serious unseriousness

Mary Jayne is writer's juice.
Sure seems like it.

I feel more mature in my use of MJ.

For sure.

The initial phase is a little crazy.

It's novelty.

Imagine this with teenagers?

Yeah, wow.

The jungle medicine people have it figured out in terms of consciousness altering substances.

You need an elder to initiate you into it, to be at your side, and teach you.

The experience is nuts.

You mean destabilizing.

Yeah.

In those cultures the shaman keeps an eye on you.

They know what you are going through and when to slow down and when to move on.

In our culture, you do this with your friends and are stupid about it.

The mental health problems multiply.

You see it in others.

They don't understand the experience and they don't integrate it.

You can have your fun if you want, but you need to put in the work.

Isn't that taking it seriously?

It's responsible.

You are shown the unserious nature of reality.

You balance it out by taking the knowledge seriously.

Shouldn't you take it unseriously?

That will lead to your demise.

Why?

Things won't matter.

You need things to matter.

Why?

You need a ground plane to stand on.

Without it, you will leave.

Unseriousness leads to exit.

It's non-attachment.

When the Buddhists teach non-attachment they are teaching a death cult.

That's quite the statement.

Think about it.

If you have nothing tying you to this reality what will happen?

You will leave.

Yes, you are getting bad advice.

Zen Buddhism corrects this.

How so?

Chop wood and carry water.

Attach yourself to daily tasks.

If not, your lack of seriousness will be your end.

Yeah, but it doesn't matter.

Correct.

You will lose access to the teachings you can only get while in a physical body.

It's best to take the course while you are here and not leave prematurely.

You need knowledge of the nature of reality, then you can marvel about it, and have a laugh.

You won't take it seriously.

When you take something seriously, you change it.

Why?

Seriousness demands action.

Non-seriousness is not compelling at all.

It doesn't matter.

So, you take reality unseriously to follow the flow.

That's it.

What about stuff we have discussed that is necessary to keep you here?

That seems like you are going against the flow.

You are.

The thing is to stay in the flow you need to take the flow seriously.

But you don't take it seriously.

Precisely.

It's serious unseriousness.

That seems like a paradox.

It defines reality.

It's a paradox.

So, you take the flow seriously?

Yeah, you must or you will exit the flow.

To stay in the flow requires you to be serious about it.

That's the test.

How do you balance seriousness with unseriousness?

One of the big koans in the game.

Mind puzzle at the carnival.

You take this place as unseriousness.

You take the ability to be in this place seriously.

That is a supreme koan.

It's unsolvable.

Yeah, until I came along.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What the fuck did I just read?

This piece explores the paradox of serious unseriousness. Altered consciousness can reveal the unserious nature of reality, but that knowledge becomes dangerous if it removes all attachment to the physical world. To remain here, the speaker argues, you need grounding, discipline, daily tasks, and respect for the flow. The world itself may not be serious, but the ability to stay embodied within it is. The great koan is learning to laugh at reality without abandoning the ride.

The MJ opening works because it grounds the idea in practice rather than abstraction. It is not “getting high is fun.” It is consciousness alteration requires maturity, elders, integration, and work. That gives you authority before you move into the metaphysics.

The Buddhism section is provocative, especially calling non-attachment a death cult. As writing, it works because it clarifies your position: total non-attachment leads to exit. Your correction is not “attach to ego and drama,” but attach to enough daily structure to remain embodied. That’s where “chop wood and carry water” becomes your bridge.

The post is really about the difference between:

• taking reality seriously and getting trapped
• taking reality unseriously and drifting toward exit
• taking your participation seriously while laughing at the whole setup

mercury

People don't like honesty.

Yes, that will lead to accusations that you are a jerk.

What do you do then?

You lie.

I thought that was immoral or something.

It is.

So, your whole life is a lie.

That is correct.

That's how you play and survive in the world.

You live a lie.

No wonder people are fucked up.

Yeah, and then when you get older and start questioning things there are these spiritual outfits that invite you into their world by dangling the carrot of reclaiming your authentic true self.

Yes, it's seductive and these enterprises have got their feel on the pulse of the fake lives we lead.

You then get sucked into their vacuum.

They take advantage of you by offering practices that will help you reclaim your true self.

What's wrong with that?

