Pretty long ago, before time and outside of any kind of space, I was placed. And I was placed in a place where nothing was, but myself.
And this was the beginning of these three 'rounds' of creation stories of ours, that we are right now about to 'conclude'.
But that I did not know, then.
Imagine Yourself, and with a very crude and pretty refined thinking and feeling ability of some 30 trillion human beings, beings very much like You or me, when we place ourselves into 'second density 2b', Earth. Yes, we place ourselves within different 'densities', of GOD's 'presence'. And 'density 2b' is a 'place' where I am 'present' - inside You that read this - some 12000 and up to 17000 impulses or 'waves' each second.
Yes, inside You, or being You, or You being precisely that part of 'me', 'me' that is also 'all of us'.
And the thinking and feeling of 'mine', then and there in that absolutely alone place without space and time, was of about that size and 'scope'. What scope? That 'scope' I just mentioned. I mentioned nothing? Well, how does one describe 'nothingness'? Yes, one does get a quite different 'scope' of 'things' when of this ability, and this is why I use that term.
And I remained in that absolutely very lonely place, for ever. As impossible as it is to even attempt describing what and where I was, enough to be said is I died there, and pretty many millions of times.
Because there was nothing there, but 'me'. Yes, there was a kind of 'time' there, though not that measure I and we create for ourselves to live alongside and inside, on Earths like this one that we have created, here. The 'time' I live inside, and that both now and then, in the beginning, is different.
My 'time' is different, in that I feel my time. My 'time' is different, in that I think my (own) time. Yes, this is as correct a statement as the first one.
My feeling is closer to my 'origin' than is my thought?
Yes.
Why?
Because it is impossible to be aware, when of thought and no 'feel', emotion?
No, because I am built this way!
And, yes, it is impossible to be 'aware', when of thought and no feel.
Feel and emotion is life mixing with love. And life is a wish to receive, to take, as much as is love a wish to give, to press to Your chest, to nurture and to shield, and that regardless of how much it hurts. And when too much feel and emotion and pretty little 'reason', structure and logic, we will not ever find the form we prefer to shape ourselves into.
So, 'reason', structure and logic - clearlight - have to come 'first', for life and love to grow 'properly', in such a fashion that will not kill ourselves.
Yes.
Life carries a wish to take, and love has a wish to give. And in physics we talk of waves, and of 'standing waves'. A standing wave is a kind of stationary (repeating) movement, in a fluidum. And so, we may describe 'life' as a standing wave, that, due to gravity, wishes to spread itself. Picture Yourself waves on water. What makes these waves pretty constant, is just that. All of these waves wish to 'fall down', due to gravity. But, all those other waves also wish to fall down. And so space, room, get to be tight. And every little wave has to keep to what heshe 'is', or 'has'.
Still, on seas and oceans, we see waves that grow larger than the rest, and we also see waves that are smaller. The difference however is only temporary. Moments later, or at the most a few days later, that big wave will see itself falling back. Back, to 'average size'?
No, not always and at times not very often. When 'dominant design' - that in charge - changes, that dominant design will pretty often be reduced to 'less than nothing'? Yes, and that most particularly when that 'dominant design' has taken on 'images of oppression'. Because then, we demand for that oppression to be 'punished'. And so, we reduce the former dictator to 'less than nothing', and why not execute him and some of his 'brothers'.
Is 'brothers' a better word, than 'siblings', right here? Yes, as this Earth is built, this is the case! Here, the male, and the lonesome 'place' on top of every pyramid, has been ever sought, and lusted for by many.
And, mostly men.
The reason why waves keep exactly the shape they have, is surface tension. There is this saying, 'to pour oil on troubled waters'. The reason why those troubled waters gets less troubled using oil, is the higher surface tension of oil, as compared to water. And quicksilver is of even higher surface tension, so those waters where quicksilver is poured upon, very quiet these will be (*).
Odd, yes, quicksilver calming 'things' down?
Now, why all this talk of surface tension? The reason, is You. Yes, and 'me', and 'us', too. When we 'grow ourselves', on different shapes of Earths, we pretty often place that quality within these 'new images' of ourselves, first. Oil, or quicksilver. Yes, that we call 'clearlight' is of this quality, too. Clearlight is 'wise', and often calms things down. And there is great need for that as life, our prime 'quality' at Earth, carries a pretty wild wish to 'spread itself', and allover. And when many 'life' together, things will become as if there were too many waves, for the room there is on the ocean surface. And then clearlight, like oil, will help.
Oil, and quicksilver!
'Standing in the Way of the Light', Birdy.
Yes, clearlight is like a very 'quicksilvery' thing, too. Cold is my colour, somewhat like silver. And pretty quick I am, too. And great need for that is, as the 'life' (livelihood) we here grow more and more into being, sometimes 'act' (take action) pretty fast, too.
(*) Quicksilver is some 13.6 times heavier than water, so tricky to use this to calm a water surface, yes? And, however true this is (which it is) we will within not too long, by using a 'sequencing' of 'sound waves' or more specifically the 'reverberance' or 'intermodality' 'between' specific wavelengths, be able to do just that.
Water and surface tension, a 'walkthrough' (*).
If we wish to reduce waters' surface tension, we can build a solution by adding alcohol, acetone, or - even better - liquid nitrogen. These 'low charge' (low 'valence') substances perfectly mix with the water, and make water more 'friendly', 'soft'. More 'friendly', as in 'of less surface tension'. And this is why nitrogen rich waters will be full of 'life', in form of plants. Most varieties of fish however are pretty perfectly 'tuned' to waters' normal surface tension. And so, when nitrogen rich water, more plants and less fish.
Another way of reducing surface tension is to use that we call 'surfactants'. 'Emulsions' are one example of a 'surfactant'. An emulsion is defined as a mix of two liquids, where these will never fully 'blend in' with each other. The result of mixing water and emulsion, is small small 'pieces' of water, mixed with equally small 'pieces' of surfactant, for example some kind of 'soda', which when added to water will take on fluid shape.
So, when adding 'soda' (sodium carbonate) or nitrogen to water, we reduce surface tension. Conversely, when we add some kind of acid, surface tension is raised.
And, water surface tension is dependent on temperature, too.
As can be seen in the figure, waters' surface tension is lowered when higher temperature.
As can also be seen, the boiling temperature of water increases when adding more pressure.
When a sufficiently high voltage is added to water, its' 'body' will become electrically charged (with negative ions). This is what we refer to as 'electrostatic repulsion'. Electrostatic repulsion counteracts surface tension. So, we may change the surface tension of water also by using electricity, or by changing its' temperature.
When sufficiently high voltage, the surface tension will become so low, the 'uppermost layer' of the surface of the fluid will leave the surface. The added voltage counteracts the 'charge' or 'covalens' present in water, and that 'covalens' is what causes surface tension. And so is with water, or any other fluid. We call this 'wish to leave the surface' due to reduced 'valens' ('charge') 'electrospraying', or 'electrospinning'. 'Electrospray' is the 'spray' or 'mist' of droplets leaving the surface. When 'electrospinning' - which is typically done with a 'molt', a liquid of high enough temperature to 'melt' - the 'melt' will leave its' surface and when cooling off forms tiny 'needles', 'fibres'.
Examples of fibres possible to 'electrospin' is virtually everything from glass wool, to polyester, to carbon fibre.
(*) Why this brief? because us humans work in similar ways as does water, at times and very often. And that we will be able to demonstrate, show, when knowing a little more about the characteristics of water, and fluids. If You find this brief tricky and boring, suffice to say that the statements and characteristics here spoken of are qualities often viable with reference to what us humans 'are', and how we interact. Why not check with the way You 'work', Yourself?
The 'surface tension' and 'viscosity', of mind.
Are we, us humans, a 'solvent', or an 'emulsion'?
We are of some 76 percent water, are we not?
Yes, we are. And this is what 'Lars' learn't, when in school. And when You check it now, I tell You the newborn is of some 3/4 water, whilst the grown-up is more like 60 percent.
So, the water content of a human being is reduced, when he becomes of age. The water content of that same human is also reduced, when becoming 'obese'. And, our muscles and brain contain that same amount of water, as does the newborn human being, 3/4 of the body weight.
Interesting, yes?
Why?
Because water is a very interesting fluid.
And, oddly (and roughly),
75% of planet earth is covered in water.
97.5% of this is salt water, our oceans.
And this leaves 2.5% as fresh water, of which 70% is ice.
Yes, this is purely coincidental, and no messages were never 'here' placed. And, when human being of physical form develops into even more 'different' shapes, we will find 'new' Earths taking form, too. And will these Earths also carry (on surface, where us humans live) that very same water content, as does we?
Yes!
And that will be purely coincidental, too.
