I want to write this down before I forget it.

I don’t think it is fully understood how much “The Light Beyond” was actually revealed from above. It’s obvious that I wrote it down and that it includes my knowledge and that I formulated it into actual human language. The content, however, was another matter entirely. Let me cite an example.

It was day before Christmas. I was just finished writing Anthea and the post mortem. Romana was already jokingly asking whether I’m going to write something about Jesus, and I actually thought Zee and Kay were going to end up being Jesus and Magdalena, but I had no tangible ideas and just shrugged. On Christmas, it just started writing itself, the concepts came into my mind just in time as I was writing, and I was completely surprised by the direction of it all. For instance, I had no idea that Mary, mother of Jesus, was going to end up being a major character, and the way she morphed into Lakshmi in the end, instead of dissolving into her, was a complete surprise. Also, the part about the Kaustubha jewel was revealed during the night after Christmas, and I wrote it down in the morning. It’s as if it doesn’t matter whether I’m going to put some sentence in Kay’s or Zina’s mouth, but the important stuff with theological ramifications was completely micro-managed from above.

Also, I thought I was going to be writing about Milarepa, but he apparently didn’t want to be written about. That door was closed and I didn’t want to pry it open. I also expected Vishnu and Lakshmi to have had actual physical incarnations, but apparently not. I also didn’t actually know Jesus before, but Biljana did; she had darshan of him once, and says that how I described him is just right; it’s the same person.

What I’m saying is, I actually had expectations about where this was going, and sometimes things just flowed differently, and sometimes I felt as if I was writing a dictation, where the next sentence appeared as I finished the previous one. This book is not some fantasy writing inspired by religious concepts. It’s the real thing. Parts of it were revealed before, parts of it are my own memories, parts are dictated from above, and the rest of it is me mixing it up together into something that flows like a book.

I don’t actually know the purpose of this book. There’s an air of seriousness and gravity about it, that’s for sure.

ps. And yeah, there was no way I could have intentionally timed the chapter about Jesus on Christmas. Absolutely no way.

I’ve been thinking about something yesterday.

There’s a fundamental difference between how I define sin, and how the religions do it. They define sin as an absolute category, and they usually have a list of things that are sinful.

I, however, define sin as everything that removes your soul from alignment with God. This means that, for me, sin is a relative category.

Since people usually have a poor understanding of scientific and technical terminology, the fact that something is relative means it’s anchored to something else, and varies accordingly. It’s not an independent, absolute parameter.

What does that mean in practice?

It means that I can’t tell you what sin is for you. I can make a general statement about things that are usually sinful – murder, theft, deception and so on – but I can imagine circumstances where each would be justified. For instance, deceiving Nazis who ask where a Jew is hidden is virtuous. Stealing bread to feed a hungry child if you have no other options is virtuous. Murdering an armed criminal who broke into your house in order to defend your family is virtuous. All kinds of things that are sinful in general can be virtuous or at least excused in another set of circumstances. Like Krishna said, “there is nothing better than truth, in either this world or any other, but truth is sometimes not a good thing to say, and a lie sometimes is”. Basically, if the Nazis ask you where Anne Frank is hidden, truth is definitely not a good thing to say in these circumstances, but whether you outright lie or say something evasive, that might depend on what’s more expedient in the circumstances. This makes the correct action both very clear and also relative. It’s clear in the sense that the Nazis are evil, Anne Frank is innocent, and you should protect the innocent from the evil. How you do it depends on the circumstances, in a sense that you need to improvise something that is most likely to work. This makes sin a very clear thing, but it also makes a correct course of action a relative matter, in a sense that “it depends”. Sometimes you are in a position to outright murder the evil people, and if it’s possible, that might be the best option. If force is not a realistic option, you can resort to deception or evasion. You can even decide to sacrifice yourself in order to save someone else. But, as I said, it depends. There’s no clear instruction manual for stupid people who don’t like to use their brains.

