A little exercise in (creative?) imagination

THIS IS THE COMMANDER SPEAKING Commander Want to keep people from seeing truth, eh? C'mon, since immemorable times, such things have never succeeded. Despite your best efforts, people are going to really know. (Shut up, little creep.) W.H. (shoo. . . Alright, alright.)

Wow! (I'm sorry for this slip. I admit it is NOT serious. But I just liked it. What The Commander said can be read in the previous post, anyway.)

"This is the Commander speaking..."

"This is the Commander speaking. It's not addressed to everyone. It's an address to those who have taken up this Work consciously and seriously tried to do something with it. (Time doesn't matter much: it may had happened a few seconds or tens of years ago.) Do you have, hm, how shall I call it, courage to fully trust this Work? Listen. Nothing, nobody can harm you, in whatever way, howsowever. It can not get close to you even. There's absolutely no reason for fear, you see. "

That was the minimum, I'd say. (Certainly I got to non-identify, i.e. no matter who am I and how enlightened and all that, I remember to identify with Him. There's certain mystery to it, anyway, I think; and if there would be need for precision, one couldn't describe it more accurately than Him speaking through me, although He is not 'me' and 'me' is not Him - and not only speaking that is. And I got to do all the rest that I've learned. Not-do, better, for doing begins by not-doing etc.) There's certainly more. Commander must have meant sinking into deep silence and utter collectedness, and I don't remember that he ever forbade anybody to rejoice and adore and wonder in joy at the great wonderful Works that Commander performs. . . since - when?

You see, at the moments like this when envy and blood-thirst and miserable, primitive, ugly provocation begins to seethe around you and cows begin to moo, so to speak, you can be at rest. You have a right, speaking legally, to remain untouched by it. You have the right to not be negative, so goes the phrase. And there's more. It's become plain to me, why by the gradual action of this Work I have had to take ever greater leave from primitive violent methods that people use, to acquire new habits, so to speak, new attitudes. It's not exactly "control" of violence, as people often think, that is involved. It's inner control -and I'm afraid that means there is no violence in you because there is, well, something else. It's not warfare such as is engaged in by those who do not see, materially, psychologically, and, if my ears and eyes do not deceive me, even 'spiritually'. It's spiritual warfare. Big difference! How can you engage in spiritual warfare? Well, by not being violent. By trumpetting Kurukshetra, Kurukshetra all the time. "This is surely not possible?" Good question, and necessary one. It would be a dissapointment if it were not asked, for it proves that the 'questioner' sees where the problem is. Now, it is possible. How? By a special kind of effort (which, properly, finally includes all the Work, et cetera. . . but that would mean somewhat a lot of things if the time of few seconds that Commander mentions is all you've got. . .). By 'remembering' what the Commander says - 'remembering': depth, frequency etc. . . Depth refers to, I think, to the part of the microcosm (that you are) that 'remembers', centers included and so on. Little part, small depth. Large part, big depth!

Practically, from what Commander said it follows that all that is needed is a conscious decision. And, of course, as in the foregoing examples, take note please, not just 'decision', what is mentioned is actually, conscious decision.

Next, there are prayers mentioned in the Bible. Thy Kingdom come. . . They might be well intended as a means of remembering as said above. . . Enough! Let those who have ears hear, stop. (Reader, we are done for the time being. I enjoyed it and I would have it last, but I cannot, should not go on writing indefinitely.)

specialization, humility

I don't think specialists can achieve anything in this Work. It's necessary to have special knowledge to perform well within a profession in life, to do well your job in life, that's right. Next, particular lines of Work have their 'special details', needless to say. A Buddhist in Asia necessarily views this Work from another 'angle' than we do. Apart from that, specialization is another word for lopsidedness, and hence, an obstruction. What you need is a general knowledge of what life is, how people live, what they think, what they need, what they want, what they strive to achieve. There is a whole spectrum, for there are cultural, geographical, economical, racial, biological (gender) differences. (And it's not a question whether your place in the spectrum is a special place from where you are enabled to freely evaluate and judge what you see. But it's possible to determine your place to some extent and win some freedom from being determined by it in your outlook.) The spectrum also concerns differences between human beings, internal differences.

These differences concern valuation, effort, faith, possesion of magnetic centre, eventual contact with 'schools' and much more, in short: being. Also knowledge, of course. After some thinking, they are not less important than life differences. Now, to see the whole spectrum of the entities in this universe is more difficult, isn't it? For, there might be entities that belong 'lower' than you - inferiors. Then those close to you - equals. These both categories you can see. The trouble lies mainly in those who are 'higher' than you - superiors. How could you 'see' those?

Let's jump to a seemingly unrelated subject. Didn't you observe how underestimated simple logical thinking is in this world? Didn't you observe how extremely useful logical thinking is? How come? Does it not tell us (does it not enable us to calculate precisely, so to speak) that the main problem at entering this Work can be self-overestimation? In other words, thinking that we already posses that what we still have to attain? "But I'm full of self-love. Therefore I certainly know what is to love my Self." What do we have to attain? We've got to either find in ourselves or build in ourselves that which pertains to higher levels of the spectrum, don't we? "Of course, I'm conscious of that." How will we see something that we don't see in ourselves? "I don't know. How strange. Otherwise I know everything." Why do we see lower levels? Because they have something we know in ourselves as well.