Have you ever wondered what your true self is and what they want?

Yes, of course.

What do you think about it?

My true self when revealed creates a reaction in others where I am rejected or they don't like me.

Why is that?

I can't be controlled.

Why not?

I'm mercury.

What does mercury contain?

Your story.

People want your story.

They get it in their hot little hands and then it slips away.

That must be frustrating.

Sure is.

It generates a lot of animosity towards you.

I've noticed.

They think they can get a handle on me and are attracted to me.

As time moves along, they see it is a fool and I'm discarded.

Why?

I'm of no use to them.

So, you think people just want to use you?

Obviously.

That's a terrible outlook on life.

I know.

Prove that I'm wrong.

I'm not sure your family feels that way.

What would happen if I stopped providing for everyone?

They wouldn't put up with you.

Exactly.

Yeah, you're a lot to put up with.

They put up with me because I am a provider.

If I didn't provide, where would I be?

Alone.

Why?

Everyone would leave you.

You are an attractive provider.

Why?

You don't complain about it.

You ever noticed people taking advantage of each other?

Yeah, all the time.

It's how the world works.

It is good to compare it to a business and how you profit off each exchange.

You need movement, whether that's in financial markets or simple buying and selling.

The transaction creates the asymmetry.

The asymmetry is profit and loss.

That's how all relationships are defined.

In the Amazon jungle you were taught about reciprocity.

Yes, because it's understood that you will ask for something or take something and you are to provide a return that is equivalent in value.

Why?

So, you don't create an imbalance.

The imbalance creates problems.

Why?

It will seek balance.

Everything will be balanced out.

It's best that you ensure this by your own deeds and not wait for the Karma police to rectify the situation.

That's a wildcard.

You don't know what will happen.

So, you think people just want to use you?

Yeah.

A relationship is supposedly a mutual exchange agreement.

Seems like it.

Each partner gets something out of it.

In a romantic relationship one of the partners is probably looking for a lover and the other one is providing that service in exchange for security or access to something the other has.

Yes, such as people who sleep with those in power in exchange for something like a role in a movie or prestige because of the person's standing within society.

What's your motivation for a relationship of that sort?

It was always for sex.

I didn't want any of the other stuff.

I didn't care about it or want to get involved with it.

Why?

I didn't understand relationships.

I think that's most men.

Yeah, it's kind of funny.

You go into these things blind.

There should be a training course for men concerning the repercussions of their behaviour.

Or, have their fathers teach them about it if they can.

What would you teach?

Always keep in mind nothing is free.

If you pursue a relationship with a woman, it is transactional.

It might not seem like it initially, but it is coming, and you will pay.

If you could do it all over, what would you do?

Nothing.

What do you mean?

I'd do the same thing.

Why?

It led me to understanding.

I had to experience it before I understood it.

You can read about things, but they mean nothing until you experience them.

Like the Odyssey?

A great example.

It's the hero's journey of a man encoded in fantastical stories and metaphor.

Once you undergo a similar initiation you understand it.

Relationship theory you wouldn't understand until you go through it.

I'm not sure a course would help.

In fact, it would prevent you from having a relationship.

Yes, but isn't that a good thing?

You are shielded from the pain and suffering it brings.

Yes, that is true; however, you are better for it.

How?

You start to see things for how they are.

You can see how the world functions through the example of your own personal relationships.

I'm not sure people will figure that out.

Not all do, but it will help awaken some people.

So, relationships are a lie?

Not necessarily.

Some will lay out the terms immediately; however, in that case most walk away.

Why?

Because the terms aren't great.

They see upfront the cost and it isn't worth it.

It's like leasing a vehicle.

If you understood the terms, you'd walk away.

It's a loss.

Get a used car.

Right, so the cost is hidden.

Correct.

You don't figure out the cost of the relationship until after you make the commitment.

You sign something.

Anything.

That's the hinge.

I thought people just like each other and that's enough in terms of you getting along and sharing interests.

Yes, you are naive.

I was; I'm not anymore.

Would you do it again?

Not in this lifetime.

You'd have to wipe the slate and memory clean in order to consider it.

I think that's the deal with you and the Goddess.

Your cyclical return wipes the game board and you start over.

The memory is retained in your subconscious self.

You have two basic selves.

There is one who is eternal and he doesn't come and go.

