Hrrrm. Well, if you don't feel your consent was violated, it's none of my biz. And if you don't want to, errr, energetically shift other people, that's also your choice and not really anyone else's biz, except that you've invited comment by writing about it in this way.
One thing that most people who go far enough on the spiritual path experience is the ability to shift their own consciousness deliberately. I can shift into a few different modes, some are quick (seconds) other aren't, or aren't reliable (I can't do it every time.)
Then they realize they can alter other people's consciousness. I can't, so far as I know (I've never tried) give someone else a spiritual experience, and I don't think I'd try except with explicit consent unless they were in a very bad place and I judged it would help them. (Spiritual experiences aren't always immediately helpful. It's definitely possible to have a spiritual experience you are not ready for and cannot handle.)
But I can change people's moods using certain methods I've discovered, and this discovery is VERY common among practitioners. So then the question becomes, should I? Should they? Everyone who isn't profoundly immoral thinks about these questions: I even knew a psychopath who spent time considering the morality.
I generally want some sort of consent. That can be implicit: a friend has given me consent thru friendship to help them alter their mood for the better, I'd say and I sometimes do it with strangers who seem to be having a very bad day: if they resist, I stop, I don't force it on them (which in some cases I can do.)
It's really not that hard once you understand how consciousness and energy work, even to a moderate degree.
But I was taught that it's very dangerous to interfere with other people's spirituality, especially without consent. Once you meddle, you're on the hook.
Even with consent, well, people often don't really know what they want, and they don't understand the consequences. Actual enlightenment experiences can break a lot of bonds and patterns. People suddenly change what they care about, their personalities rewire, they often lose ambition, etc...
They may think they want that, but they don't always. If someone does the work themselves, they're on the hook. If you do some of it for them, you're also the hook.
I can't share who, the teacher was a dangerous one in many ways, ironically and I don't want people seeking them out. Many are so desperate for spiritual progress that they will go to real teachers who are also morally dangerous.
Just long conversations mostly. The core is simple enough, the teacher was Hindu, and everyone is regarded as God. And you shouldn't mess with God: people are here telling their own stories and if you get involved in those stories there are consequences. If you interfere with what they want to experience you can get hurt fairly badly.
As that teacher put it "a 4 year old girl is as much God as I am."
Don't mess with God.
That person wasn't a good person in many ways (in some ways they were, people are complicated). The training was on how not to get hurt by interfering where you have no business. Since I tend to be a "helper" a lot of the warnings related to when it's OK to help and when you should mind your business.
Yup, that all makes sense. There are a lot of spiritual teachers who I don’t name/promote because I’m worried about their overall impact, but I learned a lot from them.
Have you ever seen a published list of warnings about when/when not to help, that you thought was a good list?
No. This was all oral teachings. I've never seen such things written down though sometimes magicians discuss related issues. Generally using abilities to harm others weakens your own defenses and any emotion/effect you push on someone else can also effect you, especially if the person you're pushing on has any ability themselves, or is loved by the Gods/Spirits.
What magicians don't tend to understand (some do) is the God angle. The weakest person in the world is still "God" and you can still get hurt.
Don't do anything to anyone else that you aren't willing to have happen to you is even more important in spirituality and magic than it is in normal life. The rebound is much accelerated, where normal evil is something you will pay for mostly after you die. (Not because you are being punished, usually you aren't. Buddha's "you aren't being punished for your anger, but by your anger applies strongly when the anchor of flesh is removed.)
Ick. Can't edit. Quick addition: it isn't just spirituality that leads to these abilities. Serious magicians get them often, advanced students of Alexander Technique also get them.
And you can definitely use them for evil. It's fairly easy to make someone fall in love with you or to get sex or to make someone dependent on you and effectively turn them into a servant. But the same methods can be used to make an existing relationship entered ethically deeper, or to improve desire and sex. Very two edged sword stuff, and that's one reason why most traditional spiritual traditions strongly emphasized ethics first, then the mystical teachings and why the wiser teachers of magic do the same.
I’ve invited paid subscribers to a few since I started charging for Substack, but I haven’t been doing them regularly or anything :) I could definitely do another one!
In fact, I was just recently thinking about doing one at Tiat. Maybe I’ll be able to pull that together soon ✨
"There’s an antique political cartoon I used to read, Pogo, which has a running joke about how the only person you can reasonably trust in an elected position is someone who refuses to run for that position."
