Aristo Tacoma THE INTERRATIONAL MIND A practical physics of 8-spheres ISBN 978-82-996977-3-6 [[[GENERAL BOOKLET INFO: Title: The Interrational Mind Subtitle: A practical physics of 8-spheres A PRIVATE PUBLICATION Booklet is copyright author -- who is also, as author names, Stein von Reusch, and Stein Henning Braten Reusch, and Henning W Reusch -- all rights reserved; ordinary quoting accepted when references given. Stein Henning Braten Reusch asserts the copyright of all works published with (artist) name / main name Aristo Tacoma. Publisher: Yoga4d von Reusch Gamemakers, (company earlier called Wintuition:Net) Year of publication: 2009 Place of publication: Oslo, Norway ISBN registration number: ISBN 978-82-996977-3-6 Booklet in electronic form is since July 31, 2009 verbatim reproduced at yoga4d.com/talks. [[[GENERAL BOOKLET INFO ABOVE]]] DEFINITIONS "Interrational mind" (inter-rational) is defined by author to mean, roughly, "a mind that aims, flexibly, playfully, and without desire or greed, to reach the ever-new golden lively creative mean between feeling and thought". (Searching on internet June 28, 2009, when this definition was made by the author, and published at yoga4d.com/talks, resulted in no suggestions of prior usage of the word 'interrational' nor, of course, on 'interrational mind.) The concept of "8-spheres" (with organic, or somewhat interlinked dimensions, and with interlinked dimensions in physics also as intended domain of usage, in contrast to the mechanical notion of hyperspheres incl. 8-spheres in 'mathematics') was introduced in privately circulated papers while author was in Manhattan, New York, in 1997. See coverpage. Backpage has what is called 'the digital version' of same. PSYCHOLOGICAL: THE 16 DIMENSIONS 1 FANTASY 2 ACTION (INCLUDING NEAR-GOALS) 3 THOUGHT (INCLUDING SIFTING OF FACTS) 4 FEELING (BOTH LOWER EMOTIONS OF JEALOUSY AND SIMILAR, AND HIGHER PASSIONS SUCH AS PRIDE OF DOING RIGHT, EROTICISM, ACTION DRIVE AND SIMILAR) 5 INTENT (ORGANIZING INTENT) 6 THE FULLNESS OF EXPERIENCE (BOTH SENSORY & INWARD) 7 LOVE 8 GOODNESS & SILENCE & MEDITATION (THE INTERRATIONAL MIND, GUIDE OF THE OTHERS) THEN 8 INNER AS THAT (SIMILAR NOT SAME) (UNPREDICTABLE IN EACH GIVEN CASE WHETHER ITS PROCESSES ARE INNER OR EXTERNAL) "INNER" HERE MEANS: THE PARTAKING IN THIS WITH OTHERS WITHOUT THEIR NEARNESS PHYSICAL: THE 16 DIMENSIONS 1 HEIGHT 2 WIDTH 3 DEPTH 4 DURATION, 1ST LEVEL 5 NONLOCALITY, 1ST LEVEL 6 DURATION, 2ND LEVEL 7 NONLOCALITY, 2ND LEVEL 8 SELF-REFERENCE (PROVIDES SELF-REGULATIVE, COHERENT LIFE TO ORGANIC ENOUGH SUBSTANCIES) THEN 8 ENFOLDED AS THAT (SIMILAR NOT SAME) "ENFOLDED" HERE MEANS: ADDITIONAL ORGANIZING PROPERTIES, CALLED ON AS NEEDED BY SUPERMODELS. BIOLOGICAL: THE 16 DIMENSIONS 1 LONGLEGGEDNESS 2 THINNESS 3 MUSCULARITY 4 BEARING (BODY LANGUAGE, DANCE) 5 BREATHING & OTHER RHYTHMIC / ARRYTHMIC OBVIOUS BODY PROCESSES 6 VOICE 7 GENITALIA 8 BEAUTY (GUIDE TO THE DISCIPLINE OF THE OTHERS) THEN 8 SUBTLE AS THAT (SIMILAR NOT SAME) "SUBTLE" HERE MEANS: INWARD ORGANS AS WELL AS ENERGIES OF A MORE SUBTLE KIND THAN MANIFEST ENERGY. SPIRITUAL: THE 16 DIMENSIONS 1 FLUIDITY / PLAYFULNESS 2 AWARENESS / CONSCIOUSNESS 3 RIGHTEOUSNESS (IN GENERAL) 4 CONSCIENCE (CONCRETELY) 5 COMPASSION (ACTIVE HEALING EMPATHY WHEN RIGHT) 6 AGILITY TO FIGHT OFF TWISTING IMPULSES 7 CONNECTION TO NONDOGMATIC FACT BEYOND ALL SYSTEMS 8 JOY THEN 8 EVEN MORE SUBTLE (SIMILAR NOT SAME) "EVEN MORE SUBTLE" HERE MEANS STAMASH PRO INTRODUCTION I could produce a cut'n'dried presentation of 8-spheres and the consequences of the definition of an interrational mind as I gave to the Internet webpage yoga4d.com/talks at June 28th, 2009, and equip it with dry academic words and so hope to get a foot within some ugly academic corridors with their belittling agendas. But one of the reasons I have not seriously described 8- sphere theory before is that I don't want it misused, clipped up, improvised upon by advertising bureaus and such -- at least not without stating my mind about how one should relate to such diagrams of power. This booklet also have reprint of the standard background text for advanced stamash martial arts students, and this shows to some extent a part of what I mean by 'practical physics' -- there is a beauty of self-defence in being derived from the sense of wholeness that the insight into the 8-sphere diagram can give, and has given me continously since I arrived at it by what I will now call 'neopopperian ways' during my long and extremely healthy and funny stay in Manhattan, NYC, in 1997 [when New York still had a bohemian slightly buddhist and girl-gay high- class section living on the dream of doing only what the heart commands day by day; and USA still had the radiance of a Walt Whitmannish poetic hope about it, asserting the rights of human beings to go beyond the anti-sexual traditions of the past, not yielding whether to islamism or judaism or anything else -- in what they named as the 'new secular order', giving individual freedom the upper hand. These features became perhaps more obvious elsewhere later on.] The stamash diagram I have made also has features which allows one to say that it is a particular implementation of an 8-sphere (or 8/16-sphere, I explain it in the conversational texts). But as it is, having seen all the quasi-spirituality in the backrooms of those who in public professional appearance are strictly, and ugly, atheistic, I do not believe that the proper presentation of anything important happens by means of hacking to pieces the spiritual aspect of something and presenting the dry material content of it. The advertising bureas -- with Microsoft Bing/Yahoo, Google and so on as ugly queens -- see to it that the idea is nurtured that only that which grabs the flimisical, whimiscal, second-oriented, second- hand attention of as many people as possible as considered Worthy, and then again only if it does not offend their hypocritical judgements of what is canonical and right. This entire paradigm is obviously the relict of a now dying civilisation, where those who party the heaviest, and fiercest, with the least respect for health, tend to get the most votes and are listed on top of 'winner's lists'. In the next civilisation -- whereever that is, and it is unlikely that it is anywhere near or that the bibles and cold atheistic capitalism of the past will have any role in it whatsoever except as a reminder of the monstreous past -- we will have to honor those who combine rather than exclude, those who sense wholeness and quality rather than count the hypocritical self- destructive false winners of false gossip, and I believe, and feel, that the 8-sphere theory will exist there. It is presented with due warnings: for it is powerful. I know these warnings will be ignored, for a while, but I know also that since I give them, it will be a more desperate act if the 8-sphere diagram and its derivatives are misused. And it will be interesting to see how it goes with those who attempt that. Meanwhile, in a nicer tone, I look forward to sharing tantric art experiences with those who acknowledge sources and origins and who trust that the real factor of real winning in real life involves good luck and good synchronicities based on good actions, and this goodness refers to a higher authority than human civilisation and their own thought processes, to a deeper authority, to the tantric authentic authority of all humanity, and indeed all that is. The approach, then, taken in this booklet is hugely practical, and in anything that is practical, one must not avoid mentioning the various possibilities of action results which can come to be if one doesn't do it right. But do it right, and you'll find that the notion of the interrational mind is exactly right also, and that by sensing, by being filled with the nondualistic awareness that knowing something of the capacities of the 8/16- sphere can give you -- not trying to know it all, mind you, for it is about a relative knowing, not an absolute knowing -- you will be able to do art which benefits humanity as never before. For the 8-sphere is on the side of the good, it brings to an end the orientation towards conflict found both in marxism, which is an opium for the low-brained people, and the other type of conflict found in atheistic capitalism, in which one believes that God is 'on the other side', allowing greedy monopolies to grow rather without limit here on Earth. People who call themselves 'christians' in the evening, engage in atheistic capitalism during the working hours, and they produce a sense of 'money might is right' which is nothing but marxism, which asserts that 'historical might is right', with a twist. And then again there is the quasi-conflict between marxism and atheistic capitalism. The 8-sphere approach to reality suggests that we must have an interactive economy, an enterpreneurship of mini- capitalism, inviting also a generous but not over- leveraged form of currency trading. Of all this I produce no proof: except the sense of wholeness that the avid, glad, deep-thinking reader may get in herself when she goes deeply into this over several seasons, again and again, realizing more and more the rediculousness of the political, economical and religious alternatives. CHAPTER 1: 8-SPHERES AND THE INTERRATIONAL MIND : What is an eight-sphere? Has it something to do with mathematics? / Perhaps you know that I am not so enthusiastic about the proposal, as a whole, called 'mathematics'. It tends to get into a lot of presumptious thinking about infinities in ways I don't think is coherent. Some would say, perhaps, mathematics is just a collective term for wildly different branches but I'm not so sure; I see it as a rather gathered structure, although huge. In this structure, there are many interesting elements which can be picked out and reimplemented in a clearly thought- through language like Lisa GJ2. There are also inspirations for free visualizations -- including the thought, also by Descartes, about dimensions. And it is in this area that one thinks of 3-spheres, or ordinary spheres in three dimensions, and then higher-dimensional spheres, including 8-spheres, also sometimes called, as a collective term, 'hyperspheres'. But these dimensions as they speak about are different than the dimensions I speak about. : How so? / Conventionally, if you can measure up a thing by height, width and depth -- say -- and you can vary, in some kind of principal way, each of these entirely independent of the other two, you can speak of the thing as having three dimensions. Now this idea of fundamental independence is -- plainly put -- atheistic. In a roomy negation of that very complicated proposition called 'atheism', for instance in that broad category 'pantheism', we do not assert, just like that, that anything is fundamentally different from anything else. We do not even feel at ease with postulating it as an abstract thought. Rather, we feel far more at ease with sensing the possibilities of abundant interconnections, and give the burden of having to produce proof to those who assert clear-cut essential divisions. : You mean to say, you want dimensions that are not entirely rigidly separate. / Exactly. : Which is what? A less mechanical type of dimension? / Sure. It is more organic, more fluid: it may not yield to all the applications of conventional thinking about these things, but then several of these applications turned out to give rather inconquerable incongruities with infinities. I propose that, as for dimensions, the idea of absolute independence of one variable from everything else is an illusion, at least at a fairly manifest level of the universe -- and indeed possibly also so at the essential level of mind, where we do our formal thinking also. : You mean to say, it is like the infinity theorem of yours -- to use that word, 'theorem', as I regard it as a proof, what you have done there relative to the impossibility of closing off the set of all natural numbers from getting into infinities -- you suggest that it is incoherent in principle to have dimensions of a mechanical kind. / Yes, it follows rather from the infinity proof or reasoning, don't you think? For a dimension can only be rigidly countable as one, two and then three, if we have a way to count that is definite and fixed forever. But the theorem -- as you call it -- shows that any counting, even at the most basal levels of dealing only with some numbers, implies a sense of infinity and thus of the indefinite and thus of the possibly bridged and nondistinct. : But you work with computers in which you assert that it is meaningful to work within the boundary of say 1 to two billion, or minus two billion. / I do, but I do not assert that this meaningfulness is rigidly formal, rather it is practical, and that, given a lot of grand old pondering -- GOP -- over the infinity argument I have produced, you will come to understand