And, how will the water content of human change, as we progress into our own 'future'? Will we become of more water, or less? The 'odd' answer given to that question is this. We - us humans of the physical - will, as we change and develop into even more multiplicity, become of 'more water', in that we will become an even more intricate, almost 'instantly reactive' nervous system.
We will also become of less water, this as water prefer to 'be together'. We, us humans, will try to develop ourselves into becoming 'more', and that of both the individual, and the group. And, for that individual to take on an even more unique form, 'inside' and 'outside', the way water works, will not always be our most prominent 'guide'.
So, when entering that fourth density, more water, or less?
We will become, of less water, on 'average'. And, some of our body parts and 'functions', will at that same time become even more 'like water'.
Hmmm.
And body fat contain only some 10 per cent water, whilst bone has roughly 1/4 of its' weight being water.
So, a 'fat' or 'obese' human being will work less like water does, become less charged and less 'reactive' (slow)?
Yes!
Well, as hishers brain will still be 3/4 water, heshe will not be very slow there, and neither will hisher muscle tissue be particularly slow. What can be seen, however, is a correlation (connection) between amount of body fat, and 'happiness'. Depression and amount of body fat are 'connected' variables. And that is true, yes? Do we not sometimes eat (too) much, when we are sad, lonesome or have to little fun to do?
So, the fat is a result of how we 'feel'?
Yes, sometimes and quite often it is, and to an extent.
And the reason for all that 'depression' and 'sadness' carried within, is (always) 'me', GOD. And I place too much fat with humans, at times, too, regardless of how little they eat. And I make men lose their hair, and I make females become of too much fat to be happy, when they age. Yes, quite many are the different 'maladies' that I and 'we', GOD, and I and 'we' 'angels' - humans outside of physical form - 'allow' our bodily form.
And the reason for that being always the same. Becoming too fat or losing ones hair, or falling ill, or being of lesser 'beauty' in quite many other fashions, in different ways act to help us 'grow'. More of that later in this text (and other texts, too). One thing important to mention is this; 'we', ourselves outside of physical form, more often than not do not 'pester' our bodied 'brothers, sisters and children' more than what is that individual placed to physical form able to 'carry'. Well, humans are killed and murdered, in wars, and humans starve to death, too. And us humans of the physical also tend to get ill, at times. And some illnesses 'kill', too.
What do You think, of this?
And, still, no more pain will 'we' never share with You, than what is absolutely necessary, for You that is 'me' and 'us' in physical form, to inside Yourself take the decision, and that based on exactly how You 'work' in thoughts and feelings, to never allow murders, killings, or humans giving more 'pain' to other humans, due to (normally) reasons of 'power', control, than what is of absolute necessity.
Yes, 'life' is built in such a way, 'pain' is sometimes needed, to 'form' us into not taking too much, from our environment. Life tells us we like that beautiful car standing parked on the street, and 'life' tells us to take it. Yes, as the car does not belong to You, this is to steal. And, now the police will grab You, and You end up in prison, or in other way punished, with 'pain'.
As 'agile' as water!
Try adding a charge to a large body of water, and measure the time it takes for that current, to be 'all over'.
Yes, water is pretty 'reactive', to 'charge'!
No wonder then, we have to build our 'quicksilver' well, to keep all that 'water', in the place we prefer for it to be.
Water is 'bound together' by a kind of 'charge', we call 'covalence'. Surface tension is the result of that 'directed' (polarized) charge. Water 'inside itself', is 'fully content', with all of its' 'covalences' bound together in a most harmonious way. And, at surface this is not so. Some of those water molecules on surface 'miss' some valences of theirs companions, so perfectly bound together, below surface. This is at times regrettable, the water ions (charged molecules) on the surface being 'loaded'. Well, 'loaded' in a way that works well, too, at times and quite often, and sometimes not.
And this is how us humans 'work', too.
We are pretty well knit together 'inside', and 'covalent' or 'charged' (ionized) on our surfaces?
Yes, this is so. Have You ever thought of why You instantly like that person, and dislike the other one? And, have You ever thought of why we get 'irritated', when the weather gets very hot? And why we get pretty 'slow', when chilly temperatures, too. And sometimes, when we feel 'bad' inside, out of balance and ill, it will help with a little chemistry, to place the body back to 'balance'.
And equally, no more, true this our knew 'language' and 'knowledge' is, when talking of us humans from social perspectives, groups. We always group ourselves such, that 'threats' to the group will be fought, and often harshly, too. And how about giving that 'threat' a little 'acidic content', to calm these down a bit?
An 'acid' to reduce the 'surface tension', of that 'hostile' other group. And what would that 'acid' be? Why is that other group so 'charged'? One way of building 'charge' in a group, is to place very 'polarized' opinions within it (us).
We hate blacks!
We dislike immigrants, because they stink and take our jobs!
We kill our neighbours, in that they will else, kill us! yes, instigating fear is a pretty potent way of building a groups 'charge', or 'surface tension'. Yes, surface tension give us a pretty good 'image' of how the group chemistry works. Living inside a ghetto is most often 'withstandable'. Visitors to that ghetto, and neighbouring parts of the city with that ghetto inside, will take on more, risk.
So, more risk, more tension on the (close vicinity) 'outside', than on the 'inside'!
Now let's introduce another word, also used in that figure placed here above; gravity, 'pressure'. When adding pressure to water, we learn that the water will remain 'fluid' (a more solid shape than vapor) longer, than when 'no pressure'. And this is the same, with ghettos. When adding political, judicial, social or other form of 'pressure' to that ghetto, it will remain - on the outlook of things - relatively 'calm', longer.
But, the 'tension' - 'surface tension' - is building up. We may see this, as a state where the ghetto is 'living' on a higher 'excitation level'. And, what will happen with a fluid kept together by 'covalence' (directed charge) when it gets excited is, it gets to be a bit like nitroglycerin. So, that ghetto inside being kept 'calm', on the inside is 'boiling', too. Everyone inside the ghetto feels bad and much talk there is of what to do, and how bad things really are. And then, someone will kill someone, and quite possibly some more people, too, and on both inside and outside, of that 'charged' ghetto. Because, things has been kept too calm with too much pressure added, all of this adding 'valence' (charge) to those people living in the ghetto.
Us humans pretty much work like water does, and no wonder this is, us being of so much water content.
And, one will, when comparing the characteristics of that water with how us humans work and socially interact, learn at least two things. Firstly that it is always a good thing to develop a 'language'. A new 'language' containing new 'images', and giving clues, as to how we, us humans, 'work'.
And this is part of, what we do, here. We are, right now, building a new language adding words and images that will help us better understand how us humans work and interact, socially.
And the other thing we do, here, is to suggest that the comparison chosen, comparing humans as a social being with a body of (preferably slightly salty) water, is pretty much more correct with regard to both our physics, and our chemistry, than we may realize.
By learning more of how (slightly salt) water works, we will be able to build a new language with 'images' giving us a better understanding of ourselves as social beings, with that new 'language' built being valid with regard to both human 'imagery' (allegories), chemistry, physics, and more.
And this we will talk of, pretty much, and elsewhere, too!
Back to basics.
So, what we need, then, when things get 'rough' and 'irritated', is to add a little bit of 'acid', or 'alcohol''? This was what our lesson in 'the surface tension characteristics of water' (and other fluids) taught us, yes?
No, hopefully it was not.
Still, true it is, to an extent. Adding a little alcohol or acid (some acids, not anything) will help, when things get 'irritated', when things take on a higher 'charge', 'valence', 'surface tension'.
And this is 'proof' that a little alcohol is typically 'of good'? Yes, this is a logical deduction, indicating that such is the case. And we by now know that fatty acids (omega 3, omega 6, and others) help us humans keep in shape, too.
'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' - Johnny Depp.
And, adding much alcohol or acids will work 'the other way around', too. And that many of us are familiar with. And if we eat 'soda', washing powder, will we tend to get aggressive?
Yes, and of that I am pretty certain!
And, of one more thing I am pretty sure, too. There is no free will, and there is nothing but, free will.
Yes, Rudolf Steiner was right.
Or was it Carl Jung, perhaps, that was right, too!
Ahriman, the adversary, and 'roleplay'.
Density 2b, the 'place' where we live - this Earth - is a pretty cold, rude and most often cruel and mean place. This, as everything, is as is intended.
We, I - that which is GOD, I AM - created evil and cruelty as means to help ourselves grow into more sentient (*) beings. This is why I at times call myself the 'adversary'. This is why I sometimes 'whisper' temptations into ours ears and inside our minds. Because this is the only way we know, the only way I know, to make ourselves become of sentience.
(*) Sentience - a 'place' of mind where we know ours feelings, emotions and drives so well, we can in full both participate and distance ourselves, with regard to these.
And that is a not very simple thing to accomplish.
