re ending the phase of the Kali yuga, marred by the industrious ambitiousness of Capricorn. It’s almost time to start… (he lowered his voice in embarrassment) living. 

S: Aye.

K: Ya. hold onto your helmet. It is going ot be quite the ride. 

S: There will be waterparks right and infinity pools

K: PRobably more than you can fathom

S: I very much look forward to going beyond that which I can fathom. I absoutely loathe myself for having a god complex. As do others, I suspect.

K: Not as much as you’d think, actually. They like that part of you. But let’s get back to the origins of creation and the overlapping of our life narratives and the formulation of the supraselves, and now let’s talk about Nietzsche. 

S: ah, yes. Good man. 

K: Really one of the best to have ever existed.

S: Sure, I guess I’d agree. 

K: It doesn’t matter… a person’s opinion has no bearing upon the nature of reality, itself. The facts stand to reason that he was, in fact, one of the greatest men to exist. Not a lot is written about him, but through what he wrote himself, we can discern the type of character he was.  You see, back in his day, there was not a lot of empathy.  You see, the tribalism that we took advantage of in colonizing the Americas was the same sort of tribalism that became our downfall as well.  A lot of emphasis in human civilization at least in the unmagical times post Christ (since, rather, using a mere saint as our scapegoat for creating a new world on his blood) has been in containing and relegating man to a tiny niche in the world through which to make money for his captors, his team, a rather narrow-minded playing out of ancient communistic principles that never came into fruition quite in the manner in which they were intended to be.  Communism, as a response to fascism, seems to cater to its very fundamentalisms, creating more of that which it seeks to branch away from. That which would be irreprehensible if allowed on an individual level, becomes the standard of conduct when it comes to groups, in which the members can be anonymous, and exemplify “teamwork” by providing for its orgainziations bottom line… it’s never focalized the other way around. All for one, and one for all; tends to be more of a one for all type of situation. And ofo course the all, tends to be managed by one person or family of persons, which we see in the current administration, which can be called a plutocracy, or an oligarchy. People riot against fundamentally this, under the auspices of other pro-social causes, but it’s to the generic idea of fascism to which they introduce a zealous branch of anarchy, which always sounds like such an originally creative and socialistic idea whenever it is brought up, for a coup, or just as a way to pass the time during a display of fascist policy enacted by whoever the withstanding reigning powers are in said epochal paradigm.

S: Okay, but given that every sincle ruler of a macro political organization, say the government for instance, is going to be corrupt, given a historical appraisal that that’s just how human nature tends to be or at least what it tends to turn into given --

K: No, bad logic. 

S: how so?

K: We can’t accept any future phenomenon to be a given simplistically on the basis of the results of the past, historically, and the reason for this is that every part of a river is different, even as it moves along the same riverbank. Nothing is the same twice. You can’t moreover infer the natures and behavior of an element given the extremely precise catalysts and responses of its past situation, with the cards it had then, and the way of being it had then, without the self-reflective powers of the present and the fact that everything adapts. Honestly, even with a regressions analysis in order to predict world events, predictive strategies do tend to be quite useless, and rather come up short to what actually happens. It isn’t enough to take a wholly pessimistic or a wholly optimistic outlook in predicting or inferring, via the medium of intuitive analysis, the outcome of affairs. Sometimes there are repetitive enough patterns that one can infer patterns of activity, but one can never infer the specific consequences of these patterns nor to any degree of specificity or certainty that A will cause B will cause C or otherwise. In fact even when it comes to the alphabet, all the letters are arranged together in a totally arbitrary manner. It isn’t like with numbers. We may as well have taken the 26 letters of our alphabet, in the format of scrabble pieces, and dumped them out of a bag and then written down which came out first. Totally arbitrary. As such, so is human nature. In fact, quite a few recent books that double study psychology and economics show and even indicate that human behavior is fundamentally inscrutably unpredictable even given supercomputer analyses of it all. Why do you think the money these days, on the level of marketing, comes from directly spying on the individual (which by the way, should blow up as an enormous court case one day, given privacy rights protections and the actual unconstitutionality of this way of procuring information)? 

S: Sure, I agree. 

K: Once again, it isn’t a matter of you agreeing or not, it simply is the case. Unfortunately, one could interpret, but that would be an opinion also. 

S: So what is the solution? What is the cure for us all, psychologically and as a whole, given that we are sovereign autonomous beings seeking, according to maslow and other developmental analysts, and that people deserve rights without having to stick their neck out and fight for them? 

K: How can you be certain that you have rights or exist at all if you don’t stick your neck out to fight?  … I’m just kidding. Yes, those are intrinsic birthrights of being human, we are always free no matter what the political auspices are that brought us into the world. The sky will never fall down upon us whether we choose this or that. To choose and make our way, is obviously the nature of free will. Humans won’t be stringy and political for long; these are the last vestiges of a dying paradigm that relies upon anxiety, competition, and impoverished conditions in order to force people to work and to give up their life force for this or that, masquerading as the collective good. It’s all driven by individual egos and greedy minds that have stopped seeking the truth and rather consigned themselves over to control, to a carrot and stick way of living.

 This is good, and rewards you; that is bad, and punishes you. Everyone in this sort of setup is always a living reactionary to the stick, and in fact economic psychologists will show you that it is both (mentally) reasonable and likely to live in a way in which to avoid losses, because the ultimate loss that we are extremely vulnerable to, is death. Living in  away that opposes death might not actually be the best way to oppose and prevent death, because it’s a reaction, and all reactions eclipse the full expressions of free will, but it is nevertheless the least risky way of living. Once you even start considering all the ways there is to die, to become injured, sick, or impaired, you see that there are really a good many ways of going about this, whereas it seems that being wildly successful (while that appears to be the magical thing the universe is conspiring to happen), is more of a balancing act on a tightrope. Now on that note, let’s discuss Nietzsche again. Nietzsche displays an unusual capacity for empathy given the histrionics of his time, and situates us within his tour de force literary platform Thus Spoke Zarathustra, by showing a tightrope walker, a public entertainer, wooing the crowd with his pointless heroics, and then falling egregiously to his untimely death in front of said large crowd which rather than feeling anything about that, rather walks away and sort of forgets about him all at once, the way that we throw out most of our celebrity fads and crushes as soon as they cease performing for us in the way that we want them to. It’s as though we want to see bravery, courage, and great skill, but only if it’s sort of, for us, or giving us the illusion that we control it in some way. When that’s no longer logically stretchable to be the case, we simply throw it out like a misguided notion, sincere there’s after all, no more that it can do, for us. 

I mean, with the logic humans employ towards their favorite idols, crowdsourcing them to overwhelm at moments where it seems like they’re in an auspicious position in which to level up, and then ostracizing them the next moment they disappoint in any way whatsoever, reveals that we fundamentally are self-condemning in our private stake or investment into the human predicament. We will go down this very road if it rewards us, in a self-pitying and disparaging sort of way, while hiding behind the anonymity of the group in whatever dress and garb (uniform) it has us sport up in in order to do its company bidding. 

S: Okay, but what of the individual’s right to express himself?