Now, isn't this humility? Is it not so, that humility is not so much a quality of character, something that one has, than it is absence, being-free-of of some serious obstacles? Do not judge may well mean Do not underestimate. Logical thinking, for example. Then psychological or even esoteric thinking, about which we do not know that much yet. Then higher beings that are our only chance to pull us from the level we currently reside on. Here, does it all strike certain cords in us that could be called: heeroosmulka-groovnian (approx. meaning: similar-to-what-religion-teaches)? Is logical thinking not great help in seeing that it's extremely improbable that we are at the extreme upper edge of the universal scale?

We often want to cooperate with and communicate with lower beings. We often love and like them. Owner/dog. Parent/child. Wouldn't it be logical to suppose that we are not the highest crown of the Universe? Wouldn't it be logical to suppose that higher beings love us and want to literally serve us in the process? Would it be wise to underestimate simple parent/child that nature and life put before our eyes as an image and analogy of inner realities? Would that bring new light to the opening line of theLord's Prayer? (No, if one remembers that long ago there were gentlemen who seriously confessed that they don't know much about DO and SI notes of second cosmic octave. How seriously they were taken is another question. By people who understood it oh all so well. Knowledge is joy! The gentlemen must have alluded to certain Dominic they all knew and his pepperoni affairs with certain Mrs. S., but in a way that only those knowleadgable among us understood.)

What are rules and regulations and exercises and esoteric knowledge&instruction other than practices that help us find (or build up, as an alternative) in ourselves that which in more bountiful measure exists in entities higher up the spectrum? (Oh and I forget to mention book reading. Not exactly am I confident that beings higer up the inner scale have read more books as a rule, but some of them might.)

Do not these simple considerations so far, if taken seriously

1) show us that knowledge and means to develop oneself really abound around us? (B influences) 2) provide a basis from which one can 'take off' on one's own, without danger of being misguided?

What I understand by humility is basically what a child feels towards its higher counterparts. They take it for granted that those are simply higher and that's it. I don't see a trace of humiliation in it. . . what whispers: "beware, humiliation, humiliation" is inner pride anyway, the inner devil. (I'm going to leave out 'less perfect' masters/parents now, although they open interesting domain.) And what self-will suggests is to get angry because some strange 'freedom' that to child would be fatal is denied us. Run over the street without looking around. Play with bombs. Something like that. I want my mom NOW! when mom is doing her shift ten miles away. But where another big problem lies is that analogy here is not perfect. An atheist, a materialist, rationalist, a believer in blind fate or impersonal deity, simply denies that there is something higher. Of which we are much like children. All those types that one can see outwardly represent some serious blindness in us. Then idolatry would be a monkey child hugging his plastic, stone-dead mother desperately, an orphan holding its teddy bear tightly.

It all gets complicated. I can't think on well from here. (It's typical, by the way. A sign that we move on... out of accustomed landscape.) I'll just try to try to determine where 3) C influences come in in today's scheme. They come in when you can 'see' them. (Not that they have to come as if they were not there all the time.) And you won't see them if you don't see C-influence-in-yourself. And to see/find/build it in yourself is what this Work, the ABC of Christianity, is about.

We'll leave whether you have to build a soul or do you already have it, for some other time. Suffice it to say that probably those who 'built' it are probably convinced that they didn't build anything, that the soul was always there... I wouldn't wonder if it appeared to logical thinking as something paradoxical. I don't discern psychological method well, yet it's a kind of higher paradox, logical paradox, so to speak, that points rather to psychological than to irrational thinking. (Speaking of that, I am firmly convinced that those who actually attain salvation, liberation from sin, actually think there was never any such strange thing that people call sin.)

Now do me a favor and don't ask that stupid question WITWA again. Otherwise I'll begin to call you Witwa. What is this Work about? Witwa, would you like to have a glass of milk?

There are probably a thousand good sides to prayer, ways to use it, to profit from it, aims that it is used for. Higher intent with Jesus' Prayer probably lies in the meaning, not in the words. That is, it is probably a portrayal of establishing conscious contact, an image in words. So, what is this cup for? It is for me. Let it not pass by, but that I may drink it. I cannot drink it in self-will as I am used to do other things. Therefore Thy will happen.

Well, quite a mystery (mystery=too big for logical thinking). I feel inclined to repeat the advice. Don't underestimate logical thinking, what active reasoning can do within you. Practically it's the gate to psychological thinking. Don't underestimate psychological thinking either - but that's already an understatement. For it must be the royal gate to the divine and all those things people say but rarely understand.

a new idea

A new idea does not come from what is called 'brain', or 'thinking'. I don't want to give rise to imagination, but just to have one good practical example, think of what Bowman says in Odissey 2010, like I don't know what it is going to be, but I know something wonderful is going to happen.

(And it is not an 'idea' at all, not in the sense we usually use this word. It's probably some other centre or other division or positive emotion or higher emotional centre. And the above is an example of it - whatever it is - in operation. Like if you said, now God help me, and you really knew God is going to help.)