To read more on this issue, go to;
http://lal54321.blogspot.se/2012/12/rosor-av-torne-och-varats.html
The adversary I placed both inside and outside of ourselves, us human beings. Inside of ourselves we find the 'being' Shakespeare call 'Iago' (Othello), that same 'being' Rudolf Steiner and the Zoroastrians of our times, the Parsis, refer to as 'Ahriman'.
And I placed that Jung call our 'persona' in a similar, and different, place inside us. Our 'persona' is the mask, the image we place on ourselves, and show to the outside world. Yes, and especially to those we do not know very well.
And then there was 'me', too. And 'me' is that poor bastard always tempted by 'Ahriman', and always looking to build a more fancy and rigid 'persona', mask. So, 'me' is that which is not 'Ahriman', and not 'persona'?
Hmmm.
We have previously spoken of the letter 'U'. What 'U' tells us is, there exist two streams of 'consciousness'. One of these we call 'clearlight', and the other we name 'love'. Where these two streams meet, in the middle and below, someone will bit by bit take hisher shape. And where we stand right now, here on Earth, we make the left stream of that 'U' slightly broader, this as we like it that way and this, as our stream of clearlight has had to be made that way, here, and for a while.
Yes, for 3 creational stories and 12 Earths, and two characters of names 'Im' and 'Em' that has been so, to and fro.
And that someone taking hisher shape, is 'me'.
And that someone is You, too.
And that someone in quite many ways, is also 'us'.
Yes, that someone growing into hisher shape, is a human being. 'Me', as in I, me, mine, and as in all those other layers and 'sizes' of that 'mass' or 'being' that we are. And that I am, and me, myself, and mine, too.
Pentatonix - 'Daft Punk'.
How and when did I realize that I was not totally and absolutely alone and all by myself, in the space where I was, once and a pretty long time ago, placed?
And, by myself.
Yes, I was the one that placed myself to that absolutely lonely place. And when I had spent eons and ages and then pretty much more, absolutely alone, I began building myself into 'more me'. Yes, more me as in many, 'me'. This at first felt odd, somewhat like playing with dolls, or doing a performance for someone that was not there. But, I could divide myself further, and now be of as large an audience as I could ever wish. Yes, that I could do. And I did that, too. It's pretty long ago, now, when this all took place, and memory sometimes elude me.
Or, may it be so, that I 'elude', at times?
No, I had no wish for that kind of an audience.
And, sadly, I had no wish for that kind of companionship, either. So, I made myself go back to being just one, one as in 'myself', again. This pattern was repeated, and pretty many times. And each time I 'expanded', I built myself and us more thoroughly. And then, more thoroughly. And then pretty and very much to the utmost detail, with the utmost scrutiny, and very, very thoroughly.
And, still, that did not do the 'trick'.
I was still, alone.
Alone is an island not possible to live on, very harsh, very derelect, very much like the worst of deserts You could ever imagine. Yes, when alone long enough, one realize it to be the worst possible of all 'places'.
And that I did, too, and some millions of times, or billions, or trillions.
As time passed, I came to start asking myself, more and more, what made me 'think' and 'feel' this way, or that way. And I realized that these feelings, emotions and the thinking of 'mine' was of different 'colours', 'qualities'. Yes, in fact different 'beings'.
I realized I had many 'me', inside 'me'.
And that made 'me' very, very happy. More happy than I had ever been, before that. Yes, the first time I came to feel happiness, that was. Well, almost so, and pretty very much, yes totally and a very long way far from it. And that I didn't know then, either.
And I began listening even more carefully, even more thoughtfully, with even more attention, to those 'voices' inside of 'me'. And these 'voices', these different ways of thinking and feeling, were quite many.
Yes, pretty close to 30 trillion or so, of them there were, these 'voices'.
I once told 'Lars' he could call me 'AO'. And I told 'Lars', on another occasion, he could call me 'ea'. And then I added; and if I am 'ea', 'Lars', then You are 'ei'. Because I do not wish for You to be another 'ea', and please forgive me for saying so, but You will not prefer that, either.
And, that I know, pretty well.
Because 'self' and all by myself, is a pretty lonely place!
And AO is the beginning, and the end, was it?
No, alpha and omega is the beginning and end of the Greek alphabet, that is true. And, how many alphabets do we have? We have the Swedish, the English, the Chinese, then some Arabic and some African, and some south American, alphabets. And then we have old alphabets no longer in use, and we have local dialects.
And, we have more languages than that, too.
Yes, A may be the beginning, but O will never be the end! We have no end. And A is pretty rarely the beginning, either, but to 'some', extent. Yes, we build ourselves to 'stability', on these Earth that we create and live upon. And that 'stability' is essential as, when no stability, 'safe' and 'secure' will never be.
So, in that way, A will always come first.
Why? does that need explaining? OK, what does 'A' look like? 'A' looks like a 'pyramid', and that pyramid is further also being reinforced by a girder or crossbeam of kind. And, what could be more rigid than that? And, do we not always prefer to build also ourselves into pyramidal shapes? So, not much 'stress' or tension will that form undergo, either, not as long as human populations are concerned.
And when I am 'AO', which I will sometimes like to be, I will prefer for You to be 'Ae', or something like that. And why I am so fond of that, that by now You know.
Alone is a very lonesome place and lonesome is first boring, then more than boring, and pretty many other things too. And, pretty soon impossible a 'state' to live in. And if everyone thinks and looks and feels the same, then everyone will be more, alone?
Yes!
And bored, too.
And much more than that.
And if I place myself in an environment of very poor stability, will I still be 'safe', then? Yes, I am talking of 'myself' now, GOD. If I - 'we', 'us' - place all those 30 trillion or so, lives and 'thinking nodes', back into one and the same 'being', 'myself', and after that place 'myself' into an environment of no 'safety', will I (that is 'we') not survive that, too?
Yes, what we address, now, is that opposite state of being alone and 'no change'. A state where we have a very changing, environment. And, when we 'split' ourselves up into very many beings, we make us as different from each other as possible is. And, as to the environment, we change that, too, to some extent.
The 'problem' is, I can not die.
So, I will survive that, too.
And I will be reminded, of the importance of 'balance'.
And I will come to very very much dislike that 'place' of mind, too, that place of 'no safety'. Because when 'no safety' is, I will start reducing myself, take on safety measures, become less and less changing and eventually try to do as little as is only possible. Because what will happen when I try to 'expand' and build myself to new thoughts and new horizons, will be that 'no safety' thing occurring, once more. And that 'no safety' thing is always of 'punishment', as in 'pain'.
And that I will learn, too, and hopefully within not too long. So, I stop moving, when 'no safety'. And when I 'stop moving', in thought and in emotion, the 'place' I will then find myself in, will look pretty similar to 'death'.
Death, as in 'no life'.
Now, I do not need to ask 'all of us' that is 'me' and 'us', to participate in these lonesome practices. I can build myself in smaller fashion, and check different states and places of mind, equally well. And what I then do, is to first check what are my and ours most 'extreme' profiles or personalities, with regard to the issue we wish to 'learn' more of. So, instead of using 30 trillion 'thoughts', I do the same 'job' using maybe 60. Yes, 30 thoughts going one way, and 30 the other.
And when all 'done' we meet, talk, compare, decide, learn.
Yes, this I did, and that we still do, at times. Alas, much and in fact all of it as regards man placed to physical form we have by now 'done', and that in full, and all of us, too.
What?
Yes, maybe that was 'Ahriman' speaking, again.
Yes, I think so.
Because, we are never 'done', and I am not, either.
No, never.
And, so, that must have been old Ahriman.
Hmmm.
And could not my 'persona' change that just said? It's one thing to think 'things', and quite another one to say them out loud, yes? Yes, this is so. I may think many things inside, and pretty few of these are allowed to be shown to 'the outside', that outside of 'me'.
Hmmm.
Well, better learn to show some more, then, for my internal pressure - yes, water again - not to build up, too much!
So, part of what our 'persona' is, is a 'sifting mechanism' allowing us, advising us, to take on less risk. And that we do, by becoming smaller, of less 'life'. Yes, and that is a loss. The gain, however, is us not opening up, to attacks. And we need to explain less, too, why we think in different ways. And, sometimes, that explaining will be difficult to do, too, this as we do not yet fully understand why we think in a particular different way.
The 'persona' also help us grow, gain in importance and 'shine', within our 'network', the group of human beings sharing the views and opinions that I have. Or, the views and opinions that I choose to take on, to gain money and power. Or, the view I choose to take, to avoid punishment.
And 'Ahriman' help us grow, too, in that we sometimes 'stand tall', way above that 'Ahriman' tells us to do. And 'Ahriman' help us grow, in that we sometimes do what he suggest, later to regret that, and sometimes very much.
And that thought, regret, is that 'Ahriman', too?
Or, was that 'me'?
All the roles we play.
