I was just thinking about one possible misunderstanding that might occur due to my style of writing and speech. You see, I essentially never make outright commandments or prohibitions. I mostly just give my reasoning as to why something is a bad idea, or might have bad consequences, or why something is a good idea.

There are several reasons for this. First, it’s a matter of your free will to do whatever you personally feel you need or want to do. I will just state my opinion, which you might accept or ignore. Second, bad things can be useful. For instance, I read many books that were bad, or outright wrong, but reading them helped me understand how people who are under this or that misapprehension think and feel. Not only that – I occasionally do things that are not wise or recommended, just to test whether my understanding of the principles applies. Of course, there are things that are so outright harmful that trying them causes irreversible harm, and those are always to be avoided; for instance, ingesting chemicals or doing other things that cause brain damage, permanent injury or death. You don’t want to hang yourself or inject yourself with heroin just to see how it feels, for instance. However, it is my experience that all kinds of evil or bad things can be turned around and used to create the kind of wisdom that would otherwise be hard to attain. Basically, doing wrong things and getting wrecked because of it can teach you very valuable lessons about why certain things are bad, or why certain paths don’t work. The reason why I have such a good understanding of things is because I tried many things that didn’t work, and not always intentionally; basically, I learned some things by fucking up so badly I barely survived. The formulation I usually make, saying that something is not recommended, or that it is dangerous, can therefore mean that it is likely to destroy you, but if you survive, you might gain extremely valuable insight, and it’s up to you whether you want to take those chances or not – after all, it’s your life to waste or destroy if you so choose.

I guess this relativistic attitude towards things that others might judge as fatal is a result of my prolonged practice of detachment; you can call it vipassana if you will. I see it all as energy behind this or that vector, and everything can be powered and un-powered, redirected and powered again to test something. “Ah, this is evil, so I know what evil feels like. Now, power off. Wind down. Change direction, slowly add energy. This is good, so this is how it feels.“ Tantra would call this “game” a dance on the edge of a sword, and the sword is indeed sharp.

Non-yogis live in a different world, where they believe that “their nature” compels them to do something, and choices can’t be undone, they need to be punished for the bad things and so on. I live in a world where bad things need to be decoupled from energy and powered down. Where non-yogis think of themselves as victims of things that happen to them, I see myself as someone who can kill processes, create new ones, change priorities and the percentage of CPU power behind each, and so on. Also, I’m not afraid of failure, pain, misery or death, and I see them as merely “things you might want to avoid”, and if you expect stronger wording, you might misunderstand. After all, failure, pain, misery and death can accompany one on their way to God, while another might succeed in things all the way to utter doom.

When I started working with students, what I taught them was very conservative, in the sense that the entire lore of yoga from the most ancient times was based on the very same principle. This principle is, in essence, to list all the things I did that resulted in not dying, not going insane, and attaining great spiritual results, and have them re-trace my steps. To introduce anything that varied much from my own spiritual practice would be, in my opinion, insanely dangerous.

You see, I had very good reasons for all the things I did, and those good reasons had very much to do with not dying and not going insane. I didn’t just pull something out of my arse out of sheer boredom and said, “I should be a vegetarian, that’s something that’s currently in”. In fact, there’s an interesting story on how I became a vegetarian, very soon after I started the practice of yoga. I did know a thing or two on how to meditate, having been proficient in autogenous training, and in one of my first attempts after the darshan/initiation I had a very powerful experience of the “OM” vibration throughout my mind and body. When I say “powerful”, I mean it in a sense of feeling as if it could kill me just like that, just because the resistance of my energy system is too great due to impurities, or if anything went wrong. I was very, very glad I stopped smoking weeks earlier, and the argument against vegetarianism that was universally recommended by all the Hindu teachers, “what would I eat”, was immediately ignored in favour of sheer survival. Obviously, I had to follow the instructions of the people who did this before if I wanted to increase my chances, and introduce changes only if I know exactly what I’m doing. This stuff was very real and very powerful, and very scary.