that the infinity is implied so to speak between each of these numbers, and carrying the arithmetic and so on that we do on them. So, you see, even a computer exists within a space which has the indefiniteness and thus the fluidity and continuity about it. It, too, must persist in what we can call a more organic or less mechanical space than that which has been the conventional type of thinking in the field you just mentioned, namely mathematics. : I see. So where does this leave us? We have a -- what, a hypersphere, -- but with softer dimensions? / Well, once you admit that we have a certain natural unlimited possibility of interconnectedness between anything and anything in any formal thought or any practical thought, even, then you have a completely different set of conditions, if that's the phrase I want, from which to do your thinking. You are negating the mechanical but you do not automatically get into one particular alternative. Rather, the negation is a bridge to a whole, shall we say landscape of alternatives. You no longer deny the subtle infinity, even as you operate within bounds. : Could you articulate what you mean in other words, please? It sounds a bit up in the sky to me. / Sure. Let us admit that once we deny the more mechanical type of dimensions, we must admit that there can be various types of organic dimensions. I propose that the 8-sphere which is of great interest has a certain type of organic dimensions associated with it, which have properties of importance both for physics, or our Grand Old Pondering over the universe and its energy, and also for practical design, even for prayer. It is all about admitting that some shapes are more essential -- we might say more archetypical -- than others. Now however we do not easily deduce these from some axioms of the type that Euclid produced; Euclid, as I have pointed out elsewhere, dabbled with poor integrity as far as infinity versus finiteness went. I am not saying at all that no axioms and no deductions cannot be given about this, but I am saying that the type of investigation we need must consider it humanly important to start with a well- cultivated, refined, self-doubting type of intuition -- all the neopopperian stuff -- and regard it as perhaps humanely impossible to explain, in logical deductive terms, the entire universe, although there may be in principle, at some level, for the mind of God if you like -- in a berkeleyan sense, you know -- something such as deductions going on after all. But not the stupidly simple stuff of Euclid, or the whimsically complex stuff of Spinoza. I think it is hubris for humans to assume that they can explain consciousness, evolution of life, or the essentials of design. But it is also hubris to assert that no features of universe as a whole cannot go beyond limitations that humans necessarily have. : So the 8-sphere, you propose, underlie much, but has something about it that is only to be verified -- if that's the word -- by intuition? / Yes, the word 'verify' literally refers to the latin word for truth, so it means something like 'truify'. Popper was well-known for speaking much more warmly of 'falsify', saying that it is much easier to dismiss the false than provide evidence for the true. But in the neopopperian approach, we say, let us learn from instances of confirmation and learn from instances of disconfirmation but not limit these merely to that which is picked up by the sensory organs in controlled scientific experiements; but let us also admit that intellectual intuition (as also Popper believed in) can stretch beyond the criterions set by the knowledge concerning sensory organs. And so, one can ask, synchronistically or kinesthologically if you like, over and over again as to whether something is right or not. It may be that it is righter than much else without being absolutely right and again I would say that humans mustn't even try to get at what is absolutely right: it is a folly to think that human thought would be able to hold that burning flame. But it may be possible to come towards that which is relatively right, and in that process listen carefully without jumping to quick decisions from instances of confirmation and also instances of disconfirmation. : But didn't Popper argue that only one instance of disconfirmation is enough to dismiss a theory? / Well, but it is far more complex in most situations to associate an experience with a theory than that which one might think. And so Carnap, I think it was, introduced the language of instances of confirmation and instances of disconfirmation and we lean back and weigh the evidence after a while, and like Sherlock Holmes, we jump then towards that which effortlessly presents itself, without prejudices based on idiotic common sense, but unlike Sherlock Holmes, we do not label as 'deduction' that which really is -- well, Pierce called it 'abduction' but that sounds a bit drastic, -- and the word 'induction' is perhaps too entwined with a rather narrow appreciation of the whole process. Some would say 'intelligence' and that's a grand word but sometimes used very atheistically and so 'intuition' has an openness that is the type I seek, and I advise this word to be used with caution so it is retaining that openness. I mean to say, we suggest that it seems likely that so and so but we do not dogmatically shout that so and so is an intuition: for it would be hubris, again, by a human to assert a divine revelation. : You are now excrutiatingly abstract and academic- sounding in how you talk about it all; but if you for a moment step out of that type of sceptical thought and speak shall we say theologically, what is then the 8- sphere? / Why, naturally, it is the most entertaining shape God can conjure and so he has put it as the generative form so that all else refers to it, and to its dimensions. : That's candid. / Well, you asked for it. : So it is much more than a theory? / I can frame it theologically if you ask for it, then we wouldn't naturally call it a theory. But really I do think that it is worth the while inside a neopopperian enquiry, where we ask the question: is it not so that something such as this diagram -- the 8/16-sphere I drew up [see the sketch at coverpage] during my first long stay in Manhattan, in February 1997. You see on the left of it that it has a shape with slash-like lines. This shape is meant to contain the whole shape -- this is of course a well-known feature of fractals -- so you get an extra eight shapes there. You can speculate about infinity, then, because you not only get a doubling of dimensions by that, one time, but possibly also on and on. If you take out that left circular element with the slash-lines, and count the number of wavish elements -- or gestalts -- then remaining, it is eight. In the gestalt theory of the subconscious, we speak of contrasts, similarities and resonances involving gestalts as the atoms of consciousness, when coupled with durations and sensitive forms of matching operators (see also yoga4d.com/dialudes for The Compassionate Anarchist which has some notes along this line). In the supermodel theory, as well as in the berkeleyan philosophy of the universe, we might speak of such gestalts as going entirely beyond the individual mind. You can then say, 'it's all God's mind.' This, of course, is a thought found in some flavour or another inside hinduism and perhaps in all the main religions. The left counts as one shape, you see, in the intended way of reading the diagram. Each can contract and expand in a way that is not upsetting the overall shape. All visualization of dimensions, at any rate when we go clearly higher than two dimensions, involves transformation of form -- and contraction and expansion is an elementary transformation of form. It is so no contradiction to speak of contraction and expansions within a two-dimensional circular shape as resulting in more dimensions, if we specify that these are not entirely independent. : You speak now of 'the interrational mind'. How does this connect to it? How does your much more recent work, what you call supermodel theory, connect to it? / Let's explore all that. However I want to urge you not merely to wait for me to produce arguments in favour of what I outline as a theory or view of 8-spheres, but rather submit it to your own wanderings, your peripatetical meditations -- peripatetical meaning wandering about, how Aristotle sought to convey wisdom to his pupils -- I suggest you weigh it over, feel its feelings as it were. And in doing so, you are taking an element of thought, and you are bringing in feelings; but the meditation requires you to go completely beyond thought and completely beyond feeling and yet be able to relate to both. So you are finding the transcendence, the in-betweenness, of emotion and cognition, and that is the interrational mind. The interrational mind is the tool you equip yourself to do neopopperian study also on the 8-sphere -- put in very simple words. : But who is this person who equips herself with the interrational mind? / Yes, who is this et cetera. That's all part of the exploration. It is also part of the exploration to ralize that it is not humanely possible to predict, in any given case, whether its processes happen on the external gestalt or on the gestalt which is contained within it -- the 9 to 16 dimensional area with more subtle properties. Then again, the digital number of the 8-sphere, 8 -- as in 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 -- lends itself to suggest we can have a digitally reduced version of it [backcover]. We can also get a mirroring of the dimensions into the shape as we distinguish the four main forms of psychological, physical, biological and spiritual [initial list of dimensions in this booklet text]. I suppose, ultimately, the interrational mind means that you abandon the ego -- just as what happens when a girl gives birth to a child; she is no longer sustaining her self-shape, she must let go to produce another of her. That is what I meant by the little-bit quick phrase in the MYWEBOOK texts from before 2004, by the way -- where I say it more roughly. It is really the start of a person if we by 'person' mean something more essential than the ego. : That's very beautiful. That's brilliant. / Well, in any case we have to give each other a little bit compliments also to carry on with our explorations: it is not all hard work and no feeling. It is also about pointing out -- selflessly, even if it concern ourselves in the moment -- what we think is beautiful. So thank you. : Just one more thing before we complete this round. What is again the practical physics -- practical aspect of the 8-sphere diagram or theory -- and what is practical physics exactly? / I sought a phrase, when I came up with 'practical physics', to convey something to those who, perhaps by realizing that the stupidity of atheism requires a really brilliant way of approaching painting, architecture and so on which is not merely producing more of the dogmatic structures of the past of humankind as of 20th century and before, but who want to see all unfoldment as in some way part of a grand prayer of evolution of the consciousness of humankind through reincarnation and so on. And so there is the question of physics, of what the universe is, and that we can have a dialogue, and a scientific willingness to drop what we like to think in favour of what is right or attuned with deeper reality to think, and work hard on cultivating harmony without resorting to lazy-man's drugs to do so -- but this physics and this exploration can have consequences when we do it neopopperianistically. When we do it with intuition, we get a lot more physics, than if we merely do it empirically. It might be wrong, but if we are careful -- and I think you may agree that I am very careful whenever I do works based on intuition, I test it in innumerable ways -- we can get concrete living advices at all levels. Indeed, the stamash martial arts branch that I have created is a direct emergence of such a neopopperian intuitionistic enquiry. And I regard it as an example of a practical physics and we'll see other examples also as we go along. : It does seem like the 8-sphere is very, well, tantric! I mean sensual. / Yes, doesn't it? It has been with me all that time since I truly began to respect intuition through and through in all features and levels of life in 1997, and started for real to throw away the petty conventions and conditions of my mind. And see all that has come out of it -- coherent stuff, and I have heard many, many say that it is intensely beautiful stuff. It is not merely something I promise to deliver in the future; it is already there. And so the 8-sphere is in that sense, by 'the proof of the pudding is in the eating', somewhat vaguely proved. By all my other works since then; and intensely so with the resent art and Lisa GJ2 