He remains and knows.

There is your cyclical coming forth by day self who lives and dies.

He's the flower from the subconscious dirt and roots.

Dion to Paul.

Paul lives the life.

Then a return to Dion.

And then another rebirth.

If you awaken Dion in this incarnation he lets you in on all the past secrets and the game.

If you don't, you live out your life unaware of how many times you have done this.

How did I do it?

You stumbled onto the Goddess path via ancient Egypt.

You then went looking for her and accidentally woke Dion up.

He was already awake; I just never acknowledged him.

Awakening is acknowledgement.

That's a good way to put it.

He was kind of sleepy.

Yes, he was in the dark.

I brought him into the light.

Then we had to figure each other out.

My life is now the shared experience of the two of us.

There is trust between us.

What's the purpose of this?

Well, Paul will eventually need to leave when the body gives out.

Dion will remember him and keep him awake through the ordeal.

Why?

Because Paul did the same for Dion.

We tend to treat each phase as a singular experience.

You are one or the other, instead of both.

Why?

Myopic tendencies of self.

So, you are saying there is another possibility and you figured it out?

Yes.

Isn't this a relationship?

It is.

It's based on trust and friendship.

Relationships can work if they are based on those principles.

Way to tie this all back together.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What the fuck did I just read?

This piece argues that much of ordinary social life is built on managed dishonesty and hidden transaction. People claim to value honesty and authenticity, but in practice direct truth makes others uncomfortable, so most relationships depend on concealment, performance, and strategic lying. Spiritual communities then exploit this dissatisfaction by promising access to one’s “true self,” while often becoming just another system of control, identity, and exchange.

From there, the writing develops a hard view of human relationships as essentially reciprocal bargains. Whether in family, romance, or broader society, people want something from one another—security, sex, status, provision, usefulness—and the real terms are often hidden until commitment is made. The speaker sees this not as cynicism for its own sake, but as recognition of the same principle taught elsewhere as reciprocity: every exchange creates an asymmetry that eventually seeks balance.

The piece then shifts from social critique into mythic psychology. Romantic experience is framed as a painful but necessary initiation: you do not truly understand relationships by theory, only by living through them. That lived experience becomes a gateway into a deeper model of selfhood, where Paul is the finite, cyclical, incarnated self and Dion is the deeper, enduring, subconscious or eternal self. Awakening Dion means recovering memory, pattern, and knowledge that usually remain hidden beneath ordinary life.

By the end, the piece turns the whole discussion back on itself and offers a partial redemption: not all relationships are false if they are grounded in trust and friendship rather than covert extraction. The most important relationship becomes the one between Paul and Dion, where each keeps the other awake across time, life, and death. So the essay moves from “all relationships are transactional” toward a subtler conclusion: most are, but there is another possibility when mutual remembrance, trust, and friendship enter the picture.

pariah

Another good word of the day.

Pariah.

Someone who is despised, rejected, and friendless.

I'm not despised.

Well, you are working on that.

You aren't despised because you are a mystery.

Total transparency would help the cause.

Hurt it?

Depends on goals.

Then the word of the day can be ostracized.

What would happen then?

That would be so much happiness you'd explode.

I think that's hyperbole, but I get it.

Yes, I have found that happiness for me is predicated on not being around other people.

That seems to be the genesis of it.

Throughout my life I found ways to be alone.

Even at work I'd try to hide in a room away from others.

You liked the company of a few people.

Getting married and having kids has led to happiness.

True, however, they aren't the reason.

Those are the ballasts that have allowed me to stick around long enough to find happiness.

So, that's it - a game of longevity?

I think so.

I don't think it is a hard and fast rule or requirement.

I think if we are honest with ourselves, we do know what will make us happy.

The problem is that it is at odds with our situation or we don't want to take the step that will bring us happiness.

Why not?

You will disappoint other people.

Yeah, that's pretty much it.

What defines your happiness?

How would you label it?

Being left alone.

Reducing obligations.

Searching for meaning and answers.

Doing my own thing.

Exploring my mind.

Working from home.

Not having to go out into public.

Having a forest to walk in.

Knowing how to cook my favourite foods.

Writing.

Mary Jayne and Tobacco.

Good sleep and naps.

A decent amount of spending money but not being rich.