Also, I assume that you have alignment with God, so that you can see what keeps you there, and what removes you from that alignment. If you don’t have alignment with God, or don’t even know what that would be, it means you’re in a pickle. You are either completely ignorant and immature, or you are already influenced by sin to the point of complete spiritual misalignment. Here, we can speak of consequences of past sinful actions that condition your present state. You can also be intentionally deluding yourself in order to justify your past sinful choices. That happens more often than not. An aspect of this is that the worst sinners will tell you that they are fine, that they feel justified before God, they have nothing to confess or change, nothing that worries them. Those people are usually the kind that ends up on the wrong side of divine justice, in a sense that the Judge flicks them into hell without much thought or consideration. People who are pure usually have all sorts of things that trouble them, and the number increases as they are closer to God. They are never sure about all kinds of things they did, and how God will see them, and they can find all kinds of faults and problems with the things they did. I know I had quite a list, and I did go through it with God. For the most part, I got explanations why it’s fine. When it wasn’t fine, I found some way to fix it. That’s the difference between being sinless and being a sinner. If you’re sinless, it doesn’t mean you didn’t do anything wrong; it means you’re not holding on to your mistakes. To be a sinner is to make your mistakes a part of your worldview, to the point where you would outright reject God if he told you to change it.

There is also a big difference between being sinless and being perfect. Being sinless means you’re not holding on to sin and making it into a worldview. You can, however, be both sinless and immature or ignorant. It’s not like being sinless gives you an automatic entrance into Heaven. A rock is sinless. The goal is not to be merely free of sin, in a sense where you make mistakes, acknowledge that they were mistakes, correct them and move on. It is to manifest the will and nature of God in your life and choices. This makes the whole thing much more complicated than the religions make it seem, but in practice, it’s quite simple. There’s a scale of goodness, in a sense that a wide range of souls can be in alignment with God, but more or less sophisticated and developed. There’s also a scale of purity, where someone can be more or less pure, but it’s fine – you work on it. But there is also a clear point where one is obviously sinful and evil and such souls are discarded and destroyed. It’s not an exact science, which is why there are Judges, instead of some automatic algorithm that would measure you up and decide. It’s not that such a thing couldn’t be made. However, the reason why the Judges are entrusted to the task instead is because they can tell whether someone is just messed up, or he’s just wrong. Their “nose” is trusted by God more than any law, rule or algorithm could possibly be, because the Judges are of God. Their judgment is therefore also of God. They are allowed to do whatever they feel is appropriate, and there is no recourse, no higher court for complaints. In practice, it means they can help you go through things, explain, show how things actually work, show what you’re doing wrong and why, or even teach you sadhana that will correct your spiritual faults. Or they can crush you like a bug and throw what’s left of you to the compost heap. They are there because God trusts them. Whatever they decide, is the Will of God. Translated: don’t fuck with the Judges. You don’t get to talk to their manager. They are the ultimate authority on you. Even the other Gods who leave human existence are always very respectful with the Judges, because they are family; they are not feared, they are missed.

So, when I say that something is relative, hard to tell and it depends on the circumstances, it’s not some moral relativism of mine that’s causing me to say this. In fact, it’s how God sees this, and it’s the reason why the Judges exist and do a job that would otherwise be entrusted to a piece of code. It’s actually so hard to tell that you need to be either a highly qualified Angel or a Person of God to be entrusted with the task. Considering that, you can imagine that some list of rules that earthly religions love so much isn’t going to cut it, either.

There’s something that annoys me greatly in modern literature, and that’s the tendency to create morally grey or ambiguous characters, without a clear line between right and wrong. Even the things that start as morally clear, like Star Wars, later get revised to include some nonsense like Light Side of the Force being “unbalanced” and needing to be “balanced” by the Dark Side, which is the exact opposite of how Lucas initially envisioned it – the Light Side being the Force in its normal state, and Dark Side being a malformation, a cancer-like structure that corrupts and consumes its user. In some works, such as the “Game of Thrones”, moral ambiguity is the actual point, and all characters are intentionally written as morally grey. This is supposedly “more realistic”.

I think there are multiple reasons why people do this. One is the fact that evil people will always desire to cloud the concepts of good and evil in order to make themselves “normal”, if not good. Basically, if everybody is morally compromised, they are fine.

The second reason is that the religions behave in ways similar to that of the totalitarian regimes, which intentionally create laws that make everybody guilty of something, so that nobody can feel justified or pure; there’s always something you’ll be guilty of, you are all sinners, and all need to live in fear of punishment, and the state, or the church, can basically pick out anyone and make an example of them. This is the problem with a totalitarian state that is also a police state and a surveillance state – it writes ambiguous laws where anyone normal and reasonable can be made to look guilty of some abject nonsense like something-phobia or intolerance of some evil, or “reactionary ideas”, and since everybody lives under cameras and other forms of surveillance, every normal person lives in fear of raising their voice or making themselves stand out in any way, lest they be summarily arrested for the crime of being normal. The religions made so many rules that make people feel they are sinners who will be condemned to hell anyway, that it has the counterproductive effect of them deciding to do whatever, since they are doomed in any case.