programming. CHAPTER 2: BRIEF VISIT OF THEOLOGICAL THEMES : So what is this 8-sphere diagram exactly? An instrument for magic? / Absolutely not! Anyone who tampers with an important piece of reality towards trying to twist things to a result they have not naturally earned, by strong goyon, get the opposite of what they wanted. Magic is self- punishing. Any attempt to affirm by excessive use of similarities and contrasts and resonances and such anything which is not gained as a result of good actions lead to ugliness within and on the outside, lead to a withering of the present incarnation. : That's pretty strongly stated, is it not? / That's definitely how I see it. The clever tricks are stupid folly tricks, that cut away the ground of good living for those who try and engage in them. : Which is to say that they never work? / They work perhaps a little so as to provide a wrong temptation, as a test of the person's ego. Then the person starts get going into magic, and it undoes the person swiftly, it eliminates the person, in this incarnation anyway. : What is goyon? Is that a neopopperian concept? / Well, neopopperianism is something I have introduced a bit more carefully than many other concepts, because I wanted a context in which we learn eclectically the best of the scientific open attitude of sceptical wonder while not blocking intuition as we proceed further. But in applying such spiritual open intuition over a long time, I felt that the word 'karma' is a bit inadequate to explain why good actions are worth the while, why it matters what we do instead of, as is the ultimate atheistic perspective, Kant or not Kant, that nothing really matters. : Karma being the buddhistic word for action, or for fruit of action. / Yeah. But karma is also entwined to the notion of causality and it is a bit unclear, for some buddhists speak of getting rid of the cycle of karma altogether and so on. Nirvana is supposed to be the passification of the desires of the ego: good, but what about the activation of the natural passions of the spiritual heart? And so, if we leave karma behind as a word that is a bit entrenched in past patterns, we need a word which speak of the building-up of the nest of good synchronicity potentials, good luck potentials. This is something which follows from a supermodel theory if we also have something such as a coptic worldview and belief in a higher authority and source, whose intent is to drive the evolution of the universe in a certain probably very complicated direction. Then that which coheres with the intent of this direction has goyon, very simply put. : How can we know whether something has goyon or not? / That is something each has to explore with a great deal of care and conscience and logic and instinct of intuition, and there is also this very important thing called prayer, or improvised dignified silent communication within with the higher beings of reality than one's own thoughts. One cannot command a higher being but one can respect them and regret one's past and ask for forgiveness and assert that the future won't have more of such bad actions of that type from this individual and if one is honest and really shows that one has learned, then suddenly goyon can increase; one gets better at currency transactions, at all things which require luck, also art, programming, what not. Over a long time, of course, goyon is health-providing; up to the point where the body has to be left and the goyon says it is right for soul to incarnate; and this is a complicated process, I sense it is about five thousands girl-souls and only girl-souls and that they enter into a new-born twelve to eighteen months AFTER physical birth of the infant into the world. This is perhaps said before in some spiritual traditions but I do not think so; also I do not think it has been said -- at least not often -- that such souls can be relating to one body in plural, or one soul to several bodies in plural, and such. But now we are rather a far way from questions of physics. These are mine intuitions and if you doubt them, doubt them, but allow me that I say quickly and easily here what has taken very serious consideration in total freedom from all dogma and all past over a very long time to reach, and not reach as dumb conclusions, but as active patterns I implement and check in daily life. : Say something about the 8-sphere relative to prayer, then, if it has nothing to do with magic. / Well there's a magic of love, there's a natural magic to what the muses and God can do if you pray, there's a natural spirit of magic in surrounding oneself with health-affirming beautiful artworks which truly have goyon in them, but the forced magic, the magic of the little clever shoddy ego that thinks it can benefit from playing the ugly role of a devil or a satan is self- defeating at once. There is no such thing as devil, demon or satan. If you look at those words, they simply mean, ethymologically, such things as 'deviating', 'inner being', or 'adversary'. But these things, these ideas, are of course but fragmented processes of thinking, boredom grown sour into ugly cunning and goodness and beauty twarted into shallow insincere purposes by withered people who think they have nothing left to loose for they have been so bad already -- but it is all existing, insofar it exists, in a universe which is one whole and one created whole and a whole that is ruled by its origin and that's total. There is no adversary within that. There is just that beautiful totality and very temporary elements of idiocy and then only when that idiocy and egotism and self-centeredness and cunning is actually something which eventually, against the imagined result of the idiot engaging in it, will play to the advantage of goodness and everyone else. One cannot fool reality: it is watching over every thought, every impulse, every motivational system, every hidden agenda, as well as every action and all the results of actions. This reality is a vast God-mind which has a great deal of apparent freedom, but the real freedom is the feeling of fresh freedom which is being a total slave to this origin and its commands. CHAPTER 3: REPRINT OF STAMASH UNDOGMATIC DOCTRINE AS AN INSTANCE OF APPLICATION OF THIS 8-SPHERE [[[this is stamash_undogmatic_doctrine_copyright_at.txt, found at yoga4d.com/stamash_undogmatic_doctrine_copyright_at.txt, license for further distribution is at http://www.yoga4d.com/cfdl.txt, author is Aristo Tacoma, and menu with context is at http://www.yoga6d.com/stamash.htm; the letters "s-t-a-m-a-s-h" are intuitively constructed, one by one, originally in the scifi context of same author's Manhattan Transformation papers, cfr the Firth234 Lisa platform which since 2006, with updates 2007, has been available at http://www.yoga4d.com/download with extensions at http://www.yoga6d.com/city and with the Lisa GJ2 programming language operating in other platforms including iMac, Windows 7, Red Hat 8.0, Ubuntu, Fedora and many others (given a fast enough PC), consult the notes associated with "hints6" rather on top of the http://www.yoga4d.com frontpage, where relevant downloads are also given. The use of the word stamash in a martial art context is strictly copyright Aristo Tacoma who is Stein Reusch, and any teaching of stamash must happen by contract with him. Any reading of the notes as follows is not necessary for the beginner student in stamash, but can be a useful background for advanced students. AFTER JUNE 18TH 2009 THERE ARE NO ADDITIONS TO THE STAMASH TEXTS -- ONLY THE PRICE AND LOCATION AND DATES AND SUCH ARE UPDATED. This pertains to the http://www.yoga4d.com and http://www.yoga6d.com sites as a whole -- only the yoga4d.com/talks section is updated, also with more books and programs. ]]] PRELUDE I wonder if it is possible for you and me, in this text, to let go a little of all those strict, strong, big categories and big meanings and big postulates that the past of human cultures and world religions and what not have associated with words such as "love", "sex", "God", "creator", "human rights" and so on and so forth and just have a kind of poetic flow, musing on these themes? FOR THAT IS HOW IT IS WRITTEN. Not at all as a logical argument. Not at all within the context of any particular system of belief. Yes, there are recurrent strong good intuitions penetrating all my most mature works. You may or may not like them. I speak of God as male, whereas I give the role of the female polarity which I mentioned in the Compassionate Anarchist at yoga4d.com/dialudes to not one, but three, not goddesses but "muses", -- I even name them; and do so without excuse. Perhaps you will say then: okay, these notes may be fine for you, but you have your little truth and I have mine little truth and let's not bother each other with them. But then, if I say, look, there is a great martial arts ethical self-defence practise, a blending of jiu-jitsu, aikido, karate, yoga, qi gong, but eclectically so, -- and your body will shine wonderfully with it -- it has been proven! -- but it won't really do its good work without certain foundational thoughts WHICH INCLUDES THE BIG THOUGHTS; then am I merely going to chuck these notes aside and say, stamash is purely physical, and what each person think about the world, about life and God and love and sexuality and rejuvenation and euthanasia and what not is entirely irrelevant? But that would be making it into a purely physical discipline of shoddy techniques; that is impossible, for stamash is also ethics and ethics is also worldview; and this ethics may be part of the energy of stamina which is perhaps the ethymological essence of the word "stamash" -- the "sh" being the sound in the word "action" when pronounced, -- put very simply. So if you can let go of the big categories and be willing to meditate with me, then read on; but I will not explain why I say what I say here except that, to my knowledge, I do not offer lies or illusions here; and, to my knowledge, I do offer some views on reality which have not been heard before in this way, at least; and, to my knowledge, there will be a greatness to a human life which relates with dignity to these words. Beyond that, it is not a dogma. THE STAMASH APHORISMS What is done elegantly is done well, and indeed stamash exists as part of the fountain of warm-hearted elegance. But this elegance depends on the dissolution of the ego -- and we can only dissolve it when we know it -- and so we must not skip the work of understanding something of the ego; and this work comes first. The structure of deceit, disappointment, greed, craving, self-pity, bitterness, resent, idiotic schemes of selfish revenge, can be called, as a sum, the "ego". When this sum, the ego, is dissolved, there is a much more grand sum, the spirit, and this spirit can act in the muscles and give them sudden strength. The spirit comes forth in generosity. The ego is the antithesis of generosity. Generosity also means generosity to oneself, but it doesn't mean generosity to oneself unless there is a spirit of goodness setting the priorities right. The ego shows itself especially when more than a quarter of one's total resources are asked to be given away by another or others. For one who has a billion euro can easily given a million, as easily as one who has a million euro can easily give a thousand, but the ego manifests itself if one who has a billion has to give two-hundred and fifty million away, at once, without return. And yet money attachs to a body, not to a soul, and will not incarnate with the soul, and so all attachment to anything or abstract concept such as money is total illusion. Yet without the factual existence of wealth and beauty and lovely hair and smooth skin and skills and all such things connected to the body, there will be no society, no laughter: so one must be generous to oneself, yet ready to go also. The readiness to let go does not mean apathy, but it means that one flexibly adapts aims to what is called for by something grander than the ego. It is this greatness which is called for in that stamash exercise which is taught under the name of Creation. And the ending of the ego is further done throughout the day in smaller exercises including Energy and also Interception (the latter being the actual attack and self-defence format). The stamina called generosity then flows through the whole being and gives radiant insight, faster than thought, and power greater than even that which training has built. But the force of generosity needs an instrument -- this instrument is your honed body and mind, your muscles who have come to know what it is to move lovely and rightly and fiercely and in respond to what is needed. One does these exercises at first slow, then faster, and at first kindly, then fiercely, and at first one by one, then several rather together, and this is so for the beginner relative to the advanced or stamash pro