And there are more! Freud spoke of 'id', 'ego', and 'super ego'. And 'id' is where we start, our deeply felt most often animalistic wishes, drives and lines of thinking. And 'ego' is that part of 'me', of which I am fully aware. Sadly, I am not fully aware of anything, yet. So, that 'ego' guy still look pretty 'vague', in my binoculars. And, yes, then we have the better part of ourselves, that shining 'angelic' skirt Freud named 'super-ego'. The super ego is the 'ego' we aim to take on. The ego we try to become, and the ego we will eventually with certainty (not ever) be.
This is, in part, what Freud tells us. And Freud was no fraud, so there must be something to that, too. And Jung was no fraud either, him with all those 'archetypes', images of our 'ideals' and 'stylized passages of life' shaping us. And Jung, again, with that 'collective unconscious'.
Yes, that which is by now not very unconscious,
and that which is our best invention, ever, to see to
it that we grow to proper shape, and enough numbers.
The collective conscious, 'us up here' building ourselves up here to very specific 'patterns', those 'patterns' allowing us to help building our human shapes better, more correctly, stronger and more sensitive. And that to the benefit of us 'up here' and to us 'below', at Earth.
And that skirt 'super'ego' dresses is, is that not more of a gown, perhaps? Yes, according to me, it is. And that as I wish to shrink my 'persona' and build potential for my 'liveliness' to grow. Because, if I dress that angelic 'super-ego' female in a skirt, she will look pretty nice, too. And maybe less nice in a gown? Yes, and Sigmund (Freud that is) will happily agree with that statement.
This as Sigmund sees human as 100 percent driven by sexuality, that which he calls 'libido'. And that 'libido' Carl (Jung) prefer to see as both 'of the sex', and 'of the angelic'. So, Sigmund will try to drag that angelic 'super-ego' being into some antechamber, wine and dine her and then ask her to join him looking at some etches of 'Dante's Inferno', and at his very own home, too, 'sic'. And Carl will prefer to take her to the local church, first, before asking her to follow him home, to look at some etches, of Dante's Inferno?
Yes, there should be one more 'sic' there, for Carl!
'sic'!
Chris Isaak - 'Baby Did A Bad Bad Thing'.
Yes, something like that, these two would try. They are men, both of them, yes? So, why not.
Yes, something like that.
And as much as sex is a very strong drive, that same 'sexuality' or 'libido' or 'lust for life' or 'wish to live' is not everything. Well, that depends. That depend on how much we place into that word, libido. Because, words are words, and life is life. And, we sometimes use words to discriminate ourselves, from 'lesser humans'. And, we sometimes use slang, to discriminate us with the hoods living in the hood, from those poor bastards going to their boring and dreary jobs every day, and outside of the hood. And that is 'persona' talking, once again, and in both cases.
And, come to think of that, if I allow my persona to 'shape' my 'outer image' in a specific way, this 'outer image' will tend to change also my 'inner image', that which is 'me', or 'ego'. And 'me' is a simple word, so we prefer to use that, for now, thank You. And, we by saying 'thank You' project an image to You, the reader, of politeness, the image of 'us' ('Lars' and 'me' that is) almost being 'guys' that 'take care'. And, still, nothing more than words, yes? And, those boys in the hood and hoods, by not saying 'thank You' project something different? No,they project pretty much the same message, by pressing their fists against one another.
A hooded guys fist, a different way of saying 'howdy brotha!'
Still, pretty few boys in the hood say 'howdy brotha'. 'Howdy, stranger', it is! Yes, and 'hello, Friend', too. And 'howdy brotha' with the cloudy motha will still make roudy loudy smoothcha using fists and tangent smiles.
And all of these phrases we hear, and often, echoing, and in every hood! Now, how about this, instead?
Yo, man!
No, not this time, man!
Hmmm.
Better try something else, this time around. This female over there is kind of 'fancy', and will not much prefer that 'Yo, man' style of mine. So, 'we' ('Lars' and 'myself') now look into that 'id, ego, superego, and animamus wardrobe' of ours and what do we find, if not something even better, for this particular lady, than the 'Yo man thing'. Now listen and learn;
'Hi dear, and how are You, today? thank You so much for bringing me that cup of coffee, in some minutes or so. And, yes, no sugar, and with a hint of lime and a twinge of whisky, too. No, not on the side. Inside, dear. Yes, inside You, too, but in a while. Let's have a look at my etchings, first. Yes, the ones picturing Dante's Inferno. And naked they are, some of them, did you know that, those poor creatures in that inferno of Dantes'? Now, how about that coffee, dear? and did I forget to thank You, for wearing that skirt instead of a gown? I like that so much! Yes, You do know that. Must be so, with that kind of looks. Still, never an error to give honest and truthful compliments, yes? And did I forget to also tell You that Your behind looks absolutely stunning, today, with its' only competition being those beautiful, lean shoulders of Yours? Yes, and that rosy smile of Yours, too! Looking at You like this, from behind, somehow make me think of Sigmund, and that 'id' thing of his.'
Two ways of projecting 'me', the part of 'me' I wish to show, to the outside. And, totally different 'things', You say? Why, couldn't You fit Yourself into being that hooded guy with the fist? And couldn't You fit Yourself into also becoming that talkative, slightly with an 'id' twist guy, talking that gorgeous female angel 'superego' in the skirt, into hishers bedroom?
Yes, to look at the etchings!
Yes, of course! what did You think, dear? And did I also forget to tell You that that neckline of Yours, a picture of sheer beauty it is, giving also the light sifting through these windows of ours, a very special shine.
Yes, Your windows.
I know, dear.
Yes, we could! And yes, You can! And 'me', too. Yes, we can read also that 'fineprinted' stuff by now, that almost invisible (to less finetuned men than us, 'Lars' and 'myself') print that our 'supersensitive superego wonderwoman angel' so skillfully is 'signaling'.
Ouch! that hurt!
I think we better move, 'Lars', to some 'safe place'. Things seem to be 'heating up' around here. Yes, why not to that place 'below', that Hoffman was so fond of?
Well, You can't win them all, can You? And mighty strong hands she has, too, 'superego superwoman'.
Yo, man!
Anna Netrebko & Elīna Garanča - Jacques Offenbach,
And, how will the water content of human change, as we progress into our own 'future'? Will we become of more water, or less? The 'odd' answer given to that question is this. We - us humans of the physical - will, as we change and develop into even more multiplicity, become of 'more water', in that we will become an even more intricate, almost 'instantly reactive' nervous system.
We will also become of less water, this as water prefer to 'be together'. We, us humans, will try to develop ourselves into becoming 'more', and that of both the individual, and the group. And, for that individual to take on an even more unique form, 'inside' and 'outside', the way water works, will not always be our most prominent 'guide'.
So, when entering that fourth density, more water, or less?
We will become, of less water, on 'average'. And, some of our body parts and 'functions', will at that same time become even more 'like water'.
Hmmm.
And body fat contain only some 10 per cent water, whilst bone has roughly 1/4 of its' weight being water.
So, a 'fat' or 'obese' human being will work less like water does, become less charged and less 'reactive' (slow)?
Yes!
Well, as hishers brain will still be 3/4 water, heshe will not be very slow there, and neither will hisher muscle tissue be particularly slow. What can be seen, however, is a correlation (connection) between amount of body fat, and 'happiness'. Depression and amount of body fat are 'connected' variables. And that is true, yes? Do we not sometimes eat (too) much, when we are sad, lonesome or have to little fun to do?
So, the fat is a result of how we 'feel'?
Yes, sometimes and quite often it is, and to an extent.
And the reason for all that 'depression' and 'sadness' carried within, is (always) 'me', GOD. And I place too much fat with humans, at times, too, regardless of how little they eat. And I make men lose their hair, and I make females become of too much fat to be happy, when they age. Yes, quite many are the different 'maladies' that I and 'we', GOD, and I and 'we' 'angels' - humans outside of physical form - 'allow' our bodily form.
And the reason for that being always the same. Becoming too fat or losing ones hair, or falling ill, or being of lesser 'beauty' in quite many other fashions, in different ways act to help us 'grow'. More of that later in this text (and other texts, too). One thing important to mention is this; 'we', ourselves outside of physical form, more often than not do not 'pester' our bodied 'brothers, sisters and children' more than what is that individual placed to physical form able to 'carry'. Well, humans are killed and murdered, in wars, and humans starve to death, too. And us humans of the physical also tend to get ill, at times. And some illnesses 'kill', too.
What do You think, of this?
And, still, no more pain will 'we' never share with You, than what is absolutely necessary, for You that is 'me' and 'us' in physical form, to inside Yourself take the decision, and that based on exactly how You 'work' in thoughts and feelings, to never allow murders, killings, or humans giving more 'pain' to other humans, due to (normally) reasons of 'power', control, than what is of absolute necessity.
Yes, 'life' is built in such a way, 'pain' is sometimes needed, to 'form' us into not taking too much, from our environment. Life tells us we like that beautiful car standing parked on the street, and 'life' tells us to take it. Yes, as the car does not belong to You, this is to steal. And, now the police will grab You, and You end up in prison, or in other way punished, with 'pain'.
