Community forums

Forum Navigation
You need to register and login to create and read (some) posts

Feeling the System - Feeling the Beast

Hey. I hope I post this on the right thread.

Towards the end of spring this year, I went to Japan, Tokyo to visit my brother. I remember sitting in a restaurant, and having some yummi food. On the side, there was a television, that was showing a mix of something akin to celebrity shows, advertisement, and news, constantly alternating. Out of some reason, I glanced at the TV from time to time.

Now, I can't say I understood all too much, since my japanese is not exactly awesome, but even so, it was clear as daylight how limiting and destructive the messages were. Although Japan has one of the lowest criminality rates on the entire planet, the news still somehow managed to be full of cases depicting rape, killings, torture. Add to that the permanent threat of North Korea and the fact that they own atomic bombs. This, obviously, has consequences for the mind, and for the emotions of the population. People are scared, they live in fear. Constantly. For me, it is quite obvious that this is a rather simple (but effective) strategy comming from the elites in charge:

1. sow fear.
2. exploit fear.

Sowing fear is done by a) rhetorics, b) choice of content. The means of distribution are the mass media outlets.
Exploiting the fear has multiple implications, which I will not go into. Starting from economic, over to political, to spiritual, the entire gamut is there.

Anyhow, what I want to share is the following, which has never occured to me before, and that proves to me the veracity of the existence of the "System", and specifically, of the "Beast", both important LP terms. Truth be told, I have not understood deep down, why Michael chose the term "The Beast", as a representation of the mental and emotional enslavement of the population. I always found that the term gives a too biologic vibe, one that contradicts the style of the initial creators of it. But that has changed now.

On that day, I remembered talking with my brother about television in Japan, and the consequences it has. He ascertained my intuitions and called me lucky that I don't understand that brainwash, as it has less effect in this case. As I was walking on the streets after the meal, probably going to a go salon, suddenly, my perception of reality changed. Suddenly, everything I saw, everything I heard, everything I thought, realized the intrinsic workings of the system. I could literally feel the system and its iron grip on the japanese society. It was not only the TV. It was so much more that constituted the system.

Most revealing to me was the vibe the system was giving off. I could feel its "signature". And believe me, it was the most perverse signature I have ever been aware of. However, not in a "negative" way. It is hard to describe this. It was a disgusting signature, but I saw "beauty" in it, too. Perverse, perhaps because I saw how chanceless individuals are who are under its spell. Like in a huge clockwork machine, energies were corrupted and diverted, archetypes designed and placed, and people who attempted to initiate change dealt with, and this, automatically, on a large scale. I felt brief horror, but also some awe for this beast. Besides its signature, what makes me think the beast is existent, was the simultaneous realization how well the beast adapts. Just like a real organism, that needs to adapt to its environment. Only, that in this case, "the environments" are the historically emerged cultures, and the psychology and biology of the species. It really does make sense of speaking of "The Beast" in this case, or so it seems to me at least.

Small edit:

Interestingly, I remember how the system also had some sort of "security level". Meaning, the feeling I had also gave me information on the status of the beast from the standpoint of "system maintenance", or we might also call it "control coefficient"- a coefficient, that reflects the degree of control a given system has on its carriers. And, to noone's surprise here i guess, the "control coefficient" was insanely high.
Something tells me, that that was the feeling the system itself "had of itself". (Another sign that shows how well the term "the beast" fits.

All in all, I had this feeling a couple of times during my visit in Japan. Perhaps 3-4 times varying from 5 to 60 seconds. It was interesting to experience vividly what my intellect already long ago understood.

thanks for this. Excellent insights.

-- Subscribe to new posts by visiting your profile

Upon rereading what i wrote, i realize i have been not very clear about some things.

First, I wish to share one more thing. When I was reading the Book of Triumph of Spirit: Master Key for the first time, 8 years ago, I had a deep realization that stuck with me ever since. But I never shared it with anyone, because the thought is so odd, so off-worldish.

Out of some reason, I pictured archetypes as if they were organisms. Upon pondering about archetypes, I realized they exerted several criteria (indeed most criteria) we would ascribe to organisms.

1. organisms are organized - as the etymology suggests. So are archetypes. This single trait has tremendous repercusions. Mainly it implies the identity of the specific ideational structure. Consequently, it is "alive"... what makes it want to survive.