practioner, as well as so for the beginning of the day compared to the advancement of the day. One must force oneself to always do some stamash exercises but one allows the body and the sense of energy or laziness determine how long, how strong, how deep these exercises go from one day to another. One is showing great kindness to body and mind in the morning, and never do quick rapid strong movements in or right after getting out of bed, but rather cultivate the smile of the body. And the stamash practioner must each month in the middle of the month one day look very carefully at all features of the body and decide what must be done more of, and less of, as for exercises and all other things affecting the body directly, such as food and vitamin types and sun or photonic nutrition, for upcoming month. The stamash individual aims at becoming stamash pro but doesn't declare herself to be stamash pro -- it is just as with intuition, one speaks of what one senses or feels but what is an intuition is shown later on. The stamash student ensures flexibility by good stretching when the body is warm enough to allow such stretching at all such areas -- legs, toes, arms, in various ways, as it is called for, but do not pursue over-flexibility. For stamash is always about knowing the proper boundaries. But the toes must bend well up when one is kicking or the toes will get hurt. And one must have enough flexibility of leg position that one leg can go somewhat up in the air without one loosing balance, with the other somewhat bent and behind one. So one finds the stance that radiates beauty, balance, and which is also ready to both protect -- with hard flat stomach -- and kick as well as hit. Yet one cannot practise hard on one another because of its danger, but one must practise hard on something because one must learn what impact does to oneself, in terms of balance and what the knuckles can stand and what the knees can handle. Those who have thin bones must aim at accuracy and swiftness more than hardness or they will break themselves in trying to break another. The role of paperballs suspended from a wire, when subjected to kicking and hitting, is that of training precision aiming at a moving target, which is important also for kicking right. One must be good at as many combinations as possible, as at many sides of oneself as possible, yet it is better to execute two successive rapid precision-movements hard and quick than make two half-good such motions as one bundle. Slight pains will arise -- that is natural -- but one heeds them by calming down for the days or weeks required till the body superrepairs itself. Stamash is nothing without the control of one's own bad temper: for even one stamash action against another can permanently undo the beauty of another, and so, perhaps, the life of the body of another: this, then, is never to be unleashed unless absolutely called for, in ways approved by the society's laws, for instance in the role of police, or in direct justifiable self-defence of direct physical attack. But verbal attack, no matter how fierce, should in all private circumstances be met by words or by a respectful enough silence, not by physical actions: for a stamash individual has tranquility, is not provoked, but does what is good. The tranquility of the stamash warrior is such that she knows what pathways in the night which are safe, by her nonchattering mind, the heat of her gut feeling. The stamash warrior smiles easily in fighting, and does the glow exercise and water exercise to maintain smooth skin and is not wrinkled with concern, ever. And goes deep into silence, praying for truth not illusion, prior to asking questions of a yes/no kind, so that intuition override fiction and wishful thinking. In leaning back, a slight nod of head or lift of finger or toe will indicate a 'yes' from gut feeling and one asks clearly from various angles and receives answers and asks again, later on, separating intuition from fiction but not cocksure about it. The stamash individual is moderate on any alcohol or drugs, is varied in music, is good at dance, avoids needless mockery of weaker ones, and moves rather with the good than with the popular when the pathways of these divide. In doing the creation exercise, begin by saying 'this is creation exercise', and similar for energy exercise and other stylized, practise-like exercises. In completing the creation exercise, -- which we also can speak of as 'doing the creation', 'completing the creation', -- there is a pure consciousness meditation in elegant pointing to the third eye. The other hand connects to below navel, the force of creative life force there. The hands then shift, after a certain while. One points first to the third eye with the right hand. There is 'a spring in the steps' which is entrained and trained, and which leads to more shapely feet, in completing the creation, in that it happens while standing on the balls of the feet. In being in solitude, walking between various activities, such as washing, eating, reading, and concrete stamash exercising, and also outdoors, one reminds oneself regularly of 'beautiful footprints'. The beautiful footprint involves having a lightness in the touch of the ground which is based on beautiful muscles there, grabbing ground with toes, allowing the balls of the feet, and their outer periphery, and to some extent the heels, to be engaged. As the foot is lifted, so also are the toes lifted, unless there is a particular stylish reason, or functional reason, why one should walk in a different way. But it is not about doing everything right all the time; and for long walks, which are important, one must allow a certain laziness to come, shifting the intensity of the muscle use and elegance to a considerably lower level to allow distance of the walk. One thinks better after a walk, one sleeps better after days with long walks, but one is alive and must relate to each day and each week and each month with creative sensitivity and aliveness. One aims, righteously, at rejuvenation for the body as long as the body is righteously alive, but trains on accepting euthanasia for the soul will not feel pain in exiting from the withered frame of the body when it does so righteously. The soul is always young, and the body one works on keeping young after it has grown up. But at such time as it is making little sense to keep the body young, one will look to what is acceptable in society. If the society is of the 20th century type, one does not do euthanasia but totters along into agedom with dignity, demanding little, and do not cause disharmony for families by pursuing a lonely path of euthanasia. But in such societies as the truth of reincarnation are clearly understood and the ease of letting go of fear of death is, samurai-like, emphasized in order to put righteousness and obedience to God before selfishness, one does not resist euthanasia when the time is right. But the soul is taught within and between each reincarnation to be less and less selfish by the experience of pain. For human beings do not necessarily learn much by rewards by doing right -- however important it is to give comfort and not pain at all, nor any punishment at all, to tiny children. For a reward can lead to a clinging to the reward instead of to a reinforcement of the joy of doing something right for its own sake. Whereas severe pain felt as a result of pursuing arrogant pathways of selfishness, power, mafia-like gang structures, and other fear-invoking schemes on others to bully more resources out of others, then this pain will lead to the soul asserting to itself: Not to do this again! But the growth of enlightenment in the human being as a result of realizing that bad actions -- actions which are not obedient and humble to God, who is love, and not written truly about in any propaganda scripts of the past such as quoran, torah, new testament, upanishads, bhagavad-gita, tao te king, dhammpada or any other such pompeous book -- this growth of enlightenment by nondogmatic fresh intuition into the deep will of God, is a growth which is always incomplete. But the fact that it is always incomplete doesn't meant it is not a growth of goodness: it is less and less incomplete, but subtly so, in the sense that there is always an infinity more to understand. The healthy human being attains to greater, richer, more beautiful, more startling, more ecstatic sexuality with each incarnation, and, on a level which can be felt, also increased with each month of beautiful, intense living, as long as the body/brain is young enough to learn, aspire and be innocent and curious and blush at the new. In the coolness of the night or in a cool day the brain may partly conserve energy by regulating normal actions on a kind of 'autopilot' which is so that certain finesses of artistic intuition -- which is necessary in stamash fighting -- may take longer time before they surface. The stamash individual should therefore check with art and with experience of sexually exiciting images and stories how awakened one is in the moment as a whole before undertaking any complicated enterprise. The action of copulation with others, especially when there are threesomes or foursomes so that the level of personal attachment is smaller and the focus on the body beauty and face beauty and dance beauty of sex is greater, can build up the wakefulness and the energy for a stamash action in the upcoming hours. But one cannot haste one's wakefulness if one is truly going to be artistic: yet, the stamash pro individual must know urgency by heart well enough to be able to step -- when it is called for -- straight into stamash force without the preliminaries, even if deep sleep occurred the minute before. But such sudden energy awakenings are exhausting if they occur often; and the rejuvenating life-style involves then a lot of sexuality and art and solitude. A society full of interesting activities involves a lot of temptations but one must balance the addition of energies from the outside with the build-up of energies at the inside: or else the body and face will show signs of tear and wear quickly. Sexuality involves the flux and coherence of nerve centres which grow with each great sexual experience; and the rich, diverse, lively pursuit of sexually stimulating images and words and sounds and motions together with others or one one's own builds up the sexuality and increases the future joy. So one must look at oneself as a sexual object not just a subject out to get other objects; and check in a camera/mirror how one looks in the various phases of sex and find out what the esthetical impulse of generosity is -- where the smile is, where the ease is, and not make it all so terribly urgent. For sex is a dance. And the dance of sex connects, in stamash exercises, the energy of genitals with the energy of the brain, the brain being thus able to charge the muscles and the skin toning more up, to rejuvenate, to be great-looking and strong and firm and smooth, and to act fast. In studying anatomy, one studies the mind of God: and in learning about the beauty of feet, one learns about the beauty of the future of humankind. You must see the many forms of beauty of healthy young anatomy of the skinny longlegged kind, and learn to listen to the story of each kind of beauty. And when these stories don't work out, there is conflict, perhaps violence, and as an artist, you will know how to heal this. The artist calls on the creative power of sexuality to make a surprising whole where it would not occur to a less energetic mind that any whole could be at all. And so there is a depth of breath, an ease of being, a playfulness of mind, whenever there is stamash; and this is also a characteristic of great sexuality. There is a magnet of command relative to the voice of obedience, which can radiate from one who doesn't use it for personal gain nor harshly but based on getting righteousness implemented in more and more people. For all activity in humanity is ultimately related and brought together towards a greater common enlightenment for all humanity, as all souls are related to one another and none of these souls very advanced in enlightenment compared to others. For when some begins to be enlightened, then soon enough all others come along; and when some begins to refine this enlightenment, then soon enough all others also refine it; and this refinement will happen more and more and there is an infinity to the possible and actual development to come -- all guided by God and his muses, L.A.H. It is in knowing this intent that the will to command -- playfully, for fun, for ecstasy, in sex under such circumstances as when this is sought -- or, seriously, when someone adept at stamash can quench violence-to-come by a mere use of deep-voice without fear in it. In finding out the intent of God, the intent of the fountain of love which anticipates the direction of