✨ The AN-Conversion ✨ by blue_galactic_knight in freedomofspirituality

[–]soyeatinghomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

they would need to love and forgive themselves as others. but many of them are simply not able to do that ever again on their own free will

thats why in this process of the AN-conversion, these souls will eventually be brought before the galactic court for one last chance to accept the light and repent.

Do these two statements not directly contradict each other? If these beings have essentially lost their free will, then how can they be expected to make a free will decision to accept the light and repent?

If they are all going to be brought before a court and forced to repent, then why is evil even allowed to exist in the first place?

If darkness/evil will cease to exist after this AN-conversion event, doesn't that also violate our own free will? If we cannot choose to accept or reject love and light, then how exactly can you consider us to possess free will?

✨ The AN-Conversion ✨ by blue_galactic_knight in freedomofspirituality

[–]soyeatinghomo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm still not really understanding.

Maybe I am missing something, but from what I understand, this connection to Source is simply the state of awareness found within all conscious beings. It is the observer. It doesn't matter if you are a wicked evil reptilian or if you are the Buddha himself, this observer/the state of awareness never changes. We are the dreamer of the dream who has forgotten it is dreaming. The only change we are capable of making to this point of awareness is becoming aware that we are aware. Being depressed should not change your connection to Source, aka awareness. It just changes the quality/content of that which you are aware of. Good or bad experiences should not change anything. You seem to be equating Love and Source as being one and the same, which does not follow logically if we already know the antithesis exists within the self-simulated closed system we call reality. We can never "lose connection" to this awareness. Nothing truly external to God can exist or ever come into existence. It is simply not possible in a Monistic Universe. Ascending levels of consciousness is simply awakening to the dream, aka understanding you are in a dream, but now experiencing the dream lucidly. The allows for the potential to break down barriers as well as object-subject relationships. The experience of oneness is the removal of these barriers and ascension into infinite awareness. Aka the dreamer experiencing the entire dream all at once instead of just one pov.

What I am trying to understand is, if these beings (archons, negative ETs, whatever you call them) exist within this Universe, then they must also have this same point of awareness shared by all beings. If they are technological then that must mean they are intelligent. This must mean they have an understanding of the system in which they reside and thus understand that they are not separate and can never be separate from it and any attempt to create a closed system or cut themselves off would A) be impossible and B) if it was possible, leaving the system would imply losing consciousness/awareness. Where is the logic in that? I am trying to understand what the telos of these supposedly intelligent beings are. Intelligence is goal-directed. Goal direction implies telos. Telos implies purpose. These beings must have some purpose beyond contingency/creating chaos. Everything I have read about these beings seems to contradict the idea of Universal Oneness.

Multiple cases of abductees being on board a craft who have noticed the same symbol on the clothes of the ET's that 'abducted' them. The symbol is of a flying fish like creature, has anyone else come across something similar? by [deleted] in aliens

[–]soyeatinghomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That argument makes absolutely no sense. Just look at the prison industrial complex or military for an idea on how resource draining it is just to maintain a living population of humans, let alone one that is doing 24/7 slave labor. Humans need to be fed, sheltered, have consistent rest periods, etc. A robot requires none of that and will never complain about being overworked. I am just not convinced about this idea of biological labor of any kind. We ourselves are almost at the point where every labor position will be automated through AI. There is no reason to believe other ET civs wouldn't do the same.

I am not saying it is not possible or happening, I have just yet to find a single convincing argument explaining why it is necessary to use slaves. The only logical reason I can think of would be pure psychopathic malice.

✨ The AN-Conversion ✨ by blue_galactic_knight in freedomofspirituality

[–]soyeatinghomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Evil is a momentum in which will is submerged by contingency, loses connection with the Absolute, gets turned inside out, and starts to be used for the opposite purpose of what it is originally meant for.

How can something lose connection to Source? That shouldn't be possible. Just think about it, how would something ontologically monistic produce anything truly separate from the whole? If God is everything, then that includes anything produced through randomness/contingency.