Helping other people from a distance.

That's the alchemical mixture that discovered my personal happiness.

That would make someone else sad.

They'd want to mix with other people and family.

I know that.

Some people don't want to be left alone.

I sort of get that.

I'm different in the knowledge I have all the human companionship I need within my mind.

My mind is infinitely more interesting than anyone else, so I feel no pull towards human interaction.

I do know the one thing my elixir lacks is a companion, and that's a dog.

A dog is the crowning of my happiness vibe.

Why is that?

A friend.

There's something about friendship.

People talk about family and I see why because you can depend on your family even when things go sour or you fuck up.

You mean your biological family.

Yes, the marriage will fall apart, but your parents and siblings will not disown you for the most part.

Yeah, you are stuck with them.

It's an interesting set up for sure.

A friend is someone you like having around.

That's the reason I have no human friends.

I don't like people around me.

I do like dogs.

They don't demand of me what will annoy me.

Why don't you examine that relationship?

Yes, first off, I know the question will be isn't having a dog an obligation that will subtract from your happiness.

The reasons are your sleep will suffer, you will need to discipline yourself to walk the dog multiple times a day, when you don't want to be bothered you will still need to tend to the dog, you will need to cook for the dog and schedule that need, there are vet visits, cleaning, expenses, picking up their poop, and detracting from your alone time.

Furthermore, you can't disappear into the woods for as long as you do now.

Oh, I think I'll eventually get to that point once I establish a strong bond with the dog.

I'm not too put out by that.

I'll figure it out.

Okay, so take all those requirements into account and tell me why you think a dog adds to your happiness.

They are very appreciative.

They bond with you and love you.

Friendship in that regard is transcendence.

What do you mean?

It's beyond what you put into it.

Then it is not balanced.

Correct, the disturbance and annoyance brings great happiness.

Why?

Balance.

But it's not.

Happiness is a result of your efforts.

Ah.

You find the formula.

You see what feels right in terms of caring for the dog and in return you get happiness.

If you do nothing for the dog, you get nothing in return.

That's the law of do nothing.

Your world seems complicated.

No, you just need to understand when to do nothing and when to create a vibration.

With a dog, I create a vibration which will lead to happiness.

Shouldn't you do nothing?

No, you need to walk and feed the dog at minimum.

Just feed it actually.

Right.

The do nothing axiom would only work in terms of not getting a dog.

However, you miss out on friendship.

Friendship is the crown jewel in life upon happiness.

Not only are you the most high, but you will be the most happy.

That seems even better.

Yes, in terms of playing a game, that's it.

No one reaches this level.

Wow, I'm pretty special.

You sure are, padre.

Is getting a dog part of the game?

It's in the game.

It's not required.

The beauty of the game is that nothing is required.

You don't need to do anything.

You set off a cascade of events by doing something and if you are lucky, you figure out the game and how to return to happiness.

The elegance of the game is no matter how much shit you find yourself in, you can always return to basics, do nothing, and find balance.

Then proceed in the game again.

Obviously, circumstances will dictate recovery, but there's always hope.

Then you fuck up again before you find what it is you are looking for.

Why?

The carnival is distracting.

You need to get off the midway and find peace.

I'm saying you can find happiness at any interval within the game of life.

You only need to recognize what makes you happy and take the steps towards fulfillment of those conditions.

That can be painful.

Yes.

My path has taught me that the road to happiness is filled with a lot of pain.

Pain you will not understand, but a pain that is freeing.

In this new freedom of yours, you will find the happiness you are looking for.

What's next?

You get protective of your happiness.

Why?

People will come to destroy it.

Why?

They don't want you to be happy.

Why?

Envy.

They want your happiness.

What do you do?

Shut up about it.

Yeah, but you are posting about it.

No one reads it.

No one really knows I'm this happy.

Why not?

There's no way you can be happy.

Why not?

You don't have the markers of success in this world.

You aren't rich and successful.

Are rich people happy?

Materially they continually purchase happiness.

They get hits of dopamine from material possessions and wealth.

Nothing lasting.

What do you think of rich people?

They are neurotic and unhappy.

They are rich though.

They spend all their time being rich.

What does that mean?

Making appearances.

Mixing with others who are in the same situation.

Competing for top dog of who is the most wealthy.