the universe and which feeds back to the body impulses as to what is right to do, one must listen to the body. In listening to the body, there is a cold sweat if one is playing with energies set on a morbid course of exploitation and manipulation by severely wrong means. One who does wrong violence to another and one who orders another to do wrong violence to another are of the same. The only violence that is justified is the violence that preemptively gets wrong violence about-to-be away. But to what extent 'preemptively' is lawful must be considered relative to the concrete laws of the society -- and these laws should be simple so not only professionals can understand them, but all can judge by them. In any society dedicated to intuition, there must be a whole spectrum of activities which, each season, anyone who has had a minimum of schooling in language and thinking, can cast a vote about. But in any society which is to endure so as to provide consistent coherent life for individuals from one generation to the next there must be a care-taking of those foundations that contribute to happy life. But happiness in human life is always in glimpses, as a result of focussing on doing much right and avoiding wrong temptations, and is not a station one lands permanently on. It is not given to a human being to understand more than in relative glimpses why a good action is good. And so it is not possible to speak of absolute rights for a human being, rather one must speak of the absolute importance of all human beings to have as much relative faith as they can in a higher authority than their own ego, and which can, in lucky moments of meditation, speak through their conscience, their heart. Stamash is a series of exercises such that they call, by a form of bodily whisper, a physical form of prayer, on more and more intuition, which is not just a knowledge intellectually of what is probably right to do in each situation for each person but it is an impulse in the gut to actually do it, whether it is understood or not. In dedicating oneself to good actions, one learns to find the tranquil temperature of high goodness in the gut which is as far as can be from the cold sweat of wrong action. When a good person feels cold sweat on encountering another person it is an indication that it is extremely urgent to be moderate in speech and vaguely avoid any further action together before a great deal of meditation and self-questioning and affirmation of goodness has happened: for the body IS an antennae. Yet the body can have effects of foods or viruses or bacteria or lack of exercise or too much reading or unbalanced behaviour or too little or too much of vitamins, or other such things, which mimick and superficially feel like intuitions -- so one mustn't decide in a dogmatically blasphemous manner what is intuitive or not, but rather be sensitive to what one feels is a probably correct impulse. What is correct for one person in one situation may be incorrect for another person in a very similar situation; -- and no two situations are absolutely identical, and all individuals have great variations. It is the full conjunction of the features of the context (the moment) with the fullness of the organism (also the soul / spirit) which must speak of the intuition in rightness. And so one must try one's best but one can still, as human, fail severely even when one thinks that one did try one's best and while it diminishes the responsibility very slightly, possibly, for the devastating effects of the severely wrong action, one cannot claim any right to freedom from punishment according to the society's laws then, or according to the essence laws governing all conscience. It is to provide intuitions but also so as to challenge the ego to be crushed in ways it should in order to diminish in ways it should for enlightenment to grow, relatively speaking, or progress towards enlightement to occur, that the submuses (the muses controlled by the uppermost three muses L.A.H.) exist around each soul and spirit. Intuition must be deserved, therefore, and can be in humility requested with improvised words (prayer to God), but it cannot be commanded and is not a mere technique, ever. It is the future which justifies the rightness of an action in the present, and this future is known only fully to God and so humans cannot know fully the rightness or lack thereof of their own actions. But a nonfull knowing of rightness, which grows with each incarnation, is always possible. But then the mind mustn't chatter all the time, and all thinking and conversation mustn't go on merely while one is walking, but also in the eye-to-eye honest dialogue where it though easier can become a confrontation of words. Those who can move a confrontation of words into a greater harmony before dissolving their contact are harmony-breeders in a society, but this harmony mustn't be purchased by accepting common illusions (collusions), or inventing false points of agreements because one of the parties are unwilling to face fact. Fact stems from God and humans must listen to them. And the ultimate fact about the future is the joy, fun, pure loving entertainment that God wants by virtue of the creation which is His, and so all life is set into motion in order to provide him with ever-better moments of this. So if the existence of an actual process is so as to ensure a greater goodness in the future then this existence has goyon; but if not, it is removed, and sometimes this removing happens fast and sometimes slow, but it must not be challenged by humans to be wrong. So the ego must tell to itself to bow down, stop exploiting, manipulating, making cunning plans, making plans to force things which are not deserved, or think it can get away with doing or saying terrible things merely by throwing out some nice-sounding sweet words such as 'I apologize', -- however deep apologizes are extremely important when uttered in an utterly sincere way so as to show deep regret and actual willingness never to fail in goodness in that way again. It can be part of prayer to get a better life to include a sense of stated apology -- to God, to the muses, to their submuses -- of very specific wrong actions, insofar one senses or thinks that they are wrong, something which one ought to reserve a relative doubt about, but not so as to cover up actual regret: for one must listen to one's conscience. But when this conscience merely is trying to give pleasure to another body and ignoring the vaster perspective of what God wants with humanity then this is not conscience -- which literally means 'con science' -- together-knowing -- with love, with God as the fountain of love, love of the future, love all good life in the future in all good ways -- but merely a placating of another's ego or one's own sentimentality. Those then, who are not fiercely antisentiemental inside themselves against rediculous attachments which are not supported by God-oriented meditation build structures of justifications of wrong actions and these structures, in sum, form part of an ego which is a dark patch on the soul which must be cleared away by severe pain, and the muses will see to it by proper synchronicities. Realism about the future involves a willingness to avoid mere rethoric in a conversation and focus, one by one, on simple questions which have as few questionable assumptions in them as possible, and neither over-emphasizing differences in a group nor over-emphasizing similarities between individuals. Realism about the future involves a sense of how fluctuations in actions which easily happens given such and such mindset and such and such environmental variations, variations in temperature, humidity, light, resources, smiles, whatever -- and what, then, easily happen given the presence of these actions relative to those others who with some likelihood are present. But since the slightest change for instance in the position of a finger or toe of one person in a conversation can give a radically new idea to another and thus sway the whole direction of the thinking, and possibly also of the emotions, and the following actions for hours, it is not given to any human being to predict anything in life for sure. Rather, these tiny fluctuations with big effects must be assumed to be at work and one must therefore have a broad sense of all likely big effects and a broad sense of which are most likely, perhaps because they tend to have happened in the past, or perhaps because one has seen intimations of them recently, or are reminded of something said from trustworthy sources. To have an honest mind is a mind that doesn't cultivate dark zones of secrecy but which knows what it means to be through and through polite. The only secrets which can be justified are those which can be easily admitted to be absolutely lawful but which arguably spared a real person for a completely unnecessary pain, both now, and with big likelihood also in the future. So while one must prefer youth and speak highly of the youth of each one present if one speaks of that theme at all, one spares others from listening to one's perceptions of another's faulting features unless they for reasons which are clear-cut actually positively demand to have some constructive criticism about something in particular and seems to be robust enough in feelings to handle something of it. But in something such as a beauty contest, one actually perceives who has beauty on the outside and goodness on the inside to back it up and votes anonymously with loyalty to that goodness and beauty and one doesn't then accept coercion in that vote so that only those who one calls 'one's friends' are getting the vote: and by analogy, one fears wrongness but does not needlessly provoke a wrong-doer, just gets away from the person. Beauty is a radiance which is so that other people are enlivened, feel important about their existence and about the contact with the beautiful other and so beauty sparks work, art, fun, love, good sex, great exercises, good insight and so beauty leads to much good for those who have it under the right conditions. But all this good must be deserved by a goodness backing this beauty up from the inside. For rather, if this beauty is sold at the cost of soul in order to reap a certain type of what-not, be it drugs, or peculiar favours such as a particular type of kinky sex one favours, or a set of compliments from some kind of rugged monster-ego who without conscience goes around trying to dominate girls, then this beauty is no longer deserved. But then the artist must not fail in seeing that the beauty of skin is not real beauty, even physically, unless within that skin there is goodness, which is to say, humility and obedience to the fountain of goodness, God, and to all the muses and their submuses, and to all souls who channel that goodness. In other words, beauty is frail if without goodness inside, and frail beauty is ugly, and must be seen as that. But those who have goodness inside and not beauty on the outside should neither have the patent on goodness nor should they be punished for the pain they already at some level will feel for their lack of physical beauty at present -- but their goodness inside will lead to a quick and painless transition after death to a beautiful longlegged new girl body. And that which is healthy has the right type of symmetries and the right type of assymmetries and the right type of strengths and smoothnesses and richness, such as of hairs, and the right form of slenderness and longleggedness relative to torso, and so on, while can be infinitely varied in subtle ways which artistically means much -- when we discuss beauty. So beauty is an indication of health and the intent of health is goodness but this intent must be grand and not selfish, it must not be so demanding that it is overruling periods of recovery but it must have the right blend of patience and impatience. So humanity must accept its role -- viz., to be at the feet of God, to make God laugh -- and God is an artist, and by that fact has made the shapes of human like the shapes of the muses and of himself, as a sole single manifest immortal male, the righteous ruler always, in the present human society. No human leader must attempt any absolute power, or absolute leadership, ever, or get eradicated in severe ways. So all must, in the name of goodness, cultivate such words as nonjealousy, nonsentimentality, plurality, art, and also regularly meditate on the word GOODNESS. And there must be no clinging to another as a 'spiritual teacher', for God is the only spiritual teacher, nor must there be any clinging to another in the sense of sexual infatuation, but rather one must cling to God and his sense of beauty as best one can, and pluralistically experience this. One must not in secret try to raise the seedings of a pompeous ego-bred new society which will provide freedom for the ego to gets its