The Hitchhikers's Guide to the Galaxy series makes the same joke, and the solution the Galaxy came up with is to have an elected President that they *pretend* runs things and who actually spends so much time being a media sensation and enjoying the trappings of power that they never notice that they're never called upon to make any actual decisions. (Those are made by The Man In The Shack.)
I have a criticism. I feel strongly or intuit you are deliberately witholding information about your initial induction. ( I've read 2 of your article on it )
In your other articles you admit to a culture and pattern of witholding yourself and your spiritual orientation ( esp the god word) from Eric because you fear rejection, judgement and didn't want to break the relationship.
I have the strongest overwhelming sense you are deliberately skimming the surface in your description or putting things in neutral language. Ie doing the same thing with the reader about Jason.
It also could be you are deliberately removing labels and brands of practitioners so prevent or preempt judgment from the reader. ( Or you fear it will be read as a recruitment or proselytizing).
( I have done the same thing to those I considered uninitiated , multiple times, but wanted to share a broader spiritual experience )
You present possible judgments from yourself including hypnosis without any evidence of such being presented. It feels like clue dropping. It leaves me wondering whether Jason gave you full Information, or whether you are
You clearly dump us in the middle of the story when Jason says 'he could mess with you'.
The problem is this deep distrust in the reader , prevents it reaching minds that could comprehend your experiences, and offer mutual insights;
Into Transmission, Religious recruitment, mysteries of spiritual charisma.
You have separated the results from the process leaving it sterile.
the topic of intersubjective awareness is a deeply worthy one, ( that I wish you had far more faith ; confidence in it's worth ( not belief ) .
These are different things.
Whether God is real refferent , is different to whether there are mysteries to plumb on sharing states of consciousness with other human beings ( however unscientific it might seem until you experience it a few times. And I think you have) .
But we can't really go on a deconstruction journey with you Into jharnic the mysteries of being, when you deliberately withold the path you quickly climbed.
( Although Christmas Humphreys describes this well as the Mystic path in "Concentration and Meditation" . As opposed to the occultic )
Your experience sounds far more like yogic nondualism realization than Buddhist A&p.
I think your particular plateau is unique so it doesn't matter to me if I believe in God. ( But have you read the Upanishads. That might respark things for you).
But you seem equally interested in the landscape of transpersonal psychology/ consciousness. There is nothing wrong with using the best language available for these conscious states.
You had a deep experience with intersubjective consciousnesses, maybe (Intersubjective Enlightenment) which is a mysterious yet wholly natural part of being a Human Being.
But so is falling in love.
( The Andrew Cohen cult went deep on Intersubjective Enlightenment before shattering. It might be interesting to talk to some of its members to see how the feel about that stage)
But it's an interesting topic on its own, as a meta discussion how it operates.
If you choose to speak more on this, my advice is full unqualified disclosure. It would be far more educational to get the full vantage point.
Things can be BOTH. Or multiple things at once.
There's always a gap between any induction experience and individual consciousness, and a mystery on why a particular one causes one to spark.
( But telling us you sparked without it , is unsatisfying.
It's like saying you went to a cookout and not saying what you ate . I don't need to join Brisket religion to share an appreciation for a meal. )
I was surprised your loss of faith was from a skeptic, mere unbelief, not from something in life or existential crises that shattered the state.
( I definitely don't think you have any obligation to enforce your realizations onto someone. The woman who thought so was being highly emotional manipulative, and blaming you for their own weakness. Seems like Fundie Christian conditioning energy in culture. )
May you find the confidence you need to fully disclose, so your experiences finds it's full and true audience . That's ultimately up to you.
I object to some aspects of the frame you are bringing here. I don’t expect anything in this area to work for everyone, and am *specifically* not trying to make it do that. This is a very deliberate, specific choice on my part, which is related to what I believe is virtuous and important in this time and place.
I also think it’s a bit much to end by saying something like “it’s up to you” when you open a 30-paragraph comment by telling me it’s a “criticism,” and also tell me I am “deliberately withholding” things (which I’m not). You obviously have an agenda here, you want me to behave in a certain way, and you are using loaded language to try and get me to do that. Are you better than the woman you described as having “fundie Christian energy”?
Hrrrm. Well, if you don't feel your consent was violated, it's none of my biz. And if you don't want to, errr, energetically shift other people, that's also your choice and not really anyone else's biz, except that you've invited comment by writing about it in this way.