As 'agile' as water!
Try adding a charge to a large body of water, and measure the time it takes for that current, to be 'all over'.
Yes, water is pretty 'reactive', to 'charge'!
No wonder then, we have to build our 'quicksilver' well, to keep all that 'water', in the place we prefer for it to be.
Water is 'bound together' by a kind of 'charge', we call 'covalence'. Surface tension is the result of that 'directed' (polarized) charge. Water 'inside itself', is 'fully content', with all of its' 'covalences' bound together in a most harmonious way. And, at surface this is not so. Some of those water molecules on surface 'miss' some valences of theirs companions, so perfectly bound together, below surface. This is at times regrettable, the water ions (charged molecules) on the surface being 'loaded'. Well, 'loaded' in a way that works well, too, at times and quite often, and sometimes not.
And this is how us humans 'work', too.
We are pretty well knit together 'inside', and 'covalent' or 'charged' (ionized) on our surfaces?
Yes, this is so. Have You ever thought of why You instantly like that person, and dislike the other one? And, have You ever thought of why we get 'irritated', when the weather gets very hot? And why we get pretty 'slow', when chilly temperatures, too. And sometimes, when we feel 'bad' inside, out of balance and ill, it will help with a little chemistry, to place the body back to 'balance'.
And equally, no more, true this our knew 'language' and 'knowledge' is, when talking of us humans from social perspectives, groups. We always group ourselves such, that 'threats' to the group will be fought, and often harshly, too. And how about giving that 'threat' a little 'acidic content', to calm these down a bit?
An 'acid' to reduce the 'surface tension', of that 'hostile' other group. And what would that 'acid' be? Why is that other group so 'charged'? One way of building 'charge' in a group, is to place very 'polarized' opinions within it (us).
We hate blacks!
We dislike immigrants, because they stink and take our jobs!
We kill our neighbours, in that they will else, kill us! yes, instigating fear is a pretty potent way of building a groups 'charge', or 'surface tension'. Yes, surface tension give us a pretty good 'image' of how the group chemistry works. Living inside a ghetto is most often 'withstandable'. Visitors to that ghetto, and neighbouring parts of the city with that ghetto inside, will take on more, risk.
So, more risk, more tension on the (close vicinity) 'outside', than on the 'inside'!
Now let's introduce another word, also used in that figure placed here above; gravity, 'pressure'. When adding pressure to water, we learn that the water will remain 'fluid' (a more solid shape than vapor) longer, than when 'no pressure'. And this is the same, with ghettos. When adding political, judicial, social or other form of 'pressure' to that ghetto, it will remain - on the outlook of things - relatively 'calm', longer.
But, the 'tension' - 'surface tension' - is building up. We may see this, as a state where the ghetto is 'living' on a higher 'excitation level'. And, what will happen with a fluid kept together by 'covalence' (directed charge) when it gets excited is, it gets to be a bit like nitroglycerin. So, that ghetto inside being kept 'calm', on the inside is 'boiling', too. Everyone inside the ghetto feels bad and much talk there is of what to do, and how bad things really are. And then, someone will kill someone, and quite possibly some more people, too, and on both inside and outside, of that 'charged' ghetto. Because, things has been kept too calm with too much pressure added, all of this adding 'valence' (charge) to those people living in the ghetto.
Us humans pretty much work like water does, and no wonder this is, us being of so much water content.
And, one will, when comparing the characteristics of that water with how us humans work and socially interact, learn at least two things. Firstly that it is always a good thing to develop a 'language'. A new 'language' containing new 'images', and giving clues, as to how we, us humans, 'work'.
And this is part of, what we do, here. We are, right now, building a new language adding words and images that will help us better understand how us humans work and interact, socially.
And the other thing we do, here, is to suggest that the comparison chosen, comparing humans as a social being with a body of (preferably slightly salty) water, is pretty much more correct with regard to both our physics, and our chemistry, than we may realize.
By learning more of how (slightly salt) water works, we will be able to build a new language with 'images' giving us a better understanding of ourselves as social beings, with that new 'language' built being valid with regard to both human 'imagery' (allegories), chemistry, physics, and more.
And this we will talk of, pretty much, and elsewhere, too!
Back to basics.
So, what we need, then, when things get 'rough' and 'irritated', is to add a little bit of 'acid', or 'alcohol''? This was what our lesson in 'the surface tension characteristics of water' (and other fluids) taught us, yes?
No, hopefully it was not.
Still, true it is, to an extent. Adding a little alcohol or acid (some acids, not anything) will help, when things get 'irritated', when things take on a higher 'charge', 'valence', 'surface tension'.
And this is 'proof' that a little alcohol is typically 'of good'? Yes, this is a logical deduction, indicating that such is the case. And we by now know that fatty acids (omega 3, omega 6, and others) help us humans keep in shape, too.
'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' - Johnny Depp.
And, adding much alcohol or acids will work 'the other way around', too. And that many of us are familiar with. And if we eat 'soda', washing powder, will we tend to get aggressive?
Yes, and of that I am pretty certain!
And, of one more thing I am pretty sure, too. There is no free will, and there is nothing but, free will.
Yes, Rudolf Steiner was right.
Or was it Carl Jung, perhaps, that was right, too!
Ahriman, the adversary, and 'roleplay'.
Density 2b, the 'place' where we live - this Earth - is a pretty cold, rude and most often cruel and mean place. This, as everything, is as is intended.
We, I - that which is GOD, I AM - created evil and cruelty as means to help ourselves grow into more sentient (*) beings. This is why I at times call myself the 'adversary'. This is why I sometimes 'whisper' temptations into ours ears and inside our minds. Because this is the only way we know, the only way I know, to make ourselves become of sentience.
(*) Sentience - a 'place' of mind where we know ours feelings, emotions and drives so well, we can in full both participate and distance ourselves, with regard to these.
And that is a not very simple thing to accomplish.
To read more on this issue, go to;
http://lal54321.blogspot.se/2012/12/rosor-av-torne-och-varats.html
The adversary I placed both inside and outside of ourselves, us human beings. Inside of ourselves we find the 'being' Shakespeare call 'Iago' (Othello), that same 'being' Rudolf Steiner and the Zoroastrians of our times, the Parsis, refer to as 'Ahriman'.
And I placed that Jung call our 'persona' in a similar, and different, place inside us. Our 'persona' is the mask, the image we place on ourselves, and show to the outside world. Yes, and especially to those we do not know very well.
And then there was 'me', too. And 'me' is that poor bastard always tempted by 'Ahriman', and always looking to build a more fancy and rigid 'persona', mask. So, 'me' is that which is not 'Ahriman', and not 'persona'?
Hmmm.
We have previously spoken of the letter 'U'. What 'U' tells us is, there exist two streams of 'consciousness'. One of these we call 'clearlight', and the other we name 'love'. Where these two streams meet, in the middle and below, someone will bit by bit take hisher shape. And where we stand right now, here on Earth, we make the left stream of that 'U' slightly broader, this as we like it that way and this, as our stream of clearlight has had to be made that way, here, and for a while.
Yes, for 3 creational stories and 12 Earths, and two characters of names 'Im' and 'Em' that has been so, to and fro.
And that someone taking hisher shape, is 'me'.
And that someone is You, too.
And that someone in quite many ways, is also 'us'.
Yes, that someone growing into hisher shape, is a human being. 'Me', as in I, me, mine, and as in all those other layers and 'sizes' of that 'mass' or 'being' that we are. And that I am, and me, myself, and mine, too.
Pentatonix - 'Daft Punk'.
How and when did I realize that I was not totally and absolutely alone and all by myself, in the space where I was, once and a pretty long time ago, placed?
And, by myself.
Yes, I was the one that placed myself to that absolutely lonely place. And when I had spent eons and ages and then pretty much more, absolutely alone, I began building myself into 'more me'. Yes, more me as in many, 'me'. This at first felt odd, somewhat like playing with dolls, or doing a performance for someone that was not there. But, I could divide myself further, and now be of as large an audience as I could ever wish. Yes, that I could do. And I did that, too. It's pretty long ago, now, when this all took place, and memory sometimes elude me.
Or, may it be so, that I 'elude', at times?
No, I had no wish for that kind of an audience.
And, sadly, I had no wish for that kind of companionship, either. So, I made myself go back to being just one, one as in 'myself', again. This pattern was repeated, and pretty many times. And each time I 'expanded', I built myself and us more thoroughly. And then, more thoroughly. And then pretty and very much to the utmost detail, with the utmost scrutiny, and very, very thoroughly.
And, still, that did not do the 'trick'.
I was still, alone.
Alone is an island not possible to live on, very harsh, very derelect, very much like the worst of deserts You could ever imagine. Yes, when alone long enough, one realize it to be the worst possible of all 'places'.