way for there is no space in the universe for any such society, nor will there ever be: any such attempts to seal off a portion of space for one's own pursuits in neglect of God according to a false doctrine of God or according to pompeous so-called "human rights" set up as higher than the intent of God will lead to the worst of synchronicities for each and all involved, and such cliques, clans, groups, and mafia- or gang-like structures will be ripped apart in what is for them the worst of ways in order for each soul involved to learn, forever. But when those who have not partaken in crime are near those who have partaken in crime, and the ending of the criminals are near, then those souls of those who are innocent will be moved to other bodies, for the soul is the experiencer of pain (as well as joy), and there is total justice in what everyone experience. This then is (as the author Leibniz in renaissance England said, centuries before 20th century), the best of all possible worlds and (as the bishop Berkeley wrote still earlier), this is the mind of God. In each situation there is a peak resonance, a top-point around which everything else revolves, when seen with a deep intuition. For instance, when several currency pairs fluctuate, there is always one pair which is the focal point, the one pair which gives the dance to all the others, so that on relating purely to this one pair you can, without looking at numbers or charts, purely from within, earn lots of money on it. And so the stamash individual, while playfully musing on all forms of complexity present in each situation, and not attempting to dominate or influence pointlessly and so as to evoke needless irritation, will always know where the key resonance is. This can be in a theme connected to some people, a sweet theme of possible refreshed love, for instanced, -- yet it may be in good taste not to speak of it, just have an awareness which senses the powerfield around it. And in building such awareness instruments in ordinary social harmonious situations, it is possible to utilize that very same awareness on encountering also nonfamiliar persons who have a violent agenda and make harmony come more realistically possible there. Yet the stamash individual must train herself in accepting death of the body and the bodies, and let bygones be bygones and know that even with humanity in an enlightened form, there will be reckless, terrible violence erupting on occasion, and only idiots would call off intense policing or declare that they never want their hands soiled with violence: for some forms of violence can only be stopped by fierce violence, of such a kind that it destroys much more than only the wrong-doers. The wrong-doers are wrong-doers because of the state of mind they have come into, not because that they are of different essence. It is as with a cold or flu that some people get -- they get affected, they loose their smile for a week, or must force it to come in spite of fever or headache or troat pain, but it passes: and in the perspective of reincarnation, when somebody has become seriously violently wrong, that person will -- in time for the next reincarnation -- come out of it. So one mustn't loose hope in humanity if violence suddenly arises in those who one believed the most in. So AMFAP -- As Much Faith As Possible -- must be in God, not in any of your girlfriends, -- and it is to God and goodness you must be aiming at being fully loyal, while you can only be loyal to those human beings who have a goodness flow going on and only for that long -- so don't promise too much relative to humans, promise only to aim at AMFAP. But when one has lost faith one will meditate and force on some faith again, and the feeling that the faith has a ground will grow again, and just like a cold the negativity will pass, in due time: this is part of what it means that human beings must realistically embrace the 'relative' -- that it comes and goes. Which also means that children growing up near stamash people must not be taught to have full obedience to other human beings, but rather be given a sense that they are sometimes more wise than at other times and they must learn to ask their own heart, and learn to think about the consequences in terms of pain. And rewards must not be given so intensely that the joy of doing things right for their own sake is forgotten in the pursuit of the pleasure of rewards; whereas the limits that society must have on actions must be enforced by pain, for pain teaches the human nervous system where the limits are in a way that is always remembered. Yet the distribution of pain must be moderate and not involving needless display to many people socially, and one does not administer pain to a child, and one lets officials administer pain to lawbreakers -- but the point is to appreciate pain for its vital importance in the growth of enlightenment -- both the growth towards it, and the further refinement of it. So the happy state of mind is not something reached absolutely, but rather, on living righteously, more and more such glimpses are reached, and deeper and deeper, with each incarnation. So there is a teaching of pain when one doesn't find the resonance: and the sense of sudden joy when the resonance is found. It is by this resonance that stamash is found to be the stamina which pervades even the mind of God -- it is not an artefact, but the real pump of all events, deterministically (but this determinism is known to God and not even fully to his muses). Good resonances with good things are deserved by the fact that one doesn't try to enforce the perspective of grabbing fame, power, influence, etc, for oneself, but rather aims at honoring God more and more. CHAPTER 4: ANIMALS AND BEYOND IMITATION / I think you write somewhere that humans are 'individualized'. Are animals not? How does that tie in with the sense of individual dignity a human may easily read into the behaviour of several not-so-tiny-brained animals? : There's certainly a great deal of a kind of real dignity to some animals and having the type of individualization that humans have is not a criterion for that! The individualization I talk about is at a spiritual level. It involves responsibility for actions based on an inner dialogue with conscience. / Animals don't have that? They don't have conscience? : They may have, for all I know, a kind of inner psychology which has some of these features. You might call it an emulation of individualization, a material beginning of it. But just as there is a jump in the manifest world from a computer to the organic, so, by analogy, is there a jump from an animal type of psychology to a spiritually individualized type of psychology with a depth that is reincarnated according to a greatly complex pattern of justice; a justice the human can grow to aspire to more and more through the millenia. / So you don't apply the notion of reincarnation to animals at all? : There are nonlocality features bridging matter and matter, of course, but nothing more. / There can be direct soul-like links between one animal and another, or between an animal and a human, and so also possibly from one animal at one time to another animal at another time? : Yes. But it is still a category jump. / When the 8-sphere theory is applied, is one shall we say 'allowed' to copy the shape of it more or less into one's design? : Definitely no. It has to come from within. You spend time in meditating over it, -- like I have done. But you push aside all attempts of copying anything whatsoever when you create a new shape. What has to be the overriding concern is that you create the right shape in each moment in which it is right to create anything at all. / Suppose it looks like it. : I doubt it. / What is natural for humans to express won't look like it? : Not much like it. At any rate, that's my proposal. There's an infinity of figures within it, that it approves of, so to speak: but you don't get a law-abiding action merely by copying the law-book. You get the right action by understanding something of the essence of the ground with the best of yourself and then acting on the instinct of your heart, having cleansed yourself from the debris of wanting to copy. CHAPTER 5: ANIMALS AND HUMAN SOUL AS EXPERIENCER OF PAIN / Suppose I say something like this: It is all very well what you say but it sounds like nothing but yet another ideosyncracy, without hardly a bit of any evidence to support it other than, well, the goodlookingness and persuasive eloquent tone of the tongue of its author -- so how am I to know that it is indeed distinct from the more or less similar-sounding -- at a distance -- proposals of which there are thousands? : I don't know. That's all I can say. / You do not say, look, there's gonna be a miracle in your life within fourteen days if you just get the gist of this? : As far as I am concerned, anything true and not based on illusions is a miracle whether or not it is felt like that, whether or not anything happens which in the short run convinces you of that. / But is the 8-sphere true, literally? Is it truth? : It is the question each has to ask. I can only say, naturally. / How can it be in a neopopperian spirit to say that? Forgive me for asking. : It is in a neopopperian spirit to assert the reality, the fierce strong and sometimes even mysterious presence of intelligent, god-given intuition. That reality doesn't come in the shape of a human-readable stamp or a certificate from the authorities in Washington D.C., nor does it come by gold plates with inscribed enochian signs, nor is it proven by the sheer magnificent size of the pyramids nor by the geometry involved by them. All things that can be concocted by an ego has got nothing to do with this presence. The presence is what calls on you as an individual to stand aside from the turmoil of humanity and demand, require of yourself to listen beyond your little self, and find out what's what, and leave what you have to leave to come to what you have to come to when you are tied into a new truth process. / This is also neopopperianistic? : You see, you ask evidence for something that I feel I have already done a near-breach -- not a breach, but a near-breach -- in proposing; I cannot try to make it sound more convincing; in fact I would be far more happy to make it sound less convincing. But I let what I have said stand. / What type of breach? : Near-breach. Of my own solid commitment to myself not to contribute to new physics, for physics can be so easily something which feeds new type of military production. Suppose I say, if I provided evidence for this the sum total of all atomics and hydrogen bombs and so on could be superceded a thousand times even with ease. That's what we gotta not have. So I assert, humanity won't get any further with anything whatsoever unless they leave of new physics, for it is no longer a thirst for important knowledge, it is merely, now, -- and has been so in part since World War II (and this many of the pre-and-post-world-war-ii physics writers agreed heavily in), a thirst for too-dangerous knowledge. Human cunning must be fought by providing bounds. The bound has to be set on physics knowledge. What there is not enough of is ego-transcending knowledge. That knowledge is different in kind; I'd rather you ask about that. Forgive me for re-directing the course of the conversation. / So be it, let's re-direct. You say, ego-transcending knowledge? Knowledge of a different kind? Now could you indicate why someone interested in a hot party and a swimming-pool before it should delay the hot propositions for an hour and instead deepen his or her ego- transcending knowledge? : Sure, I can do that. When you have a lot of ego, you don't have humor, you don't understand metaphor, nor irony, and so you get trouble even at parties, you don't get the vitality and lovely playfulness of the gay girls going with you, you get a sense of blocked answers. And add much alcohol to this, and it only gets even more sour, the lack of irony is also lack of self-irony -- it is a mere imposed type of irony in order to win friends, but one doesn't understand it -- and so the lack of priorities and temporary distrust in plans that alcohol gives becomes a severe vulnerability and severe self- distrust. Similar effects, or after-effects, come by other drugs I think. Look at the people who don't do the ground-work but who run to drugs! They have to try ever- new concoctions of their drugs because their ground-work of love, of humour, of empathy, of compassion has not be laid. They get full of the bad hygiencs of inner aggressiveness, and this inner psychological impurity breaks down even the brain and its patterns become boring and soon this shows on the smile. So it is a severe natural in-born punishment on the human being who denies the importance of a -- shall we say -- light buddhistically inspired self-enquiry, or who