That’s why the message from above is a clear “no, that’s not how it works”. They condemn both the religions in their narcissistic totalitarianism, as well as the evildoers who try to cloud the line between right and wrong. There is a very clear line between right and wrong, but it’s not the stupid nonsense and adherence to some rule book the religions preach. That’s why the Gods in “The Light Beyond” are presented as absolutely morally unambiguous, perfectly “white” characters; because that’s what the actual Gods are. This, however, doesn’t mean that everybody else is condemned to hell, and that the Gods are judgmental to the point of finding flaws with a microscope with intent of throwing to hell everyone who has even the slightest blemish. No; they are incredibly kind and tolerant of all kinds of errors and flaws, but they also have an excellent nose for the actual evil, exactly because they are its opposite. There’s a huge difference between making mistakes, or making a wrong call somewhere, or misjudging circumstances, or doing things you end up regretting, and actual evil. Also, evil isn’t measured the way people think. It’s not a scalar, where he who commits most sinful deeds wins the deepest place in hell; if murder is evil, he who commits most of it is most evil. Some of the most evil people never killed anyone, they just lived in such a ways that produces a deep spiritual darkness that tried to extinguish the Light of God in others, the way it is extinguished in themselves. Yes, murderers are often very evil. However, evil itself is a spiritual corruption, a fall of soul into spiritual darkness and adoption of darkness. Evil actions do often follow from that state, but not necessarily and not always. You can be a completely depraved and evil person without actually ever doing much about it.

Also, since the religions create an impression that everything is a sin, heaven must be a terribly boring place, since everything even the least bit fun must be outlawed there. This is absolutely not how it works. I’ve seen religious texts that imagine Heaven in ways so simplistic, boring and idiotic, that no reasonable person would want to live there. For instance, angels supposedly praise God. The higher angels praise God… more, I guess. The highest angels do nothing but orbit the throne of God and say something like “praise, praise, praise to the God Most High”. I mean, how stupid would one have to be to imagine praising God to look like that? That’s why I wrote it in a completely different way: the Gods do it by bringing coffee and comfort to the Judges and Teachers who are stressed and tired, and making them feel better. Or they right a wrongness. Or they create something wonderful. Or they give a special blessing to a very deserving person. Or they destroy some evil. Or they take it upon themselves to purify the world of evil by accepting to suffer in the process. Or they outright praise someone who manifested something wonderful. Or they make love to their spouse. That’s what “praise God” means. It is choosing and supporting things that are of God, and rejecting and destroying things that are opposite to God. It’s not orbiting around the Throne of God and singing “praise!” like zombi harpies. More likely, it’s seeing a good person that is exhausted and making their day better. It’s being a guardian angel to someone, and remind them of God’s presence, and try to discourage them from bad choices.

So, yes, the line between good and evil is very clear. It’s just that it doesn’t look as stupid and totalitarian as the religions try to make it, where it creates a wrong and counterproductive idea that evil is fun, and good is boring.

No, there’s nothing fun about Evil, and there’s nothing boring about the Good. I mean, sure, evil people would probably find it boring if they couldn’t torture anyone or dismember someone’s children for organs. They would probably find it fun to morally and spiritually corrupt someone and see them degraded into abject depravity. See Epstein files for details.

The truly good ones have their fun in different ways. Make a necklace that enhances wisdom. Giggle in the grass with your friends. Make a ring that makes the wearer’s consciousness deeper. Make a dress that makes the wearer more powerful. Write holy scripture that leads to better understanding of God, and dispels ignorance. Make a tiara of bliss and happiness for your sister. Praise and reward those who did something good, and heal them if they suffered in the process. Punish cruelly and without mercy those who caused spiritual corruption of others, and opposed the inner nature of God with their choices and actions. Yes, there are the Hunters – beings who ferret out evil ones and destroy them. They praise God by going after the Epstein-like bastards, every single one, and they dismember them while they scream, until they are no more. And believe me, they are having great fun doing it.

And yes, Satan and his demons are all about rights and freedoms, while Gods and Angels are all about duties and virtues. It’s because rights and freedoms make you a terrible person, while duties and virtues make you a great person. Just think about it. I mean, actually think.