And that I did, too, and some millions of times, or billions, or trillions.
As time passed, I came to start asking myself, more and more, what made me 'think' and 'feel' this way, or that way. And I realized that these feelings, emotions and the thinking of 'mine' was of different 'colours', 'qualities'. Yes, in fact different 'beings'.
I realized I had many 'me', inside 'me'.
And that made 'me' very, very happy. More happy than I had ever been, before that. Yes, the first time I came to feel happiness, that was. Well, almost so, and pretty very much, yes totally and a very long way far from it. And that I didn't know then, either.
And I began listening even more carefully, even more thoughtfully, with even more attention, to those 'voices' inside of 'me'. And these 'voices', these different ways of thinking and feeling, were quite many.
Yes, pretty close to 30 trillion or so, of them there were, these 'voices'.
I once told 'Lars' he could call me 'AO'. And I told 'Lars', on another occasion, he could call me 'ea'. And then I added; and if I am 'ea', 'Lars', then You are 'ei'. Because I do not wish for You to be another 'ea', and please forgive me for saying so, but You will not prefer that, either.
And, that I know, pretty well.
Because 'self' and all by myself, is a pretty lonely place!
And AO is the beginning, and the end, was it?
No, alpha and omega is the beginning and end of the Greek alphabet, that is true. And, how many alphabets do we have? We have the Swedish, the English, the Chinese, then some Arabic and some African, and some south American, alphabets. And then we have old alphabets no longer in use, and we have local dialects.
And, we have more languages than that, too.
Yes, A may be the beginning, but O will never be the end! We have no end. And A is pretty rarely the beginning, either, but to 'some', extent. Yes, we build ourselves to 'stability', on these Earth that we create and live upon. And that 'stability' is essential as, when no stability, 'safe' and 'secure' will never be.
So, in that way, A will always come first.
Why? does that need explaining? OK, what does 'A' look like? 'A' looks like a 'pyramid', and that pyramid is further also being reinforced by a girder or crossbeam of kind. And, what could be more rigid than that? And, do we not always prefer to build also ourselves into pyramidal shapes? So, not much 'stress' or tension will that form undergo, either, not as long as human populations are concerned.
And when I am 'AO', which I will sometimes like to be, I will prefer for You to be 'Ae', or something like that. And why I am so fond of that, that by now You know.
Alone is a very lonesome place and lonesome is first boring, then more than boring, and pretty many other things too. And, pretty soon impossible a 'state' to live in. And if everyone thinks and looks and feels the same, then everyone will be more, alone?
Yes!
And bored, too.
And much more than that.
And if I place myself in an environment of very poor stability, will I still be 'safe', then? Yes, I am talking of 'myself' now, GOD. If I - 'we', 'us' - place all those 30 trillion or so, lives and 'thinking nodes', back into one and the same 'being', 'myself', and after that place 'myself' into an environment of no 'safety', will I (that is 'we') not survive that, too?
Yes, what we address, now, is that opposite state of being alone and 'no change'. A state where we have a very changing, environment. And, when we 'split' ourselves up into very many beings, we make us as different from each other as possible is. And, as to the environment, we change that, too, to some extent.
The 'problem' is, I can not die.
So, I will survive that, too.
And I will be reminded, of the importance of 'balance'.
And I will come to very very much dislike that 'place' of mind, too, that place of 'no safety'. Because when 'no safety' is, I will start reducing myself, take on safety measures, become less and less changing and eventually try to do as little as is only possible. Because what will happen when I try to 'expand' and build myself to new thoughts and new horizons, will be that 'no safety' thing occurring, once more. And that 'no safety' thing is always of 'punishment', as in 'pain'.
And that I will learn, too, and hopefully within not too long. So, I stop moving, when 'no safety'. And when I 'stop moving', in thought and in emotion, the 'place' I will then find myself in, will look pretty similar to 'death'.
Death, as in 'no life'.
Now, I do not need to ask 'all of us' that is 'me' and 'us', to participate in these lonesome practices. I can build myself in smaller fashion, and check different states and places of mind, equally well. And what I then do, is to first check what are my and ours most 'extreme' profiles or personalities, with regard to the issue we wish to 'learn' more of. So, instead of using 30 trillion 'thoughts', I do the same 'job' using maybe 60. Yes, 30 thoughts going one way, and 30 the other.
And when all 'done' we meet, talk, compare, decide, learn.
Yes, this I did, and that we still do, at times. Alas, much and in fact all of it as regards man placed to physical form we have by now 'done', and that in full, and all of us, too.
What?
Yes, maybe that was 'Ahriman' speaking, again.
Yes, I think so.
Because, we are never 'done', and I am not, either.
No, never.
And, so, that must have been old Ahriman.
Hmmm.
And could not my 'persona' change that just said? It's one thing to think 'things', and quite another one to say them out loud, yes? Yes, this is so. I may think many things inside, and pretty few of these are allowed to be shown to 'the outside', that outside of 'me'.
Hmmm.
Well, better learn to show some more, then, for my internal pressure - yes, water again - not to build up, too much!
So, part of what our 'persona' is, is a 'sifting mechanism' allowing us, advising us, to take on less risk. And that we do, by becoming smaller, of less 'life'. Yes, and that is a loss. The gain, however, is us not opening up, to attacks. And we need to explain less, too, why we think in different ways. And, sometimes, that explaining will be difficult to do, too, this as we do not yet fully understand why we think in a particular different way.
The 'persona' also help us grow, gain in importance and 'shine', within our 'network', the group of human beings sharing the views and opinions that I have. Or, the views and opinions that I choose to take on, to gain money and power. Or, the view I choose to take, to avoid punishment.
And 'Ahriman' help us grow, too, in that we sometimes 'stand tall', way above that 'Ahriman' tells us to do. And 'Ahriman' help us grow, in that we sometimes do what he suggest, later to regret that, and sometimes very much.
And that thought, regret, is that 'Ahriman', too?
Or, was that 'me'?
All the roles we play.
And there are more! Freud spoke of 'id', 'ego', and 'super ego'. And 'id' is where we start, our deeply felt most often animalistic wishes, drives and lines of thinking. And 'ego' is that part of 'me', of which I am fully aware. Sadly, I am not fully aware of anything, yet. So, that 'ego' guy still look pretty 'vague', in my binoculars. And, yes, then we have the better part of ourselves, that shining 'angelic' skirt Freud named 'super-ego'. The super ego is the 'ego' we aim to take on. The ego we try to become, and the ego we will eventually with certainty (not ever) be.
This is, in part, what Freud tells us. And Freud was no fraud, so there must be something to that, too. And Jung was no fraud either, him with all those 'archetypes', images of our 'ideals' and 'stylized passages of life' shaping us. And Jung, again, with that 'collective unconscious'.
Yes, that which is by now not very unconscious,
and that which is our best invention, ever, to see to
it that we grow to proper shape, and enough numbers.
The collective conscious, 'us up here' building ourselves up here to very specific 'patterns', those 'patterns' allowing us to help building our human shapes better, more correctly, stronger and more sensitive. And that to the benefit of us 'up here' and to us 'below', at Earth.
And that skirt 'super'ego' dresses is, is that not more of a gown, perhaps? Yes, according to me, it is. And that as I wish to shrink my 'persona' and build potential for my 'liveliness' to grow. Because, if I dress that angelic 'super-ego' female in a skirt, she will look pretty nice, too. And maybe less nice in a gown? Yes, and Sigmund (Freud that is) will happily agree with that statement.
This as Sigmund sees human as 100 percent driven by sexuality, that which he calls 'libido'. And that 'libido' Carl (Jung) prefer to see as both 'of the sex', and 'of the angelic'. So, Sigmund will try to drag that angelic 'super-ego' being into some antechamber, wine and dine her and then ask her to join him looking at some etches of 'Dante's Inferno', and at his very own home, too, 'sic'. And Carl will prefer to take her to the local church, first, before asking her to follow him home, to look at some etches, of Dante's Inferno?
Yes, there should be one more 'sic' there, for Carl!
'sic'!
Chris Isaak - 'Baby Did A Bad Bad Thing'.
Yes, something like that.
And as much as sex is a very strong drive, that same 'sexuality' or 'libido' or 'lust for life' or 'wish to live' is not everything. Well, that depends. That depend on how much we place into that word, libido. Because, words are words, and life is life. And, we sometimes use words to discriminate ourselves, from 'lesser humans'. And, we sometimes use slang, to discriminate us with the hoods living in the hood, from those poor bastards going to their boring and dreary jobs every day, and outside of the hood. And that is 'persona' talking, once again, and in both cases.