merely does enquiry in order to produce words to others with which to impress. / So one must do this in private? : Like the grand old master said some twenty millenia ago, don't go meditating while others look at you, this is something between you and God entirely. Or we can say, between you and all the other subtle higher authorities, submuses especially, then higher than that, muses, then with them, and highest of course, the creator. / What role of 8-sphere in this meditation? : Like this: you can get to know by it that they are artists. That you have to have the dynamic playfulness of the artist, who can think in shall we say entwined tantric terms, who can think many-dimensionally, who can be self-referential and give herself over to the ocean of silence and meditation, in order to deserve real inward conversation with the higher beings. It is not about getting a better company consultant! / Will it rejuvenate? : The child growing up is given some free space to grow, the fast-growing-ness of the cells (as I believe Rupert Sheldrake pointed out well in early Cambridge studies in biology) is the rejuvenation factor in itself. The children has the fast-growing-ness because they stretch and to some extent fill out the right shapes. But the adult then will have a finely woven balance which is all the time affected by deeds, even by thoughts, in an intensely self-related interconnected alocal whole. / Alocal? You mean nonlocal? : With my friend Henrik B Tschudi prior to my work on 8- spheres we sought for a word sounding like nonlocal but which can be used in a philosophical generic sense rather than a strictly physics scientific sense, and so suggested, to ourselves in a conversation, that alocal can be used with this philosophical distinction. The prefix a- is then not used in the sense of 'an instance of', but rather as 'something beyond'. Whether or not others had used the world alocal before wasn't the point, but the point was to generalize over an important term at the time. / And what, then, is the role of the alocal in the self- transcending enquiry you spoke about? : Any religious tradition with any element of worth in it has a sense of unfolding events as token of a greater pattern of interconnectedness, which atheists cloaking themselves as scientists love to be sarcastic about. But it is real, this interrelatedness of all events. It is even artistically real. But to listen to the music of events, you must understand that the great challenge of this world is to explain distance in space, not to explain how things are tied up, bounded together, bonded, resonant. For the world is a whole and it is a beautiful mystery that anything at all is stretched out! And so by this out-stretcedness of the body, the human body as the muse body as God's body, we are touching on an expression from the 8-sphere, which literally is a provider of dimensionality of an organic kind. It doesn't actually show the longlegged babe that is an archicon of all beauty in all artistic activity, but it rather implies the longlegged babe. / Why longlegged? : Because the future is infinite. / The future being where we go? : Instead of sit. / Some would say this is racist. Like beauty photography. How does it tie in with all-compassionate-ness? : You must have all-compassionate-ness if you are to be a really good artist. You must cultivate it in yourself. But this compassion must also go into the future, and feel the reality of the existence of a healthy humankind. If you are so tied up in your narrow focus on the presently unfolded manifest moment that you deny thinking about the future, then everything goes and, as a consequence, nothing matters and nothing has any meaning and then also the concept of beauty gets washed out. / Like the art works associated with late 20th century and early 21st century and sometimes called 'contemporary'. : That's all atheist bullshit, of course. It is marxist, or atheistically capitalist, which are but two sides of the flip of the coin of putting might of human thought above the might of God. / So you say, you have gotta look into the future to decide what to be, well, MORE compassionate to? : Yes. Quite so. Unless you have a distinction between something and something else as far as beauty goes, as far as the health-producing potential in the future, you have merely got a valueless all-embracingness. Now however that all-embracing-ness is a very important feature in any spiritually enlightened heart. It is only that in addition you need the meaningfulness of making a discernment. This discernment will make you say 'yes' to an artwork and 'no' to another on something not based on gossip or market evaluation. It will call on your heart to decide. You must then not eat too much fat nor drink too much alcohol for then your heart gets clogged or your nerves and your sensitivity gets hardened, then death masks and skulls and bones and so on are the only things which provide any intensity and any resistance to you; for you are bored. The morbid individual is not morbid in essence, but is so fat in essence that the orientation away from the laziness and boredom of that fat becomes the only thing which provides a distinction in life, and that distinction becomes death. So the fascination with death -- which is, plainly put, necrophilia, becomes the end-state of the atheist and the end-state of the dying earth. Which is why we must be willing to be artistically racist, so to speak: we must not apply a whimsical criterion like skin color or mother lineage. It is not about being a jew or not jew. Nor is it about being against anyone who comes from a background where they read Mein Kampf or Quoran or similar very racist stuff. It is rather looking for goodness on the inside -- freedom from wrong conditioning -- and the backing up by a promise of health-in-the-future by the longleggedness, not tallness, and skin complexion of shining peach-melba health and gracefulness of built and so on. The artist has a taste, and this taste rejects cultures which says that God has by geneology chosen anyone. : That doesn't sound much racist. Rather you are saying, beauty has got to be honored without bothering too much where that beauty comes from. / Well, as long as it is not a fake merely lasting the day, or that the generous smile is merely a cover-up for a hidden agenda based on a shoddy book. : The psychology of the individual must be beautiful as well? / Yes. : I have heard some utter the view that excellence is artificial and perhaps not very attractive. / Now, do they really mean that, or is it merely that they live in a relatively constant state of self- condemnation -- proposing to themselves that they are not excellent -- and so fear the presence of something which they would badly want but think they cannot get? I think there is in all beings a smile of happiness in coming into even a brief moment of resonance with something truly excellent, not artificial, something going beyond, something that transcends. : But then, the next moment the person may start to long. / Yes, and this longing may be felt as a sadness that the person rejects, if the person is immature, instead of takes as a leaping-point for an exploration into needless attachments and so, in a lightly buddhistic sense if you wish, comes to a greater sense of playful detachment. But this playful detachment doesn't mean that you strain yourself to conjure up the image of a girl as old when she is young so as to avoid seeing her present beauty as young, as I have seen some rediculous buddhistic schools -- schools calling themselves wrongly 'buddhistic' -- suggest. It is not about training oneself to be cold to greatness. It is rather about training oneself to allow beauty and greatness and excellence and rediculously attractive women, those excessively pretty ones, to switch on many lights, perhaps too many lights, and then one must do what one must do to avoid getting into a sulking mood afterwards. For beauty has to be deserved in relatively surprising moments to come, and these moments are not owned, not possessed, except by the muses and so forth. I am slightly uneasy about the residue, if that's the word I want, about something we talked about earlier. About animals. Could we go back to that theme for a moment, please? : Sure, yes. We talked about individualization. Animals, you seem to say, do not have soul. / Well, remember I am using the word 'soul' in a very strict sense, to actually denote a subtle and even immortal body that is actually incarnating into the young human body when it has had a year or more to show a bit of what it will be. About the latter, we can note that infants may, when newborn, look rather like having been through rainy days. Their skin are soggy, often, you know; it is quite a complicated process to go from mother's womb when she does the breathing for you, to go to breathing on your own and having the naval chord clipped off. The rediculous proposals of some religions are that a soul enters a body at this stage; or even more rediculously so, when the sperm, or babestream as I call it, meets the egg of the girl, as if that had anything to do with soul! That is obviously a purely material process and the catholic church -- which is, as far as I can say, entirely non-catholic in the sense of the word 'catholic' as 'straight, right, fundamental' -- has such a rediculous idea. The tie the material to the body because they are afraid of coptic divinity and they are afraid of incarnation thoughts and they are afraid, above all, to loose their money and their political influence. They are not the possessors of truth. I would give more truth to the teen pop-singer, the young Madonna, in singing Like a Virgin; the fact she got away with it despite all the idiotic insincere cursing done in the cellars of the Vatican in mafia-ridden Italy means that the Vatican has no powers at all, neither in heaven nor on earth, beyond that which any ordinary corrupt tiny rogue state with corrupt senile politicians have. The pope is an insincere member of humanity. Had they had integrity, they would have closed the shop and announced divinity to be elsewhere than in their rotten cellars and fat-obesive and often gay-men-obsessive artworks like those of Leonardo da Vinci. I have no homophobia, especially not when it comes to girls doing it with each other, for that is but beauty meshing with beauty in tantric orgasms, but I don't see that men messing about with men can be trusted to come up with divine art. : Hm. So humans have soul, girl-souls you say. These girls incline towards God? / You may laugh of it but I propose that human existence is essentially a divine tantric sexual existence, and so the future belongs to girls meeting up with a coptic manifestion of God. By 'coptic' I do not mean the rediculous rituals or pompeous priest manifestos of those who of this day call themselves coptic, however much I respect amharic and all that; rather, I say, there is a form of sensual divine-in-matter christinaity there -- as an eclectic component only! -- that any individual must bring up and realize together with an ancient indian feeling of the immortality of each human soul; and then blend with understandings also from elsewhere that these souls acquire experiences at many levels, in several manifest universes you might say, and that they can be moved around also after the incarnation into a human body. This, then, will all make for a justice-oriented reality; and if you are any believer in God at all, you will naturally also believe in justice. But justice one cannot get by a fixed one-body-one-soul-at-all-times solution. Rather, God creates and God destroys and God puts souls there then here then around and so on. This he does by helpers, naturally, or it would be too much intricate work for him to enjoy anything; and so there is a hiearchical organisation of higher helpers, higher submuses lead by muses which are his main consorts at all levels. This is how I intuit it and I don't care one shit whether it is accepted by anyone, it is not something I say as part of a package that I'm trying to sell to anyone. Truth takes care of itself. Those who claim something to be true when it is not are taken care of by truth. Someone who has this ground-faith don't speak quickly and without many many seasons of very deep and very young and very aspiring and very frank meditation. What is then said has the integrity of truth and those who have any enlightenment at all will pick it up and not come with stupid questions, and there is no nead for yellow or orange or brown robes and dangling incense boxes and peculiar forms of religious languages to back it up, or peculiar names of bodhisattvas and mysterious forms of reasoning. It is all about speaking about what is seen when the ego is not blocking. And what a human may see is always in glimpses and so it is not really for anyone to speak about