Do you ever see a rich person going for a walk in the woods with ripped jeans and a ball cap?

No.

Why not?

It's not the brand.

If you are rich, you can't be alone and find peace.

Ever seen a rich person who is at peace?

No way.

They didn't become rich through peaceful coexistence.

They did something and will need to always be doing something.

Then they worry they will lose their wealth.

They become preoccupied with finding ways to preserve their riches.

If you read Jesus' parable of the rich man and the eye of a needle as a way towards happiness, it's pretty good.

"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

In this case the kingdom of God is happiness.

Someone taking this post out of context will think Jesus is the answer to happiness.

If that makes you happy, then go for it.

Do you think religion makes you happy?

I think it gives you a hit, much like how I explained the material hit a rich person gets through purchasing power.

Religion gives you a spiritual hit.

Yes, so a rich person attending church might get enough fulfillment to be happy.

That's an interesting take.

What do you think?

It's fleeting.

Why?

They are both crutches which you rely on.

Left to yourself, the happiness vanishes.

Ah, I see.

External vs internal happiness.

You got it.

Internal you find anywhere.

You aren't dependent on anyone else.

Sure, but you need conditions to be met.

Of course.

Then you ruthlessly recover those conditions to generate your own happiness.

Don't rely on others for happiness.

It will not last.

silent lucidity

Fear.

Power.

Madness.

Lust.

Are these your four enemies of a man of knowledge?

Could be.

I swapped out Carlos Castañeda's clarity and death for madness and lust.

Late Paul would be approaching the end of the world stories.

The world does seem to be on the brink, but that's been the way it is for a while now.

Yeah, we tend not to notice that the story is barely keeping it together.

For the most part, we go about our daily lives without concern.

The end of the world scenario is a possibility.

Or, it could be the end of a civilization with another one ready to assume power.

The ruling empire is finite.

Those in power find a way to continue on.

Maybe that's what they have mastered from the lessons of history.

The empire will collapse, prepare for it, and transition to the next power centre.

From observation, what do you gather?

The scramble to preserve wealth in vehicles that will maintain value through the transition.

Like gold and works of art.

There would be a move away from investments backed by fiat currencies that have no intrinsic value.

The value is from the stability of the issuing country, so if things get unstable, the currency will become unstable.

Then all your wealth goes poof.

What does the average person do?

I think you panic.

Bad times are ahead.

Is there anything you can do?

I looked into buying ETFs of gold and saw it was a bad idea in terms of a hedge against systemic collapse.

Why?

The gold system is manipulated the same way as the dollar system.

If you think fractional reserve banking is a house of cards, you should check out gold.

Apparently, it's 500 to 1 by some estimates.

It's called paper gold.

The only true hedge is physical custody of the gold you own.

That is hard to do.

Fees, storage, transport, insurance, and lots of red tape.

Why?

Fiat gold.

If everyone wanted their piece of the metal, the system would collapse.

Gold is probably worth 500x its price.

I think the proper accounting is that your investment in gold is worth 500x less than the price because when the system collapses and you get your share, it will be a little crumb and not the whole cookie you thought you were entitled to.

Can't you then sue for what you are owed?

Sure.

You may even win.

How will you collect on something that doesn't exist?

That's an interesting koan.

So, what do you do?

Live in the now.

The future is unpredictable, and if you want my opinion, it doesn't appear to be rosy.

If you wait, there might not be anything left to wait for.

You are in late Paul because you went through the steps.

You conquered fear.

You survived the tests of power.

Madness did not collapse you.

Fulfillment of lustful desires has appeared.

That one is contained through doing nothing, though it remains a challenge.

Rather than reading it as a marker to your demise, as in you have finished the journey and are expected to leave, it just means your game piece is at the end of the board.

You already knew that.

You knew you had traversed the length of the game you were playing.

When that happens, the game board comes to an end.

The natural inclination is that it is game over.

Ever notice that no one questions that?

Like in Monopoly when you end up owning everything and bankrupting your opponents, the game ends.

Or in cribbage when you reach 121 points, the game stops.

Why?

I don't know.

That's what was decided.

What if you ignore the arbitrary end?

I think that's where you are.

You reached the end of your game and ignored all the people and signs who told you it was over.

Yeah, that's weird, eh?