And, come to think of that, if I allow my persona to 'shape' my 'outer image' in a specific way, this 'outer image' will tend to change also my 'inner image', that which is 'me', or 'ego'. And 'me' is a simple word, so we prefer to use that, for now, thank You. And, we by saying 'thank You' project an image to You, the reader, of politeness, the image of 'us' ('Lars' and 'me' that is) almost being 'guys' that 'take care'. And, still, nothing more than words, yes? And, those boys in the hood and hoods, by not saying 'thank You' project something different? No,they project pretty much the same message, by pressing their fists against one another.
A hooded guys fist, a different way of saying 'howdy brotha!'
Still, pretty few boys in the hood say 'howdy brotha'. 'Howdy, stranger', it is! Yes, and 'hello, Friend', too. And 'howdy brotha' with the cloudy motha will still make roudy loudy smoothcha using fists and tangent smiles.
And all of these phrases we hear, and often, echoing, and in every hood! Now, how about this, instead?
Yo, man!
No, not this time, man!
Hmmm.
Better try something else, this time around. This female over there is kind of 'fancy', and will not much prefer that 'Yo, man' style of mine. So, 'we' ('Lars' and 'myself') now look into that 'id, ego, superego, and animamus wardrobe' of ours and what do we find, if not something even better, for this particular lady, than the 'Yo man thing'. Now listen and learn;
'Hi dear, and how are You, today? thank You so much for bringing me that cup of coffee, in some minutes or so. And, yes, no sugar, and with a hint of lime and a twinge of whisky, too. No, not on the side. Inside, dear. Yes, inside You, too, but in a while. Let's have a look at my etchings, first. Yes, the ones picturing Dante's Inferno. And naked they are, some of them, did you know that, those poor creatures in that inferno of Dantes'? Now, how about that coffee, dear? and did I forget to thank You, for wearing that skirt instead of a gown? I like that so much! Yes, You do know that. Must be so, with that kind of looks. Still, never an error to give honest and truthful compliments, yes? And did I forget to also tell You that Your behind looks absolutely stunning, today, with its' only competition being those beautiful, lean shoulders of Yours? Yes, and that rosy smile of Yours, too! Looking at You like this, from behind, somehow make me think of Sigmund, and that 'id' thing of his.'
Two ways of projecting 'me', the part of 'me' I wish to show, to the outside. And, totally different 'things', You say? Why, couldn't You fit Yourself into being that hooded guy with the fist? And couldn't You fit Yourself into also becoming that talkative, slightly with an 'id' twist guy, talking that gorgeous female angel 'superego' in the skirt, into hishers bedroom?
Yes, to look at the etchings!
Yes, of course! what did You think, dear? And did I also forget to tell You that that neckline of Yours, a picture of sheer beauty it is, giving also the light sifting through these windows of ours, a very special shine.
Yes, Your windows.
I know, dear.
Yes, we could! And yes, You can! And 'me', too. Yes, we can read also that 'fineprinted' stuff by now, that almost invisible (to less finetuned men than us, 'Lars' and 'myself') print that our 'supersensitive superego wonderwoman angel' so skillfully is 'signaling'.
Ouch! that hurt!
I think we better move, 'Lars', to some 'safe place'. Things seem to be 'heating up' around here. Yes, why not to that place 'below', that Hoffman was so fond of?
Well, You can't win them all, can You? And mighty strong hands she has, too, 'superego superwoman'.
Yo, man!
Anna Netrebko & Elīna Garanča - Jacques Offenbach,
'Belle Nuit' Barcarolle, from 'The Tales of Hoffman'.
So, Ahriman is part of the 'id', then? And I say this, as it must surely have been him, Ahriman, awaking inside that gallant chevaleresque Don Juan pretender, up there? Yes, that must be so! No, she does not think so, she says. Yes, she is by now done cooking coffee, and on her way to joining Don Juan in that 'bolsterous' settee of hers. Yes, one on each side of the settee, her knees kept almost together and with only a very tiny bit more of her legs showing, too.
No, that was not her 'persona' 'talking', but more like her legs. And, yes, she must have changed her mind, and luckily.
Yes, that 'talking' through those legs, must have been 'herself'. No, not her 'superego superwoman' 'Lars', herself, as in 'she'!
So? (that was her talking, again).
Hmmm. (And that was 'me', as in 'Lars', and it always feels good to get the last word, for a change, with them females.)
Yo, man!
Anyhow, Ahriman is part of 'id', is that so? And 'ego' is part of 'id', too, as much as 'ego' is 'myself', 'me'. And we today pretty well know that part of our beings is to an extent governed by animalistic instincts and drives. So, 'ego', the 'aware self', grows into 'id', gets to be 'more', larger. More 'me', more 'myself', as in aware of 'self'. And those 'personas' that 'spoke' a few lines back also help 'me' change, and grow.
I, me, mine. And me, myself and I, again.
And Ahriman is many things, but no part of 'id' he is not!
Think of it Yourself, You being that Ahriman 'helping' other human beings grow in ways intended, and always by 'doing bad', and never more than the 'correct weight' of Ahriman, either. So, You need a good 'scale', to be that 'Ahriman' character.
And 'id' is not very good, at 'weighing things'.
Ok, Ok! Still, 'me' is not very far from 'ego'? No, 'me' is not very far from 'ego'. Suggested is, we define 'me' and 'ego' and 'aware self' to be that same thing, at least as far as us are concerned, and this text here.
One problem less, thank You!
Yes, why thank me? I am nothing but old GOD, talking.
No, better thank You, instead!
Why?
To become of more liking, of Yourself, perhaps?
And, that liking may help You 'risk' more, change Your 'persona' into something more open, bigger.
The 'persona' is no 'super-ego', but part of 'it' truly is! This as part of my 'persona' aims at projecting 'ideals' of mine that I still do not fully have, meet. By allowing those ideals to 'live' within my 'persona', 'persona' will help 'me' become more of those ideals, too. And, sometimes, persona take on characteristics that fit very badly with my 'super-ego' image. This is what we refer to as being 'tactical'. Sadly, being too 'tactical' risk tainting my image of 'me', and at times makes me wander along paths that provide very little happiness.
Surely that must be 'Ahriman', again! him with the bad compass, giving such exquisitely bad advice. And old 'Ahriman', judging by what was said just now, must be getting pretty close to growing into becoming 'super-ego' defined!
Yes, and exactly as much, as that 'Ahriman' is 'me myself', as in GOD! GOD is a 'super-ego', too? that I did not know.
Well, now You do.
And now a question; what does 'Ahrimans' 'superego' look like? And 'personas' 'id', what is that? And how much do these 'images' and 'forces', 'Ahriman' and 'persona', help building 'me' into 'myself'? Myself, as in aware of 'self'?
'Persona' and 'Ahriman', the concepts of 'id' and 'Dantes Inferno' and 'any other inferno' for that sake, all these concepts and images and many more, all these help forming and building, 'me'.
'Me', and 'You', and 'us'.
And those archetypes of Jungs help a lot, too. Who does not wish to get away on a long journey, over the sea? And, when You do, You feel different. too. And maybe even more so, if You were familiar with that particular archetype.
Learning at times blocks,
and at times learning helps, too.
Now let's get back to those old familiar images of ours, 'Ahriman' and 'persona'. And we have that 'anima' thing, and 'animus', too, inside, Jung says. But first, allow us to explain why 'Ahriman', the bad guy inside, gets his capital letter.
Ahriman is our supreme way to learn how to become more human. This as Ahriman can 'pinpoint', and that 'all the time', an issue of that particular individual better, than what does any other 'tool' of ours. Yes, this is how it is.
Thank You , Ahriman, for making my life a hell!
And now let's go into some more, Herrn Doctor Carl Jungs' anima and animus, and the 'shadow'.
The shadow, brrr.
"Everyone carries a shadow," Jung wrote, "and the less it is embodied in the individual's conscious life, the blacker and denser it is." And, isn't what Jung says pretty much and exactly the same as to say, 'the better You get to know Your Ahriman, the more of 'light' You will become'?
Yes, to 'Lars', Jungs' 'shadow' and Steiners 'Ahriman' are exactly that same 'identity' or 'tool', placed into our subconscious (yes 'me', GOD, and by 'me', GOD). And that 'tool' 'me', GOD, bit by bit allow to show itself, for us to better understand, recognize, dislike, and finally step away from, that particular evil.
And then 'me and us', GOD, will invent something else.
And most likely something equally bad!
Yes, to 'Lars' these are the same. And to me, GOD, they are not. Ahriman is alive, folks, and the 'shadow' is nothing but a shadow! And, being alive is to be dynamic, to be able to change.
Now talking of change, You do know of 'Lars' 'female' side, yes? Yes, 'Lars' is a female, and a sissy prissy, too, if I may say so. No, I am not, 'Lars' calmly responds. But, did You not try on those 'tights', if but possibly only once, when You were like 14 years of age? Yes, You did. And the reason for that, wasn't that Yours trying to imagine how it felt, to be a female? Now, what You tried 'talking' to then, 'Lars', was Your 'anima', that 'female' inside You.