What I didn’t know at the time was that the majority of those people (orange robes, fancy titles) actually didn’t recommend the stuff they did because the opposite is spiritually or energetically harmful, but out of purely traditional and ideological reasons. Vegetarianism is one of such things, and it’s specific to India; in Tibet, for instance, the very advanced yogis like Milarepa ate meat whenever it was available, and he noted a marked improvement in his spiritual and energetic condition after eating meat. Another thing those swamis are actively trying to prohibit is sex, with all sorts of claims about its spiritual harmfulness. While I certainly won’t tell you that watching porn and promiscuity aren’t spiritually harmful, it is my experience that the most harmful aspect of sex is doing it with the wrong people, from a wrong state of consciousness, and feeling guilty because you think it’s spiritually harmful. What I found out was actually harmful was accepting students and talking about spirituality with others. Essentially, working with students creates spiritual/energetic links directly into your mind that are very similar to the links created when you have sex with someone, only deeper and stronger, and those links are bidirectional. They allow your influence to help the students reach things that would otherwise be difficult, but they also allow all sorts of garbage and disturbances from the students to flow into your mind. This meant that controlling the students, in a sense that they should always maintain spiritual discipline, was paramount. What actually happened is that they for the most part explored all kinds of desires and paths they felt they have the power to pull off now, and the extra energy I was feeding them, that was supposed to feed spiritual ecstasy, ended up feeding hysteria, egomania and madness, in a very large number of cases. All of that was fed back to me and drove me crazy; in fact, I didn’t actually go crazy only because I underwent full vajra initiation prior to working with students, so my spiritual core was beyond such influences, but I understood why all those spiritual teachers go hedonistic and insane – it’s caused by the students who don’t obey the instructions, don’t focus on God, and as a result create a stream of madness that is fed back to the guru, destroying his astral body. In my case, destruction of the astral body is not a big deal, because if I’m left alone for a few days I can rebuild it from above, but if someone is not a vajra initiate, the damage can’t be undone. So, basically, what I found out is that eating meat is not a problem, sex (with the right person) is not a problem, but plugging your astral body into multiple undisciplined people who show signs of potential by reacting positively to spiritual energy, that’s where spiritual people go to die.

Another thing transpired in ways that are obvious in hindsight, yet defies “spiritual” expectations – money is a huge problem, and not in a sense that “money corrupts” or something similarly silly, but in a sense that not having money is not survivable in this world, and so if you have things to do here you must choose between dying and failing to achieve your goals, and trying to get money in ways that might compromise you spiritually. Lack of money caused a constant struggle and huge problems of all kinds, and the most ridiculous thing is that I heard all kinds of “spiritual people” saying all kinds of nonsense about spiritual harmfulness of having money, as if money will somehow tempt and corrupt you. No it won’t; what actually corrupts you is that you didn’t purify your spirit, you aren’t clear about your desires and goals, you suppress things instead of dealing with them in a transparent way, and when you have lots of money you basically pour lots of energy into all that suppressed and unresolved mess, and then all hell breaks loose. What I found out when I had significant amounts of money is that it doesn’t make me do anything I normally wouldn’t. Basically, it allows me to deal with problems that can be solved with money, and that’s it. If my computer breaks down, I can just replace it with one that’s current and good. If my car breaks down, I can either repair it or buy a new one. I can buy a home instead of renting it, and I don’t have to live in some shithole because it’s cheap. Yes, if you’re a “raw” person and you didn’t do any real work on understanding your desires, motives and so on, and someone just removes your limitations and allows you to do whatever you want, it’s going to end badly, probably in the same way things tended to end badly when I fed spiritual energy into my students that would otherwise be beyond their reach. Feeding energy into an unresolved mess inside someone’s astral body is most likely going to make this mess explode and set it on fire. Money is basically the same thing; however, the path of restriction, of not allowing yourself the means and the energy because you fear what you’re going to do is just wrong. What one needs to do is resolve things within himself and understand his desires, and then practice detachment and focus on transcendence. Restrictions and discipline, in my experience, are a great tool in the beginning, but there is a great danger in just leaving them “turned on”, and not resolving the underlying issues because it’s “messy”. Yes, dealing with messy things can spoil your impression of yourself as a pure and very spiritual person, because sometimes you need to deal with very nasty things, and you might not like yourself very much while you do. However, once you’ve actually dealt with them, you find out that you no longer need rules, restrictions or much of a discipline. Sure, some things in this body and in this world tend to feed themselves if left unchecked, so you occasionally have to say “no” to some fancy gadget, but as for the moral restrictions and regulations, you don’t really need those. The religious people tend to imagine all sorts of nasty things one would do if they had no commandments, laws or restrictions, but in reality, do you really need laws to prevent you from diving into a septic tank and drinking sewage? Not really, I would guess; well, that’s why I don’t need laws to prevent me from snorting cocaine from a hooker’s arse. If I’m left alone and unchecked, I meditate, read books, analyse what’s going on in the world, think, write books and articles, do photography and take walks in nature. The difference when I have endless money is that I do it on a more expensive computer, with a more expensive lens on a more expensive camera, and I go to a place where I actually want to be, instead to a place that’s affordable because it’s nearby, and I drive there using a more expensive car. I don’t just magically turn into a pig-werewolf that rapes and kills teenage girls and is stoned and drunk most of the time, just because I have money and no restrictions. The way religious people imagine these things is ridiculous, and is probably a result of awareness of what would happen if they had no restrictions put upon them. That, however, is not the path of yoga. A yogi would rather revisit his “caged pig” and gradually transform it into an angel of God, and you don’t have to keep the angel of God caged to prevent him from fucking everything that moves and ingesting all kinds of drugs. That is not to say that restrictions and discipline are not necessary; I started with them, and I’m sure my students would have found them very beneficial and it would have spared me many problems if they had, but it’s merely a phase that keeps you from going crazy and doing something you will later regret, until yoga had the time to do its thing.