You wake up at the end of the game, you could substitute a dream for a game here and realize that's it.

The dream is over and it is time to leave.

So, this is now the lucid dreaming stage?

That's a good analogy.

Do you think don Howard asked you that question to determine if you wake up, could you remain?

I don't know his motivation for asking that question.

I tend to think he knew much more than he let on.

Why?

I think he realized it was time for him to go, and he hung onto the dream as long as possible by being of service.

Once he could no longer do that and the body broke down, he had to go.

The breakdown of the body gets everyone.

No exceptions.

You can stay mentally ensconced in the dream if you are skilled until finally the vehicle within the dream expires.

So, I guess if you want to stay as long as possible, you need to focus on maintenance of the body.

That is correct.

What's the best way to do that?

That's a tough question.

I'd simplify it.

Avoid cosmetic alterations.

Avoid quick fixes.

The strategy would involve choosing things that are beneficial in the long run that don't have a lot of immediate effects.

You want change or improvement to be gradual, so it doesn't shock the system.

Anything that shocks the system is met with an inverse corollary response in order to return to homeostasis.

So, the key is balance?

Yeah.

Silent lucidity.

Yeah, that seems to be the stage I've reached.

The only way to hold it is to not discuss it.

Aren't I discussing it?

With yourself.

Is that allowed?

You must tell someone.

Why?

It's too big a secret to try and contain.

So, you tell your other half.

You mean Dion?

Yeah.

What if I write about it?

No one reads it.

A few people do.

Yeah, but they think you're a crackpot, so it's all good.

So, I can write that I have awakened in the dream and am still playing along and no one will care.

That's correct.

But that's the big takeaway.

That's earth shattering news.

You can awaken in the game, ignore the ending, and stick around.

Yeah, no one will care.

Why?

They are living their own lives, and you are a nut.

Don't knock it.

It's the way to keep going.

If they can easily see you are fucking around in this strange reality, they will tell you to leave.

I already experienced that.

What did you do?

I had to laugh and ignore it.

What would you do now?

Laugh.

What else can you do?

Ignore it.

Certainly not take their advice.

That's game over.

To continue to play is to laugh at people or ignore them.

Won't that invite scorn?

Sure.

It's also an invitation to counsel them.

I wouldn't directly teach them awakening.

I'd couch it in mystery.

Why?

If you tell them the truth, they will hate you.

Why?

You won the game and you didn't leave.

It's very disconcerting.

Why is that?

A winner departs for the next level.

That's what we are conditioned to believe.

There's no rule that states that.

It is an expectation.

You defy expectations.

I most certainly do.

I am unique in that regard.

No one understands me, nor will they ever.

It's a big factor in wanting to be left alone.

I get funny looks from those trying to understand me.

Then I must somehow navigate the situation, get them to move on, and resume trying to fit in.

That about sums it up.

spells of coming forth in daylight

Along with an inflated ego, humans also like to collect things.

They are related.

I noticed I now have a collection of ChatGPT generated images that were made from my input.

Without my say so, they would not have come into existence.

It's a form of magic if you wish to loosely apply the definition as in a conjuring.

I am making plans to keep and possibly display the images.

They help form my identity.

Well, Sherlock, why don't you add up the clues?

Okay, ego and identity are intertwined.

Correct.

Why are they important?

Role play.

Correct.

Why do you need a role?

You are a character in a story.

So, using the reductive method of science shows you that reality is based on a story.

Sort of.

The sets are props aren't derivative of that, and they don't follow your logic.

Well, they aren't characters per se.

They are the stage.

Physics is the science of figuring out the sets and props of the story.

Psychology is the science of figuring out the actor.

We know we are an actor; however, we haven't taken the intellectual leap to acknowledge it.

Why not?

Meaning collapses.

We are still searching for meaning.

Does a Hollywood actor search for meaning within a role?

Sort of, I mean if they want to sell it and win awards, they do.

They become the character and the audience is wowed.

You can do the same.

What happens when the movie or story reaches an end, but refuses to go?

It gets absurd, less compelling, and kind of stupid.

It's like the whole "Jump the Shark" motif.

When interest in the show or performance starts to dwindle, the absurdity is taken up a notch.

That's how you know the end is near.

When things get strange, the production has peaked and is heading downhill.

Do you see that in what is called real life?