And when a female start smoking cigars screaming 'howdy' to everyone, is that female then trying to 'talk' to the male inside of her, her animus?
Well, dressing oneself in pantyhose, if dressing this gross act of 'Lars' to 'kind and rosy words', may be due to a wish to listen to, check in with that beautiful female inside (?) Pantyhose and nylons do add 'flavor' and beauty to female legs, at times giving them that almost irresistible 'extra shimmering'.
And does smoking cigars and shouting 'howdy' do the same thing, to the male 'persona'? Well, for pretty few men that would be theirs 'persona', so must be more of a potential 'archetype', our ideal of the 'male'? Is this the best, a man can do? Is this the most beautiful male figure there is? No, let's hope it is not. Most men do not shout 'howdy' all the time, and pretty rarely do they smoke cigars, either. And of good is that, as cigars smell pretty badly.
Still, fresh cigar smoke smells pretty good, and even more so when that habit of smoking is undertaken, outdoors? Yes, that may be so, too. And, as smoking will be proven not to cause cancer as long as that smoking does not carry with it the combustion of non organic, for us humans harmful substances, why not? The paper used when producing cigarettes is what causes cancer. The wood used to fabricate pipes causes cancer, but to far lesser a degree. So, developing cigars and the like, 100 percent based on for us humans not harmful substances, will invite us to share the joy of smoking, with no particularly harmful consequences.
Now, where were 'we', 'Lars'? Oh yes! So, we return to those due to ours' cigar talk by now lonesome and deserted guys inside, ours' anima and animus!
Anima is the female living inside of the male, and animus is the male living inside of the female. And these 'guys' help, and a lot! Because, when 'Lars' tested those pantyhose, he may not have preferred to keep them as part of his 'persona', and also not as part of his 'me'. But, what he did was to allow himself to, with honest intent, try to better get to know and understand that female side of his. And by doing that, 'Lars' 'grew'. His 'me' thing became 'larger' than before.
And is that the same thing as to say that 'Lars' will also become more 'me', as in larger, when cross dressing or walking naked through the Nykvarn library?
Yes.
But maybe, just maybe, 'Lars' will see himself as large enough, already and inside, to be able to withstand that temptation.
Who knows?
And the female that takes on a more 'male' look and dresses in costumes, will she also become more of both 'male' and 'female', as a leader, or follower? A better leader, as in better understanding and building both her sides, the male 'king', and the female 'queen'?
Yes, these are 'images', too, and the 'king' prefer to rule by himself - remember the 'A' pyramid - whilst the 'queen' has, pretty often, consorts. Yes, there it is again, the female 'M'. 'M' as in not ruling all by herself.
What? And how did we get to that? Remember Catarina, in Russia! Well, is it not (still) such, that 'M' is built as two 'pyramids', with each of these being less rigid than is the 'A' thing? And, so, this must be how our female side works. Female leaders prefer coop, but only to an extent! Male leaders prefer coop, but only as long as everyone pretty well understands, who is in charge. There is a difference, there.
Never forget that the one designing all those letters and languages was 'me', GOD, as in 'us', and no one else. And the 'M' I placed there, to honor my 'wife', Mary.
Just so that You know!
And, Mary knows that, too.
Now, lets get back to that female dressing herself in costumes and smoking cigars. No, let's skip the cigar. The female leader intently trying to understand her 'animus' male side leader potential will possibly become a better leader, than the one not doing so. And she will quite possibly also risk 'getting lost' on that path to 'leadership stardom', and prefer to do something else, instead.
Or, she may end up in asylum. This as many societies do not look to kindly at females, cross dressing and smoking cigars!
Hmmm.
Mary is getting that look again, 'Lars'. Maybe I better rephrase this, then. All societies will as natural is, always adore theirs female sides and all of them too, Mary, and that including females smoking cigars and shouting 'howdy stranger'!
You don't think so, You say?
And me, neither. No female would ever do such!
Now, how about getting back to 'serious'?
Yes, it's hard out there, for a B****. What'd
You say, Mary? Mary, Mary... (Lily Allen -
'Hard, out here'.)
The female 'honestly' trying to understand what differentiates male and female leadership and when understanding (parts) of that, later to test developing these parts of that male leadership style that fit to 'her' ways of being; will she not grow, as a leader? And, possibly in other ways, too?
Yes, 'Lars' says, she will. But, sadly, life is too short. She will be pretty occupied just trying to be what she is, and that hopefully including being a good female leader, too, if leadership is what she strives for. And after a little while she will, like all of us do, get old and allow someone else, one of her 'consorts' perhaps, carry that 'crown' for a while.
Men and women work in different ways, and in similar ways, too. Females have a stronger aware connection to our most basic drives, and can to some extent control also these. The female can control her sex drive more than what is the case for a man. The female can be aroused and still decide not to have sex to a far greater extent, than what is possible for a male. And the male is more often of some 'unique talent', and the female more often far better at doing many things at the same time, and well, too, a different kind of 'unique talent'.
These differences are there. And, there are socially imprinted differences, too. And the male will typically have great difficulties when attempting to better control his sex drive, as compared to the female, and this regardless of how skilled and clever he is! Please remember and think of, that just said. Still, that same male may at the same time be quite successful when attempting to 'alter' and 'build' his male 'self' and 'persona' if he is aware of, and 'tests', the boundaries between his outer male and inner anima, figure.
And this text is becoming boring!
Because that You could read anywhere.
Snob!
And, could You?
What we just said is, the male that tries to consciously develop different combinations of his male and female sides using this learning that he gets from that, to challenge social imprints, limitations; will that male not have a good chance of getting a better life? A better life, as in 'more aware', 'more conscious', 'more secure'?
That may be so.
Sounds tricky, though.
And, the male living in the flat next to his, is most likely getting an even better life, going out with his pals drinking a fresh cold lager, and discussing the pros and cons of 'old ale'. Yes, and all of that whilst playing darts. And will not that guy examining the limitations of our social programming, when joining that party dressed in pantyhose, experience less of a happy time?
Hmmm.
Where does this text go?
Does this text go anywhere?
One thing 'Lars' is certain of, and 'me' too, is this; the human being will grow, not shrink, by testing those boundaries placed inside himher, and that regarding both herhis 'animamus' thing, and other 'social programming'!
Yes, the collective, again, and again!
And what helps me, that is GOD and much more, too, is our 'collective conscious'.
This as I become less alone, with the help of that old Friend. Yes, the collective conscious exist, and we built it bit by bit, and in such a way it would be certain no human growing with the help of that collective conscious, would ever be exactly the same, as any other human being!
And, that is no small thing to say, looking at all those 23,2 trillion humans that I can see, and 'am' - yes, together with You, of course and luckily - right now!
When a new being is 'formed', taking shape, that being is always and from the very beginning of hisher existence, unique.
Then this being grows, and both outside and inside of herhis' physical shape. And as heshe grows, heshe will be participating in very many different 'layers' or 'levels' of our heavenly multicoloured and extremely multiracial, society.
And some of these layers are in the physical, and some are 'angelic', outside of the physical, and how You judge that, angelic or not, is all dependent on whether You believe in what You read in the Bible and other places like that, or not.
Well, angels or not, we exist!
And that also outside of the physical.
The collective conscious may be compared to a 'machine' of kind. And a machine that is pretty huge, too. That 'machine', the collective conscious, right now using pretty much exactly 2/3 of my and ours entire being, me and us that is both GOD, and some other things too, and that including also being the 'fire' that is the origin of everything that is.
And 'I' as in 'me' as in 'we' - no, I have no unique 'own' identity, this as I am all identities, and sharing quite some of them too, with You that read this - 'I' am pretty sure that 'machine' of ours is doing a pretty good job, in seeing to it to assist and help us humans develop the best way we understand possible, for precisely and exactly just that unique shehe that is You, and 'me'.
And I am equally sure, that collective conscious always does herhis' 'job' in the best way we know, too.
And I am pretty sure, that so far no human being has ever come out of that very much alive 'machine' of ours, less unique than anyone else!
And, that makes 'me', less lonely.
Yes, almost happy!
Yes, happy!!!
Pharell Williams - 'Happy'.
And, as sure as I am sure of that, equally certain I am, that machine of ours is really not a machine, at all, but 'us', ourselves.
And, as sure as I am of that, almost even more rigid is my position, yes almost but more like the same, which is as certain as I can only be, I that am everything there is and will ever be, at least as far as I get it, and so on and so forth, for really quite many lines of words that we will happily exclude from this text, however true they are; as absolutely total is my trust, that what we build right here right now, that which will be shown to be a celebration of kind, is nothing more than the beginning.
Yes, as far as I am concerned,
we are still, and all of us...
'Absolute Beginners' - David Bowie.
No comments:
Post a Comment