One thing that most people who go far enough on the spiritual path experience is the ability to shift their own consciousness deliberately. I can shift into a few different modes, some are quick (seconds) other aren't, or aren't reliable (I can't do it every time.)
Then they realize they can alter other people's consciousness. I can't, so far as I know (I've never tried) give someone else a spiritual experience, and I don't think I'd try except with explicit consent unless they were in a very bad place and I judged it would help them. (Spiritual experiences aren't always immediately helpful. It's definitely possible to have a spiritual experience you are not ready for and cannot handle.)
But I can change people's moods using certain methods I've discovered, and this discovery is VERY common among practitioners. So then the question becomes, should I? Should they? Everyone who isn't profoundly immoral thinks about these questions: I even knew a psychopath who spent time considering the morality.
I generally want some sort of consent. That can be implicit: a friend has given me consent thru friendship to help them alter their mood for the better, I'd say and I sometimes do it with strangers who seem to be having a very bad day: if they resist, I stop, I don't force it on them (which in some cases I can do.)
It's really not that hard once you understand how consciousness and energy work, even to a moderate degree.
But I was taught that it's very dangerous to interfere with other people's spirituality, especially without consent. Once you meddle, you're on the hook.
Even with consent, well, people often don't really know what they want, and they don't understand the consequences. Actual enlightenment experiences can break a lot of bonds and patterns. People suddenly change what they care about, their personalities rewire, they often lose ambition, etc...
They may think they want that, but they don't always. If someone does the work themselves, they're on the hook. If you do some of it for them, you're also the hook.
Yes, this aligns with what others have said to me
When you say you “were taught” about these dangers and responsibilities, can you share who taught you? Or more about how you learned?
I can't share who, the teacher was a dangerous one in many ways, ironically and I don't want people seeking them out. Many are so desperate for spiritual progress that they will go to real teachers who are also morally dangerous.
Just long conversations mostly. The core is simple enough, the teacher was Hindu, and everyone is regarded as God. And you shouldn't mess with God: people are here telling their own stories and if you get involved in those stories there are consequences. If you interfere with what they want to experience you can get hurt fairly badly.
As that teacher put it "a 4 year old girl is as much God as I am."
Don't mess with God.
That person wasn't a good person in many ways (in some ways they were, people are complicated). The training was on how not to get hurt by interfering where you have no business. Since I tend to be a "helper" a lot of the warnings related to when it's OK to help and when you should mind your business.
Yup, that all makes sense. There are a lot of spiritual teachers who I don’t name/promote because I’m worried about their overall impact, but I learned a lot from them.
Have you ever seen a published list of warnings about when/when not to help, that you thought was a good list?
No. This was all oral teachings. I've never seen such things written down though sometimes magicians discuss related issues. Generally using abilities to harm others weakens your own defenses and any emotion/effect you push on someone else can also effect you, especially if the person you're pushing on has any ability themselves, or is loved by the Gods/Spirits.
What magicians don't tend to understand (some do) is the God angle. The weakest person in the world is still "God" and you can still get hurt.
Don't do anything to anyone else that you aren't willing to have happen to you is even more important in spirituality and magic than it is in normal life. The rebound is much accelerated, where normal evil is something you will pay for mostly after you die. (Not because you are being punished, usually you aren't. Buddha's "you aren't being punished for your anger, but by your anger applies strongly when the anchor of flesh is removed.)
Why am I reminded of Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" here? "Thou art God"...
Fairly fundamental to various strains of Hinduism. Everyone's God.
Read Yogananda's Autobiography if you want a pure shot of it right into your veins.
Ick. Can't edit. Quick addition: it isn't just spirituality that leads to these abilities. Serious magicians get them often, advanced students of Alexander Technique also get them.
And you can definitely use them for evil. It's fairly easy to make someone fall in love with you or to get sex or to make someone dependent on you and effectively turn them into a servant. But the same methods can be used to make an existing relationship entered ethically deeper, or to improve desire and sex. Very two edged sword stuff, and that's one reason why most traditional spiritual traditions strongly emphasized ethics first, then the mystical teachings and why the wiser teachers of magic do the same.
Yes, one hundred percent agreed!
I would love to hear more about gatherings you're convening in the Bay Area!! but I understand if you don't want to post details here
I’ve invited paid subscribers to a few since I started charging for Substack, but I haven’t been doing them regularly or anything :) I could definitely do another one!