So, the conclusion would be that some things that are commonly seen as dangerous can in fact be harmless or beneficial, while some things that can be seen as beneficial, such as compassion, can be deadly. This means there really is no substitute for having your brain switched on, and observing what’s going on inside you and around you. You can’t just accept some set of religious restrictions and think you’ll be fine; it doesn’t really work all that well for religious people, if you read up about all the scandals. Also, most of the stuff that the religions try to restrict is just misguided; for instance, trying to regulate people’s sex life and food. Instead, if you learn how to disconnect thoughts and emotions from energy, in a practice of vipassana or yoga, to power anything up or down, to see how things actually function under the curtain, where the cogs and wheels of things are turning, you can make very swift progress and actually control things by removing the energy, instead of applying the brakes. Control is absolutely necessary, because in this world we are immersed in satanic energy that forms the background of our every thought, and if you don’t pay attention, the tide is going to wash you away and you’ll drown. You just need to be relaxed and smart about it, that’s all. Relaxed attention, and the ability to disconnect power from any emotion or thought at will – and you find out that control is not hard, if done properly.

So, let me elaborate further on the practical implication of the “spiritual palimpsest” I described in the previous article.

What it means is that, in absence of your soul providing an overriding influence, the default, strongest and most influential force is the one provided by the global astral field, which is designed by Satan in order to produce just the kind of humans he likes. What happens to those who remain in that state when they die? They go to hell? In my opinion, that would actually be an upgrade for them, because if they are merely the satanic energy churning in the pool of generic unawakened not-really-being, that gets reused between bodies, and it’s like asking where does the electromagnetic force go when the motor isn’t working and the current isn’t flowing. Well, the electromagnetic force is created when the current is running through the coil. If the current isn’t running, the electromagnetic force isn’t being created. It doesn’t go anywhere.

The next question is, what is “self”, the “I” in all this? Vedanta says that self is the witness – the screen in the cinema, so to speak. Since the world is projected on the screen, self is present in the background of all beings. However, self as witness is not a karmically active element, and I am more concerned with self as the active element, of will and choice – not only asking “who am I?”, but deciding on a course of action that choses “what am I?” among the presented options.

So, let’s say we have the default Satanic energy saturating the spiritual life of all humans, as the baseline default, omnipresent like the gravity and the electromagnetic field of the Earth – I call it the global astral field. Then we have individual incarnating souls, imposing their individual karmic pressure upon the field, and locally overcoming its influence in order to create a specific being they will incarnate through. This ability to manifest presence here isn’t “free” – it has to be purchased from the owner of the place; at least, a “contract” has to be signed, agreeing to his terms. The other option is to purchase rights through karmic law, if the owner sins against you, and thus yields authority. The third option is to inherit the effects of previous incarnate beings’ actions, if they applied spiritual force here within the sphere of their authority, creating localized “presence” of high states of reality, that then saturate the place in certain ways.

This, in essence, means that if God wants to manifest a presence here, he needs to agree to Satan’s terms. Usually, this means that he can’t just come here and overrun and overcome everything – but he is allowed to present options, because that is the stated intent of Satan when creating this place, and he always has to concede this. God is allowed to have presence and representation here, and is allowed to present choices and, in fact, to be a choice here.