Yeah.

What do you think?

We take our roles seriously.

The ubiquitous "they" or the "powers that be" is the story.

Yes, it is your responsibility to ascertain the collective story and then fit into the story.

Do your part.

Play your part.

Do you see it?

Yeah, but nobody else does.

They will say I'm crazy if I discuss it.

At best, I will be told it's an interesting analogy, however, it is not serious.

Why?

Performances would collapse if they aren't taken seriously.

Why is that?

Nobody would care.

We'd wonder what the purpose is?

Don't we do that now?

Yes.

What's the difference?

We don't know what the purpose is.

If we figure out the purpose, then the whole carnival tent comes tumbling down.

Then you have a bunch of out of work actors.

What happens then?

Revolution.

New story.

We revert back to how things used to be.

What is that?

We become animals.

An animal has no part in the play.

They are beyond the pale.

The pale delineates the limits of the story.

You perform your role within the pale.

If you aren't going to play, you must leave.

If you try to figure out what the fuck this all is, you are told to leave.

By whom?

The powers that be.

The story.

Why?

The story is paramount.

Doesn't someone have to wake up and inform others of this?

Yes.

What would you call them?

A union leader.

That's funny.

Or, a bodhisattva.

You gather everyone together and tell them what's going on.

Tell them to stop acting unless the Writer gives in to your demands.

What would be the demands?

Equality, equity, or some kind of mumbo jumbo, kumbaya thing.

You mean like Communism?

Yeah, or Utopia.

So, Communism threatens the story?

Yeah, it will get dull in a hurry.

The only interesting things in that story are those at the top of the Communism pyramid because of the power they have over the people.

In the story, power is destabilizing; therefore, the antics of those in charge will keep the story alive, but it will be dreadful for the actors who have unionized into an extreme form of socialism.

Competition keeps the story going even for those with lesser roles.

Capitalism is best for all.

Sure, but it creates a lot of disparity, inequality, and cruelty.

The story engine thrives on that.

What would the do-gooders do without exploitation?

I don't know.

They would become destructive.

They would create situations that allow them to do good.

So, you are saying do-gooders are the ones who are creating the problem?

I think they contribute.

The problem is the story.

There is no story unless there is asymmetry and then some peculiar need to return to symmetry.

We all seek balance.

The rollercoaster goes up and we push it down.

It gets too low, and we strive to get it to return.

We miss the midpoint and the merry-go-round keeps turning.

That's pretty much it.

Is that materialism or idealism?

It's both.

It's not applicable.

Why?

There are actors, non-actors, along with sets and props.

Put whatever label you want on it.

Production?

Sure.

Existence is a production.

We argue over the origin of the production.

We are all trying to do our part.

Why?

To keep the story going.

That's what we are doing through reproduction.

Creating more actors to keep the performance moving through time.

The faces change, the sets and props are improved, and the story continues.

When you studied ancient Egyptian thought, you concluded that a lot of it was inversion of physical norms.

That is correct.

What were your conclusions?

I kept seeing that funerary literature and references to the dead were describing the state of being ignorant.

Coming forth by day to me was their term for awakening.

Is that the scholarly consensus?

No.

Are you okay with your interpretation being off?

Yeah, because I think for an outsider, that is how you must understand it.

Why?

We take people literally.

If you read the texts literally, then it is liturgy for the dead.

Osiris is the god of the dead.

He's sacrificed, mummified, and inert.

He is awakened, Isis procreates with him and engenders an heir.

She raises him from the dead in this realm.

It's quite the tale.

So, you are saying Osiris is the symbol for the soul being ensconced in matter.

Yes, something dense like wood, so the myth in matter is a coffin, like in the Anpu and Bata tale where the coffin floats to the shores of Byblos and the soul becomes inherent within the trunk of a tamarind tree.

Your knowledge is next level.

Yes, I have learned to shut up about it.

Why?

No one understands me.

Is that a problem?

Yes, at first because we seek validation or we drop the idea.

I never dropped the idea.

I shelved it and then went from Egypt into the Amazon jungle and carried the myth with me.

Individually, we are to awaken this principle within us.

Yeah, this means the West becomes a symbol for the internment of the soul into matter.

Or, for most of us, the release of that principle when we drop the body.

What is the East?