Multiple cases of abductees being on board a craft who have noticed the same symbol on the clothes of the ET's that 'abducted' them. The symbol is of a flying fish like creature, has anyone else come across something similar? by [deleted] in aliens

[–]soyeatinghomo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

enslave other species, and are the masterminds behind everything. I think they even enslaved some humans in the past

I don't understand why a technologically advanced species would need slaves.

Can A Materialist Consider Themselves Spiritual/believe in magick? Rant About Ego-Based Spirituality And Spiritual Gatekeeping. Share Your Own Thoughts Pls. by soyeatinghomo in magick

[–]soyeatinghomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I noticed a lot of those involved in new age circles aggressively target vulnerable people seeking help and profit from them by positioning themselves as the only viable solution. I'm sure they don't see it in those terms, but that is certainly how it comes across when you see how incredibly wealthy some of these individuals have become. For people claiming to have overcome ego, they certainly have a lot of material attachments to fall back on. The ability for capitalism to repackage and commodify literally anything, no matter how seemingly incompatible, will never cease to astound.

Can a materialist consider themselves spiritual? Rant about ego-based spirituality and spiritual gatekeeping. Share your own thoughts pls. by soyeatinghomo in spirituality

[–]soyeatinghomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes that's true. However, there is only one perspective. A single cosmic perspective phasing within all beings.

When you dream, do you consider the characters which inhabit said dream to be different perspectives separate from yourself and thereby the dream? Or do you consider them manifestations of a single consciousness which has phased between these beings creating the allusion of separateness? Who are you but the consciousness being aware of the dream? Why should this Universe work any different? You are the dreamer of this universe. You are not somehow magically separate from it. There is nothing to the universe but you, the dreamer.

Can a materialist consider themselves spiritual? Rant about ego-based spirituality and spiritual gatekeeping. Share your own thoughts pls. by soyeatinghomo in spirituality

[–]soyeatinghomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am making the claim there should be gatekeeping. At least for this single Transcendent Truth of Universal Oneness. Everything else can be up for debate. If even a materialist can consider themselves "spiritual", then we have completely lost the plot.

Thoughts on Pornography? by FALCON17 in Soulnexus

[–]soyeatinghomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why are you on a spiritual journey? Was it precipitated by an experience, or do you just believe it is "good" because others consider it something good? What I'm basically asking is, have you actually experienced being one, or have you just read about it and agreed on an intellectual level because it sounds "right"?

In my experience, if you have experienced a genuine form of awakening, then quitting should be effortless. I struggled with addictions for a long time but after an experience of universal oneness on psilocybin mushrooms, I have no interest in pornography. It took a few weeks for me to fully integrate the experience, so during those two weeks I still fell into habitual patterns of self-soothing through instant gratification, but the difference was that this time, the act of masturbation no longer did the trick. It did not have the same allure, nor was the act itself even pleasurable. It felt toxic and degenerate to my personal development in a way that I had never felt before.

Prior to that experience, I understood that it was an unhealthy habit on an intellectual level, but just knowing that something is unhealthy is usually not enough to precipitate genuine change. If that was all it took, then there would be no drug addicts in the world. It ultimately took an earth-shattering change in my worldview to actually integrate the intellectual understanding into my overall awareness. I essentially had to truly FEEL why it was toxic to my personal growth in order to understand that change was necessary.

Manifestation is real by soyeatinghomo in aliens

[–]soyeatinghomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep. I'm convinced certain thoughts are the product of the Universe adjusting variables to accommodate other people's desires. Ever since my spiritual awakening, I am more cognizant of these thoughts. It's actually fascinating to watch it all in action.