The problem you have before yourself in this Work is too big for logical method. Try using it and it will become defective method. Psychological, sometimes even esoteric method is required. And that is something 'you' cannot 'switch on' yourself. Like, but it will be switched on anyway.

email excerpts - re-formed

... It's true [this system] looks like house that was never quite built, worse, like in the beginning of making plans for it. One thing I begin to understand well is that people who wrote about the system had not much time. By this I don't mean they were like busy managers and yuppies and others who have no time to look around them. But there was obviously an urge to go about their business in a very direct and efficient manner, a strong awareness that they may attain nothing at all if they use customary approaches, that their chances are small, not at all proportional to their effort.

Their seeking of special methods, of the 'schools' and so on, of the contact with the esoteric circle, their valuation of 'spedial knowledge' (which, by the bye, explains why ordinary effort can have no effect) has its ground in all that. It has nothing to do with the well-known forms of Inner Special Circle of Inner Awareness of the Golden Key and all the rest of we-are-chosen miseries of this or that kind - nothing to do with pride and vanity which they sought to overcome.

Well I agree oh that point. But allow me to say that it would be good if you could find a way to climb up, out of your simplistic dumbness a little. I'm going to consciously (yeah it's different from 'intentionally') humble myself and pretend that I'm going to debate and speculate about it all. Think, for example, how this "system" you are talking about and obviously have difficulty grasping as a whole, could be very alive and dancing and complex and joyous thing. Think how there exists, in the literature, vast, colourful range of consciously (ahem, yes, or less consciously) built Images and Picturings of the same. Imagine how, while you think that you are interested in the the system, in reality the system may be interested in you. Think what a total 'metanoia', what a schock of a conscious meeting it could mean at certain point. Don't the Inspired Authors testify at large: What is a man that You look down upon him? (Some book:some-verse)? And they they find it is too wonderful to praise and and and not-exectly-the-word, tongue-in-cheek they bring themselves to the point of uttering something. (Why should they? In a certain sense, there's no need for it. The reaction is understandable but may not be exactly what is desired. Of course, to achieve that, one has to at least anticipate it all. Just a hint.) Why? BECAUSE THERE WERE LADIES AT THE BASE. No no. Don't mix that in. That's External Considering theme we are going to expatiate on, I hope, on Some Other Suitable Occasion.

Your Bellowing Uncle

Scrampleding

More Questions And Answers

Q. I was told to find without seeking. This drives me crazy, tellya.

A. Who told you?

Q. In the group...

A. Ah, in the group.

Q. I'm sure it is a group connected with Gnosis, Holy Spirit and the Work. There are many friends, brotherhood, you know. We were told-

A. I see. Well, brotherhood and friendship is a mighty fine thing. Even a group can be a mighty fine thing, er... should be, well, theoretically of course, that is, at least I hope so. T'seems to me that only Love can save you now, friend. Depart in piece, God bless your soul and protect you from muslims, from christians, and from christian civilization. God protect you from christian technology and christian use of it. Or better, from no matter who misuses it.

I am told that congregation of sheep was celebrating Declaration of Independence from the Old Yoke of Bondage yesterday. I am told that today these sheep loads their rifles to shoot even their neighbour's dog, should such by mistake try to piss in vicinity of their private Trespassers William sign. I am told they are rapidly mutating into pigs since 1948. I am told that Worldwide Sheep Organization and other organizations are feverishly seeking their own identity. Well I can be told everything, can't I. I am told that because of the trees they do not see the forest, and I'm inclined to believe it. And I add that because of the forest they are not able to see the trees. And I add that they do not see much, in general... And I ask myself an old question: Who controls the would-be-in-controls?

Q. Jesus! What you have in mind must be a very lonely ride!

A. Saying Jesus without knowing what it means is not exactly a rare thing today... But back to your question. One finds what one looks for. Where one's heart is one's treasure is also.

Q. Thank you for this captivating interview and a friendly advice.

A. Well, thank YOU, [person's name]! I wouldn't call this an interview and, regrettably, there was not much room for a friendly advice either. (Hopefully the situation is different in your 'group'.) But without your questions event this here weren't come to pass. Will had been wouldn't passed. Argh, whatever. We sincerely hope that they will be able to deduce the meaning despite obstacles that Lord Himself, perhaps, has laid in our way to understanding. Perhaps to prevent us to come to Him? Just joking. I mean, thanks to your questions only God could again use me as the choisest of his chosen weapons, provided I, W.H., am evermore framed by this Work into a, so to speak, willing instrument to that end, in the original Nicean sense of pivotal totality, that is, totally overriding and in parts replacing dodecalogic sequence as predicted by the first 4th century and earlier fathers, in pristine beauty. Pristine beauty rulez! (You can not be TOO enthusiastic about pristine beauty, in case you thought of the possibility. You CAN be not enthusiastic enough, though. So regarding this there's no question, no doubt, no problem. For pristine beauty, I use this term in post-Nicean council sense, and this Work that we are after as if we wanted to catch it, must somehow be connected, I reckon. Must be inseparably joined, I tell myself.)