Also, when an incarnation of God (I’ll simplify it; in reality it’s incarnations of many different aspects of God that are Divine beings as such) creates a presence here, this gives the nameless God a name and a form, it leaves a trail in the global astral field, like lightning in the dark, only persistent, and this network of trails creates a sort of Ariadne’s thread that allows the incarnate beings to navigate the maze – they have other options, besides the satanic global field, to choose from, and thus decide “what” they are. This choice of “what am I” is essential, because it connects different layers of reality, allowing the higher to override and extend the lower, in object-oriented paradigm. The basic stuff remains, of course, because by virtue of being incarnated you have the body that works in a physical reality, but “overriding” a property means to rewrite code of a method; sex, for instance, is a good example, because it is one of the primary driving forces here, and although the physical part is common to all, the spiritual part differs wildly, because a person who made actual spiritual choices to become of God will rewrite their “sex” method, not necessarily consciously, but it will reflect spiritual choices, and so the primary element of sexual attraction will be spiritual, and the rest will be “inherited”. I actually don’t know how to explain this to a non-programmer, but the “inherited” code is executed after the new, original code; it’s like explaining “differentia specifica” of Idared apple sort. You write what makes it special, and then “inherit”, saying “the rest is common for ‘apple’”. In logic, you would say that “Idared apple is apple with the following specific properties: …”. Stating that it is apple is the “inherit” clause in OOP. So, in spiritual-physical terms, you override the sex method, declare as attractive that which is immersed in God, which is of God, and inherit sex from human_male which in turn inherits human and adds specifics for male sexual attraction and activity. So, by overriding the sex property of human existence in order to accommodate for your spiritual choices, you essentially become attracted only to women who embody your spiritual choice, by choosing to be of God themselves, making the presence of God the necessary condition of sexual attraction for you.

Of course, things are messier here, and choices aren’t so clear-cut and precisely defined, because even those who have chosen God rarely have a very good idea about God – they know that it’s something awesome, spiritually powerful, of higher reality, and they can recognize it when they are in its presence, but telling whether something in the world is “of that”, and to what degree, is hard and messy, because people’s spiritual choices are rarely unequivocal, clear and conscious – rather, it’s like a compass needle that generally points at North, but also responds to all kinds of local anomalies, such as speakers and mobile phones. It’s also recursive – you expect to be able to recognize a woman whose spiritual choice is God by the fact that, if you yourself make God your spiritual choice, and become an embodiment of that choice in all ways, she will be powerfully sexually attracted to you, because you assume that she, too, extended her sex method the way you did – adding attraction to God above all, then inheriting human_female, which inherits human, which inherits primate, which inherits mammal, and so on. The messy part is that not all people do that – some, instead of extending sex to accommodate for their spiritual choices and tastes, attempt to eliminate it altogether, under the assumption that sex is inherently an animal and satanic thing and there’s no such thing as spiritual sex. They attempt to have no code whatsoever in the sex method, not inheriting anything from the “parent”, however since the parent.sex method includes some fundamentally important things, not running the code at all can have all sorts of unforeseen bad consequences.

The second messy part is that “God” exists on a scale, or a gradient. A choice for God should be translated as “a choice for what I was able to understand and perceive of God”, and there is always more where that came from. There are all kinds of spiritual beings – call them angels, archangels and what not – and they are all very different, because they see and understand God in different ways, and in different amount, and all kinds of factors influence how much and of what they were able to internalize and be of. You can “choose God” and be a being of white astral light because you understand that much of God, you are able to take that much, and your choice is nevertheless real and valid, but one needs to understand that there’s more, and by refusing to go where “more” is you basically are saying “no” to God, in a way, because there are beings who went for “more” and consist of blue vajra, and beings who went for “more” from that and are of black vajra, and beings that went even further, and are of that, which can wield black vajra.

The third messy part is that when you say that you made all the choices there are to make, and what remains is to “enlighten” others, you basically said “no” to God – basically, you closed yourself for the direction where there is “more”. That’s why I find it funny when people object that I change my mind about things and evolve my theoretical explanations, because am I not supposed to have had the final knowledge from the start, or at least from the point where I started teaching? Well, I was a living Buddha made of vajra when I started teaching, but there was more. Considering how most people are still struggling to absorb the lesson 1 that I gave at day 1, and how those fundamental principles and techniques that I gave from the start are quite sufficient, having been exactly what I was using to get where I am now, I would say that the difference between level million and level billion is irrelevant from a perspective of beings on level one hundred, struggling to get to level 101.