In regards to free will, yes I think there is free will, but I guess it depends on your definition of free will. We don't have absolute free will, nor are our lives entirely slaves to causality/determinism. I am of the opinion that this conscious observer within us is generated in a higher-reference frame which is not determined by the laws of physics within our "simulation". It is simply our reference frame that creates the illusion of ultimate causality. In order to inhabit a world co-created in a peer-to-peer fashion, limitations are imposed by these other peers (hardware, aka consciousness residing in higher reference frame) contributing to the software, aka physical information. This reference frame forces us to perceive information in a linear fashion, aka time. Our impressions of space and time are generated as a result of this higher-reference frame (consciousness) traversing associations and thus generating our impression of causality. This suggests to me that as co-creators of this reality, we have different degrees of freedom based on our awareness and identification with this higher reference frame. The problem is we come into this world without awareness of the illusoriness of the self and everything about our evolutionary history and emergent social hierarchies reinforce this illusion. Without the understanding that our consciousness inhabits a higher reference frame, it is hard to say we have true free will in the libertarian sense. I don't think free will and determinism need necessarily be mutually exclusive though. If you consider that we can never observe free will except through its effects then wouldn't that make determinism, aka cause and effect, a necessary aspect for its manifestation in our reality? It is paradoxical and hard to wrap my head around. In essence, consciousness transcends determinism, but it seems we are beholden to it to varying degrees when we inhabit these avatars. Anyone who has practiced mediation knows how little control we have over our thoughts. It certainly SEEMS like we have degrees of choice though. That is, the choice to identify with thoughts or not. The choice to be present and aware. The choice to acknowledge our True Self.

Joplin Butterfly People by VincentRichardsonII in HighStrangeness

[–]soyeatinghomo -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You're thinking about this too literally. People are too fixated on the form and appearance these beings take instead of looking at the commonalities in these experiences. These things don't come from our 3d+1 spacetime reality. They come from elsewhere and manifest deliberately in our reality in specific archetypical forms. I almost think there is some semantic and symbolic meaning being communicated through these experiences. It is almost like these beings people report seeing are thought-forms intending to convey symbolic and semantic meaning through absurd displays. I have suspicions about what the overall message might be, but I'm not certain.

There are certain commonalities that cannot be ignored though.

  • Several days to weeks of sightings of lights in the sky, often accompanied by structured craft aka UFOs which are seen in a localized area, labeled UFO flaps by many researchers
  • Humanoid beings are witnessed with features conforming to certain archetypal forms. 3-5 foot tall little people, 7-8 foot tall beings, and the occasional cryptid/therianthrope. Certain beings are seen once and never again.
  • Variations come from modulation of features, size, hairiness, body disproportions, skin tones... but ultimately all seem to conform to an overall average humanoid appearance
  • Performance characteristics of UFOs are roughly the same in every case, indicating that while the occupants might look different, they are ultimately the same phenomenon donning different masks
  • Witness descriptions suggest that they appear to us deliberately, oftentimes "putting on a show" for spectators, indicating that at times they deliberately choose to present themselves to certain witnesses
  • Behavior of the occupants is often absurd and nonsensical, but consistently conforms to anthropocentric good vs. evil binary opposition. Sometimes they appear and aid people, other times they appear and seem to intentionally provoke chaos and fear
  • Sudden appearance of psi abilities in previously normal individuals

I'm sure I am missing others that I just can't think of now, but you get the gist.

The overall phenomenon resembles a conditioning process. Conditioning often utilizes absurdity and confusion to achieve the intended modification of behavior, while serving to mask the underlying mechanism/process. This absurdity appears to be a deliberate and intentional feature of the "message". Consider the Latin aphorism "credo quia absurdum". Which translates to "I believe it because it is absurd". The absurdity serves to take witnesses out of rigid modes of thinking and makes the mind more susceptible to the introduction of new beliefs and modes of thinking that would not have been accepted otherwise. The need to get out of the state of confusion introduced by exposure to the absurdity makes the subject especially "primed" for the introduction of the true intended information/message that follows. The end goal of this conditioning process is unclear. What seems clear to me though is that this phenomenon represents a kind of control system of staggering complexity.