with sureness. We were to say something about animals. : Yes. Would you say it is possible to be cruel to animals on behalf of rescuing humans? Is there any meaning to a value comparison? / Oh, there's tons of meaning to value comparison, and humans are infinitely more important than mammals, I feel it is right to say -- and I do not claim that I do not see immense beauty in the natural world, or in the sub- oceanic world, or in the other types of life-oriented spheres of this universe. There is fantastic beauty and it is all 8-sphere oriented. But humans are the real quintessence of the artwork of the divine. That is not something an ant can say to the other ant. It is something a human can say to other humans. It is not something an atheist will agree in, but then the atheist won't last forever, will he? He will be wiped out and incarnated in what is deserved so as to be taught better lessons; and this is part of the justice, part of the faith we have gotta have, that all moves on and on and on but it is not the type of evolution that is clearly depicted in human statistics in the news. Rather, it is an evolution that is on the scale of many millenia at a time. So in your spirit you must feel the millenia to come, and not merely look to weather forecasts for the upcoming day or imaginary weather forecasts for the upcoming decades. It doesn't matter whether Earth will persist or not, it won't for long anyway, but it is entirely important that human beings physical keep on reproducing themselves. So they will. So they must. Nothing can stop that, not a dying Sun nor climate nor nothing. It is bound to happen and only when you take a cosmic perspective of time and on the immortality of your soul and on the justice of reincarnation and of goyon will you lift to the dignity of having a morality that says yes to the right temptations and right painful actions and no to the wrong temptations and wrong pains. Without the cosmic perspective, one is merely withering away in senility. With the cosmic perspective, you pray in earnest to know what is right to do in each situation, and you not merely go around by habit attending to your committee and your bank account and your party plans. As for animals, the old bibles got it right at that one point, that humans are far more important to God. And so one must make a distinction. One has no right to say that it subjectiveness or unfairness when a human has priority. Animals have no instrinsic rights; but a human has the duty to have a sense of conscience to protect humans in their evolution towards God. Humans must not cling to animals at all. I am not saying, go kicking meaninglessly at animals. I am not saying that there ain't anything like pain sensors in animals but I'm saying that the pain there has a practical function in the nervous system rather than there being a soul or spirit that feels that pain. So if you trample on an insect which is trespassing your house, you do something which is an act on hygiencs, protecting your house, and so very slightly enhancing your goyon. The buddhists who gently brush insects to the side before treading on the road are merely clowns performing an atheistic ritual, in which nonsensical, nonunderstood consequences of their little aphorirms or sutras are taking more seriously than the grand truth of freedom from attachments and obedience to the essence of nirvana or joy or God or truth. And this essence says, pain is important for human growth, so don't do painkillers, rather punish quickly any somewhat grown-up who does something wrong but only at fingertips, don't do anything against health, against dignity, don't do it so that needlessly many sees that punishment, don't do it ever against genital areas, don't disfigure a person, and get over with a punishment in minutes. That teaches a soul to be law-obedient. And without that, egotism gets free, and sour, conditions to unfold its ghastly content. So allow bounds for the city to be strictly overheld but in very elegant quick punishments. Humans feel pain in spirit and soul and learn when this is justly applied. Now an insect has a fantastic function far out into wild nature in breaking down last season's productions and converting it to soil. One doesn't want to tarnish their activity there, for it is right. But it is right in being part of a completely ordered nature, in which everything is design and nothing is coincidence -- really -- as I see it. It is not about insects or dogs or fish or birds or horses incarnating or anything like that. They don't. They never have and never will. They are but matter, put crudely but I think, rightly. So there is a goyonic freedom -- a moral justice, I would even say, in a human being eliminating the living body of one animal in favour of something else, perhaps in favour of another animal, or in favour of humans. CHAPTER 6: : You speak of 'small is beautiful' when it comes to organisations, entrepeneurship and so on. Is this a form of capitalism, would you say? / On a very small scale. You see unless we have, humans have, a lot of diverse options there is no real experience is there? Entertainment need be diverse and shopping or massage or food options need be fairly diverse and the music must have an inner diversity or arrhythmicness and elections must have a diversity of options and so on. Without diversity, there is not the suffusing of human consciousness with the sense of potential out of which something new can emerge; and without this sense, the human narrows down and withers and leaves the experience for the next incarnation. And so I speak of something such as free capitalism in a minimalistic sense. It has gotta be minimalistic because if it is not, -- it must be warmly, hotly minimalistic, with tons of diversity, maximal in diversity -- for if it is not, the companies will by greed make all things uniform, more or less, or destroy all alternatives but a petty two. The dualism of parties in the USA elections, all excluded by two near-identical productions of the political establishment -- I am not saying the small differences don't matter hugely, but they are similar on, oh, so many grounds. That is not diversity. That is not what the promise of democracy is all about. The promise of democracy is to apply it within a zone that is rigidly controlled as to its foundations, and it is part of this beautiful rigidity to set an upper limit to capitalism and, if need be, by police force make it comply with divinity. : Rough words. / Yeah. I guess it is. : Well, how can anything in the commercial world, where money and more money and yet more money tend to be the rule, be tied up into -- what did you say? -- divinity? / You see it is here we have to say NO to atheism, and YES to 8-sphere. We say by 8-sphere that God is an artist who day-dreams all reality by injecting interconnectedness but in a flud, dynamic, richly lively way. So all is related to God and each action is either relatively supported or not to the intent of the more long-term unfoldment of the patterns. Each little money transaction is either right or not. If you do currency transactions, it may not be right to earn money every time. It is foolish and illogical for one who is even slightly enlightened to say that capitalism is all about more and more and more money. Rather, the righteous type of capitalism is about right action in creating money- related diversity and sustainable, interesting events which encourage more righteousness, more goodness, in people. And such. It is not just any set of words but the general religous feeling. We cannot put it all into the form of law-books. We cannot have the self-centered asberger-syndrome-like sharia laws, so-called laws, which are really just the intent of putrified men to chop the hands of girls who want to masturbate each other. We must have real laws. Real laws must be realistic as to human greed and say no -- a clear-cut, fierce no -- to too big structures in human society. They must be small. Otherwise all first-handed-ness goes out of the society. The structures must also relate with tremendous respect to the foundations of this society. For instance, elections must be run by the society not by a company, for elections must be trusted. So also the currencies, which should be four or something, otherwise there's not enough to do currency transactions of an interesting kind, must be maintained in a way which is dignified in terms of the total quantity of money by the society, not by companies. So banks should never be privately owned, of course. It is an absolute folly to try to apply private ownership on the things which are the foundations of the game. And it is also a game. That is also why I use the phrase 'Yoga4d v.r. Gamemakers' and all that. If you don't understand what a game is about, you don't understand anything of human society nor then therefore of human enlightened existence. : This thing about currency transactions. How does it come into a mini-capitalism like the way you say? What is it all about? / The fluctuations of how you convert, say, yen to dollar or dollar to swiss franc or franc to euro are determined as a sum by the liveliness of natural human market interactions. This liveliness is, like the grooming of plants, something which the banks must see to that happens with frankness. This frankness involves the trust that humans have in money and such. The fluctuations always occur when there is the wanting to pay in yen by what has a price in dollar, there's a difference which may vary minute by minute, say. If you are eager on having a certain service, say, you want a fantastic leg- massage, and the price is 10 dollars and you have only yen on yourself, you can check with a bank for the current going rate of conversion and you are so eager you couldn't care less what the rate is, unless it is horrific. If it so happens that a lot of people line up to pay with yen for dollar things -- and then take this yen to the bank to get dollar -- the dollar gets more and more expensive for the bank runs out of bills and want to limit this tendency, want to check the whole thing from running out of balance. So the banks are balance-makers. But this balance must be fluid and playful like a song or dance. It must be willing to move but not move beyond certain limits. When these limits are pecked at by a restless market, they have a vault of extra reserves and can go in and do a slightly artificial transaction, say, with yen and dollars, so as to correct a tendency; but they must evaluate whether to do some other restrictions as well. But then, when you are in the mood to simply increase the money in your bank account, which, say, you earned by being the one that gave that fantastic leg massage, with free masturbation on top maybe, you will want to sit back and just study these fluctuations. Is it not so that the swiss franc or whatever tends to grow in value relative to the euro or whatever you are looking at? So suppose you ask the bank to assist you to do a leveraged transaction in that direction, you put a bet, throwing in, say, a hundred dollars with a leverage of a dozen or so, meaning that the bank is willing to lend you a dozen times as much money as you have to make the slight fluctuation be expanded a dozen time to income for you if you have betted right, and loss if not. The responsible bank -- and, fortunately, such exists!!! -- will clip the transaction for you automatically if it strays too far in the wrong direction so that you don't get a minus on the account, ever, from doing a CT or currency transaction. The responsible bank will also offer you to cash in automatically if your bet comes right by a parameter you enter into a computer program. : You get money this way? / Sure, with ease I increase what I have by more than twenty percent each week when I give it enough meditation and time; or slower if I have too many other activities going. And that is after I have substracted the losses. But before I have paid the taxes. Remember though that I have not really had any big sponsoring to start with -- I have barely had enough to pay for a week's food and so on, in addition to acquiring all the means to do my sometimes very expensive projects with lots of electronics and so on. So I have just put aside minuscle sums and learned to make money out of these and this again I have just started with. I cannot claim therefore to have a wealth based on this work as yet, which really started just months ago, but I can claim to have a wealth-creating percentage. : Suppose now we say, shouldn't money be earned the hard way? Is this gambling-like thing real? / Look, if you have any sense of the entertainment that the human mind craves, and to some extent deserves, you mustn't deny the fun of getting something out of what is almost nothing. Definitely there are such things in life as a free lunch and yet it is deserved if you have the cosmic perspective.