2. organisms are stable. So are archetypes, since their core information does not change.

3. organisms strive for continuity (they want to survive). Upon thinking about it, archetypes do so, too. Archetypes behave like physical matter in this regard. They posses inertia. But what makes me say that archetypes strive for survival is the fact that archetypes are complex, whereas normal ideas, which, as far as I can see, do elicit inertia, are not. Being organized, archetypes are able to adapt. Combining the two traits, inertia and organization, makes it possible to say that archetypes strive for survival.

Think about it. We are dealing with a thing that is complex, organized, permanent/stable and has inertia. That, to me, does sound like it wants to survive.

The adaptations it makes can be readily interpreted as a way of retaining the inertia it had when faced with new circumstances. Similar to a rock that attempts to retain its inertia until it is forced otherwise. Or similar to an animal that wants to retain her life/wishes. Meanwhile it also retains the complexity and the specific core of the specific organization. As far as I can see, this is nothing but an attempt to survive.

During the past years, this analogy served me well in understanding other humans, and especially why it is sometimes so damn hard to let go of ideas, habits and archetypes. My conclusion is that this difficulty persists because of the way archetypes behave. They try to survive. To formulate it more cautiously, archetypes exhibit inertia. Thus, they try to retain their form, force, and area of influence.

Furthermore, consider the following, and this idea is probably at least as odd as the previous one:

Lately I've been quite active on Quora. I tried to establish clarity in the "spiritual" section of my feed. I'll make this short. I was apalled at the amount of garbage that has been presented as truth there. Based on the "likes" it is possible to estimate how the acceptance of specific information is distributed. Many likes means acceptance of the specific information, perhaps even more, perhaps even identification with the information. Unfortunately, some people there proceed to spout out nonsense. (and this even after i warned them that the content they provide is incorrect and that it has negative repercussions adopting that position. Which lead to a small intellectual debate, that ended abruptly after I pointed out clearly, logically, in a grounded fashion why their position is flawed... I just want us all to awaken, and this will never happen as long as people do not gain the right insights, or more specifically, as long as they operate partly on old world archetypes.)

This frustrated me quite a bit. And so, out of this frustration, I started to ponder on why exactly these people all mumbled more or less the same mumbo jumbo of spiritual doctrines. Especially annoying was the part with "you must lose your ego". If they knew! Losing your ego means death, as no identity can exist without ego. And we didn't even consider what connection looks like when one's ego is damaged. Grim. Mindless stupidity.

Anyhow, I asked myself alot of questions. And as far as I can say, these people did not have the same source of information. Some of them really DID get it their own way, without following specific known doctrines. Now, I assume that we can safely assume that spiritual archetypes are present in every "non-spiritual" thing of our everyday life, and thus, when applied on the topic "spirituality", we acquire such answers.

This sounds plausible, but it is not the whole story I presume. The reason I am saying so is that some people claimed to have experienced these in states of heightened awareness, which was well above of their quotidian CQ. This means that the information acquired had no tangency with their quotidian experiences.

Thus, I arrived at the following conclusion concerning how these ideas/archetypes are seeded into our minds:

In effect, it concerns channeling, and how channeling functions. When we connect, it is obvious that our ability to channel is heightened. Yes, heightened. Not newly acquired, but heightened. We could picture it like magnetism. Every magnet radiates a magnetic field that influences its vicinity magnetically. The further away, the less strong is the effect. To make the metaphor more precise, think of the "tunnel-effect" from quantum mechanics (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling), and now think of the information comming through as being tunneled through a wall (which might be what the LP terms as The Veil)

So, the "farther away" the information is, the less likely is it possible to attain it, depending on what CQ one has. Assuming these people did reach a higher CQ in their states, and in those states they acquired insights, then we might understand why most of them all arrive at similar conclusions, if we think of archetypes as vivid "organisms" that have an area of influence etc.

What i propose is that the earth is "surrounded" by a thick "wall" of archetypes. Humans in normal consciousness channel as well, from time to time, but their CQ (which could be interpreted here as determining the range within which information tunneling can work) disallows them from arriving at information that is beyond the veil. Information that is beyond the thick, old world archetypal layer are not reachable, because too much "resistance" is there to pierce it.