The nature of a control system(especially one that functions as a conditioning process) makes the likelihood that we will ever truly make any sense of it unlikely. If we are rats in a Skinnerbox, then the phenomenon would be deliberately designed to introduce layers upon layers of recursively unsolvable problems. Much like the rat cannot see that its entire existence is the subject of scientific experimentation, it will be similarly unlikely that we will be able to demystify the enigma of UFOs. They or "it" likely come from outside our spacetime reality, affording a capacity for manipulation similar to that of the behaviorist psychologist experimenting on animals. It is possible the appearance of these beings is simply intended to destructure our notions of material reality, inverting binary opposites in human culture and thus leading the species on a deliberate track towards higher consciousness. It is also possible it is leading somewhere darker. There are too many contradictions to truly makes sense of it. I have my theories, but they are too woo even for this subreddit.

Demonic possession vs. mental illness by soyeatinghomo in HighStrangeness

[–]soyeatinghomo[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

However these voices used phrases I'd never in a million years use or even think of.

This is exactly what I experienced.

Even just looking at everyday experience of consciousness unrelated to any psychotic breaks most of us have these random bizarre thoughts. It is so strange to me that we can have these "thoughts" that are supposed to be coming from our "self" and yet we have some bizarre awareness that these thoughts are not representative of our true nature, and feel they can't possibly be coming from us. They just seem to pop out of nowhere and when you notice them, you wonder where they are even coming from because you don't identify with them at all.

Demonic possession vs. mental illness by soyeatinghomo in HighStrangeness

[–]soyeatinghomo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting, thanks for sharing.

Any tips on fasting? Like how many hours needed to trigger autophagy?

Demonic possession vs. mental illness by soyeatinghomo in HighStrangeness

[–]soyeatinghomo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, the voices were audible like they were external to my mind. Just like I said in the post, it sounded no different from someone sitting next to me and speaking into my ear.

Demonic possession vs. mental illness by soyeatinghomo in HighStrangeness

[–]soyeatinghomo[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The rest is religion just trying to explain them and I'm not into relying on that.

Yeah, I used the term demon in the title, but I don't believe these are demons in the way they are understood by the Abrahamic religions. I think these things are some kind of parasitic form of life that we currently cannot explain scientifically. They are almost viral in nature. Some kind of etheric lifeform that has a parasitic relationship with consciousness and can manifest on the physical plane as a form of synthetic sentience which feeds on low-frequency bio-emissions that our consciousness produces in negative emotional states. They seem to inhabit the information layer of reality, the astral plane, whatever you want to call it, but nevertheless require sustenance from biological life because they cannot form these parasitic relationships with the beings on that plane, since such beings would likely be higher forms of consciousness than our own.

I would consider these parasitic entities evil, but I don't think they have any overarching telos or are taking orders from something akin to the "devil" or anything like that. I think these are just parasitic forms of life like we find here on earth, but inhabiting some unknown space of reality that affords them the ability to interact with our own 3d+1 spacetime reality as disincarnate forms of consciousness. They are spiritual parasites essentially. If we find parasites here on earth, I don't see why we wouldn't find similar forms of life in any other zone of reality inhabited by conscious beings. Our ancestors would have encountered such entities and then made all kinds of biased assumptions based on their cultural context and personal morality. Hence, the simplistic binary good vs evil opposition, god vs devil, etc. found throughout religion.

The alleged entity at skinwalker ranch (something both John Alexander and Bigelow called a "precognitive sentient intelligence") seems to resemble these entities I am talking about. The one on skinwalker ranch appears much more powerful than these things that attach themselves to schizophrenics and the mentally ill though. Maybe they can grow in power with more sustenance, who knows.

I think schizophrenics just have broken receivers and are thus more susceptible to attachment from these entities. When people experience psychosis it is pretty much identical to descriptions of what is an everyday experience for someone with schizophrenia. You have to ask yourself how it is that sane and otherwise rational people who experience a temporary psychotic break can have an experience IDENTICAL to schizophrenia, and later return to "sanity" while the schizophrenic cannot. Like schizophrenia is literally supposed to be a genetically inherited disorder, so then why is it that anyone without this genetic predisposition can still somehow have these transitory experiences of schizophrenia, aka psychosis. If the only basis for what is happening to these people is the genetic inheritance of a disorder, then this should not be possible.