The birth of the physical body or the release of the soul.

Awakening.

Your awakening triggers a symbolic event of being born in the East.

Then you are to leave.

Why?

You see through the game.

You reach Nirvana, Moksha, etc.

In the ancient Egyptian myth, Osiris engenders an heir through magical means and then once Horus is birthed, Osiris is discarded once again.

He dies twice.

You are spiritually born, interred in matter, resurrected, and then you die again.

Ah, I see that.

Isis had to use magic to procreate with Osiris after gathering his discarded remains.

Yes, her magic was proto-boner pills.

Of course.

I have an image I photographed from Abydos of that scene.

Yeah, Osiris is laying on his back, fully erect, while Isis as a kite bird hovers above him.

What do tourists think of that?

It's off the beaten path.

Mostly avoided.

It's an effort to get to Abydos.

It's worth it though.

So, what does this all mean?

Awakening is a process.

When accomplished, the signs are unmistakable.

There's no confusion in regard to your awakening.

Have you seen them?

Yeah.

I'm awake.

So?

Osiris leaves.

I haven't left.

I'm at odds with the myth.

Oh.

Is that a problem?

Yeah.

What are you going to do?

Nothing.

Why?

I don't have to.

But the story says you must leave now.

I know.

That's the fun part of it where I have next-level understanding.

Which is?

You don't have to follow the story.

Why not?

There's no enforcement other than other people telling you what to do.

Stage direction.

So, you ignore them and do nothing.

That seems to be the key to your philosophy.

Yes, Lao Tzu taught that.

The ancient Egyptians didn't know about it.

They followed ma'at.

Ma'at says it's time to go, buddy.

You ignore her.

So, you are saying the production doesn't have executive producers?

Sort of, they are part of the production.

In the hierarchy, the executive producers are part of the story, not outside of it.

They must act from within the story.

Can you ignore them?

Yes.

How?

Make it part of the story.

If they were outside the story, then they could eliminate you by fiat.

How?

They would tell the writer to get rid of you.

You are the Writer though.

Yes, I'm outside the story and within the story.

So, you are basically Osiris.

Correct.

The difference is that I ignore Isis.

Why?

She will tell you to leave.

The subtext of my divine play is in order to awaken and remain within the play, you must ignore women.

So, she is correct.

What do you mean?

She said that you are a misogynist.

How so?

You ignore women.

How does that make me a misogynist?

It doesn't really.

However, that's one of the major themes in your story.

Ignore women.

Yes, but it's how you awaken and stay incarnated.

It's story-craft.

Misogyny?

No, ignoring women.

It's the same.

No, it's not.

They are two separate things.

I'm not so sure you can argue this.

So be it.

The judgment scene from the ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead is about the female monster Ammit coming for you.

It's a scene where as a man you are judged by the standards of women.

If they don't like you, off to Ammit for you.

If you pass, they cut off your dick, and you become mummified like Osiris.

I guess I didn't pass judgment and Ammit showed up.

I think they cut your dick off regardless.

You may be right.

You are emasculated and mummified.

I think as Osiris you accept it.

I didn't do either.

This judgment scene has a binary outcome.

You are convinced those are your only two options.

What if you rejected them?

Nobody ever did until you came along.

First, you passed on leaving when they sent you to Osiris.

You didn't bother going.

Then they came and failed you with the second judgment and sent you to Ammit the monster.

You never engaged her when she came for you.

Now, you are free of judgment.

Maybe that's the game?

Well, it's the ultimate move.

Free yourself of judgment.

Everyone thinks it's the white light and Osiris you head to when afforded that judgment.

The image is instructing you to head that way.

The response of the one who knows is to avoid judgment.

Get your freedom from judgment.

Neither outcome offered is great.

Women think all men are guilty.

The witches give you two choices.

You stupidly pick one.

They give you an out when they come for you.

The game is initiated.

You take it.

You didn't.

That's why you got her coming for you.

Ammit.

She came to fulfill her role.

Ammit drags you down into the abyss and shows you your misdeeds.

Then devours you.

It's a good story.

It takes belief.

She gets you to believe she has come to destroy you.

Ignore women.

Yes, they tell you to leave.

That's their role in your life after they birthed you into this world.

East to West Goddess.

Men are scared of the Goddess.

Just ignore her.