Combining this view with the idea that archetypes behave akin organisms, perhaps offers a suitable answer for the feeling I had described concerning the control coefficient. The archetypal system, given it behaves the way it was suggested, may effectuate what the LP describes as The Veil.

 And we didn't even consider what connection looks like when one's ego is damaged. Grim. Mindless stupidity

They simply lack the superlative training the LP provides.

What i propose is that the earth is "surrounded" by a thick "wall" of archetypes

You mean like this...

You are absolutely right about the channelling. In fact, when Zoroaster had his connection experiences, he basically channelled in new archetypal nodes. These nodes were then manipulated by Sasanian priests (full story here).

I don't know how useful the "organism" analogy is. It assumes archetypes have an existence and will independent of their "hosts," i.e., the monads which harbour them. I think what it is is that when people connect they connect indiscriminately. They don't enter a "Monadic Address," in other words. For more on addressing see this. They connect to whatever monad is closest. Since old energy archetypes still constitute the Archetypal Canopy of this planet, that's what they connect to. In this way, the "virus" is reproduced.

Archetypes are like the "home page" you get when you access monadic locations in the Fabric.

Make sense?


Additional content is available to LP members only. To get the full message, become a member, register and login.

Register an account for full access | Lost password

-- Subscribe to new posts by visiting your profile

Yes, the LP teached me so much. I rely almost blindly on it, really. I am a thinking person, and until now, I have not found any flaw, and discordance within the entire corpus, which is pretty amazing i'd say...

how on earth did u do that 😛 great job really.

xaxaxa, indeed that's the perfect representation.

I understand the analogy with the server. Indeed, lacking an address, you connect to whatever.

Hm. I have had my doubts concerning my own channeling, especially because I rarely give an "address". Usually, I just ask myself questions, and throught the day, I somehow, miraculously, always find a solution to the questions posed. It is certainly not very focused channeling, but I can imagine how it must feel like when you are strongly connected and channel then. (i mean I had the experience, too, but it is long since.)

I agree with you that the biologic metaphor is problematic, because of precisely what you rightly criticized. Inertia is the better word describing this "behaviour" of ideas. But I do believe that ideas stick/have inertia.

Yes I read the paper. (of course) Several times in fact, since I used it in my master thesis, which I recently handed in.

I wrote on the genealogy of morality, and one of my points of critique was what I termed moral/ethical oligarchy, which is supposed to describe that ethics has been corrupted in the most deep way imaginable, far from being a collaborative effort, as the author I was criticizing stated.

can you share your master's thesis with me? I'd love to read it. Will respond to the rest later.

-- Subscribe to new posts by visiting your profile

Sure, I don't mind.

I'm not sure you'd be interested in it though, perhaps you'll find it rather boring. 🙂 (I wrote in philosophy after all...)

So, the whole thing is a critique of the theoretical framework of Philip Kitcher's The Ethical Project.

It attempts to show some difficulties that come from adopting pragmatic naturalism. A philosophical position that combines naturalism and pragmatism. Furthermore, I show why ethical oligarchy is a possibility we should take into consideration when talking about ethics.
Anyhow, I attempted to write with minimal EPMO, so the text is readable.

Unfortunately, I was not able to implement much of the LP, the part where I used your paper is utterly minimal, but important. I just didn't have the space to put it all down. Moreover, the discrepancy between the knowledge of the LP and that of the rest of the world is so huge, that I find it very difficult to use the information provided by the LP, because the self-evidences and the core premisses diverge so strongly.

Initially, I attempted to write about spirituality, about connection experiences. After failing to find a professor who would support my thesis, after months of searching, I gave up. (All I received were some smirks subtly suggesting how gullible I am and some responses that essentially told me that the issue is not debbatable... but, to be fair, others commended me for the attempts, but rejected their support nontheless out of various reasons.)

As far as I can say, the "Free University of Berlin" is not ready to research the subject as of yet. Which is why I changed my thesis into the above one.

Uploaded files:
  • You need to login to have access to uploads.

Recent forum posts

bullying
Realisations
Grounding
rough draft
Just to get High
Working Class Hero
Navigating reConnection
Understanding Endorphins
Cannabis has been found to not ma …

Pin It on Pinterest

Skip to toolbar