In fact, I was just recently thinking about doing one at Tiat. Maybe I’ll be able to pull that together soon ✨
"There’s an antique political cartoon I used to read, Pogo, which has a running joke about how the only person you can reasonably trust in an elected position is someone who refuses to run for that position."
The Hitchhikers's Guide to the Galaxy series makes the same joke, and the solution the Galaxy came up with is to have an elected President that they *pretend* runs things and who actually spends so much time being a media sensation and enjoying the trappings of power that they never notice that they're never called upon to make any actual decisions. (Those are made by The Man In The Shack.)
I have a criticism. I feel strongly or intuit you are deliberately witholding information about your initial induction. ( I've read 2 of your article on it )
In your other articles you admit to a culture and pattern of witholding yourself and your spiritual orientation ( esp the god word) from Eric because you fear rejection, judgement and didn't want to break the relationship.
I have the strongest overwhelming sense you are deliberately skimming the surface in your description or putting things in neutral language. Ie doing the same thing with the reader about Jason.
It also could be you are deliberately removing labels and brands of practitioners so prevent or preempt judgment from the reader. ( Or you fear it will be read as a recruitment or proselytizing).
( I have done the same thing to those I considered uninitiated , multiple times, but wanted to share a broader spiritual experience )
You present possible judgments from yourself including hypnosis without any evidence of such being presented. It feels like clue dropping. It leaves me wondering whether Jason gave you full Information, or whether you are
You clearly dump us in the middle of the story when Jason says 'he could mess with you'.
The problem is this deep distrust in the reader , prevents it reaching minds that could comprehend your experiences, and offer mutual insights;
Into Transmission, Religious recruitment, mysteries of spiritual charisma.
You have separated the results from the process leaving it sterile.
the topic of intersubjective awareness is a deeply worthy one, ( that I wish you had far more faith ; confidence in it's worth ( not belief ) .
These are different things.
Whether God is real refferent , is different to whether there are mysteries to plumb on sharing states of consciousness with other human beings ( however unscientific it might seem until you experience it a few times. And I think you have) .
But we can't really go on a deconstruction journey with you Into jharnic the mysteries of being, when you deliberately withold the path you quickly climbed.
( Although Christmas Humphreys describes this well as the Mystic path in "Concentration and Meditation" . As opposed to the occultic )
Your experience sounds far more like yogic nondualism realization than Buddhist A&p.
I think your particular plateau is unique so it doesn't matter to me if I believe in God. ( But have you read the Upanishads. That might respark things for you).
But you seem equally interested in the landscape of transpersonal psychology/ consciousness. There is nothing wrong with using the best language available for these conscious states.
You had a deep experience with intersubjective consciousnesses, maybe (Intersubjective Enlightenment) which is a mysterious yet wholly natural part of being a Human Being.
But so is falling in love.
( The Andrew Cohen cult went deep on Intersubjective Enlightenment before shattering. It might be interesting to talk to some of its members to see how the feel about that stage)
But it's an interesting topic on its own, as a meta discussion how it operates.
If you choose to speak more on this, my advice is full unqualified disclosure. It would be far more educational to get the full vantage point.
Things can be BOTH. Or multiple things at once.
There's always a gap between any induction experience and individual consciousness, and a mystery on why a particular one causes one to spark.
( But telling us you sparked without it , is unsatisfying.
It's like saying you went to a cookout and not saying what you ate . I don't need to join Brisket religion to share an appreciation for a meal. )
I was surprised your loss of faith was from a skeptic, mere unbelief, not from something in life or existential crises that shattered the state.
( I definitely don't think you have any obligation to enforce your realizations onto someone. The woman who thought so was being highly emotional manipulative, and blaming you for their own weakness. Seems like Fundie Christian conditioning energy in culture. )
May you find the confidence you need to fully disclose, so your experiences finds it's full and true audience . That's ultimately up to you.
I object to some aspects of the frame you are bringing here. I don’t expect anything in this area to work for everyone, and am *specifically* not trying to make it do that. This is a very deliberate, specific choice on my part, which is related to what I believe is virtuous and important in this time and place.
I also think it’s a bit much to end by saying something like “it’s up to you” when you open a 30-paragraph comment by telling me it’s a “criticism,” and also tell me I am “deliberately withholding” things (which I’m not). You obviously have an agenda here, you want me to behave in a certain way, and you are using loaded language to try and get me to do that. Are you better than the woman you described as having “fundie Christian energy”?