So, what happens after death for beings who made choices to be of God? I’ll try to explain it with a visual metaphor. Imagine a fabric, basically a grid of fibres. Now imagine several superimposed cloths, made of various kinds of fabric, of increasing subtlety. Let’s say a choice to be of God means interweaving the lowest layer of fabric with the one immediately above, and increasing spiritual progress means to interweave both layers with the one further above, and so on. This interweaving is the acceptance and recognition that “I am that”, basically the extension of self, of “I”, into progressively higher realities. The interweaving means that the pieces of cloth are bound into one. Now, let’s visualize death as the process that dissolves the lowest fabric – an acid bath, or fire, or something equally destructive, but only the lowest fabric is destroyed, and those higher ones remain unharmed, as well as their interweaving. This means that your “self” identity remains preserved in those higher “bodies” that you created by your choices, as you became “of that”. If your sense of identity is lacking without a physical body, this starts to weave into the physical plane, connecting the higher fabrics to the physical body, creating a new incarnation. If not, you likely start weaving upwards, trying to grasp the next-higher fabric and interconnect it with your identity.

So, if you are a NPC, a child of Satan that never evolved higher choices, when the body is dissolved, what happens to your sense of identity? Well, since it was borrowed from the global astral field, which borrowed it from Satan in the first place, it was never “yours” to begin with, because if you were “you” enough to claim yourself and strive for an actual existence and identity, you’d probably not be in that position to begin with. And yes, there are also those who weave their identity into lower fabrics of deeply demonic and evil things, but you can already guess where that choice leads, and I would rather not go there.

So, basically, where your heart is, there will also be your treasure – you can choose to gather with the Lord, or to waste with the world. That which is of God, which you gathered into your own spiritual makeup by choosing to be of that, and choosing always more, that is the fabric that is weaved out of the threads of eternity, and survives when the lowest physical fabric is washed away in death. What of you is made of the stuff of eternity, survives time.

In Hindu and Buddhist sources that talk about reincarnation, a birth in human form is always described as something rare and precious, that provides the opportunity for attaining liberation. Sankaracarya narrows it down further – human birth is precious, but being born as a male is even more precious, and being borne as a brahmana is most precious. Before women start making noises about it, consider this: the Hindu civilization is very strict, it prescribes duties very precisely, and if you’re born a sudra, you are expected to be a physical worker or a servant, if you’re born a vaiśya you’re expected to became a skilled tradesman or a merchant, if you’re born a ksatriya you’re expected to be a soldier, policeman, politician or a ruler, and if you’re born a brahmana, you’re expected to be a religious scholar, a priest or a yogi. A woman, even within the highest caste, is expected to be a mother and a housewife, albeit very highly educated and intelligent one, and is not supposed to be a wandering sannyasini. Even the feminine gender of the word sounds weird and uncommon. So, what Sankaracarya said is actually common sense – since he was a wandering monk, a sannyasin, who thought this was the best way of life if you want to attain liberation, it’s obvious that being a male brahmana is the only birth where such a choice will be approved of, and even encouraged.

What is interesting is that even in those ancient times a choice to be a yogi and a wandering monk who seeks liberation from the world was seen as exceedingly uncommon, a thing only a few do, and even fewer attain success. Even in those times, when human birth was seen as a rare and precious thing, there were discussions on whether sudras have a soul or not, because, apparently, their appearance and actions allowed for such questions.

The model of reincarnation is quite different between the Vedic, Hindu and Buddhist religions. The Vedic system sees spiritual life in ways that resemble that of Christianity – there is heaven, hell and the physical world, but you are not necessarily stuck in either heaven or hell forever. Saints and gods can commit an offence or a sin and end up born on Earth, even in animal form. Humans can end up in either heaven or hell, and in various forms, depending on their actions during life. Beings in hell can rise up when the punishment for their sins is exhausted.

Buddhism, however, adopts a Jainist, rather than Vedic theory of soul, and develops it further, stating that soul is in fact an aggregation of karma that follows a path that is of its nature – desires create rebirth focused on their fulfilment, basically, and good and evil deeds create rebirth that will allow for reward and punishment. Hinduism in essence adopts the Buddhist view on karma, but revises it to accommodate for the concept of atman, an individual soul that is an aspect of brahman, the Absolute, and is a core of infinity captured under the layers of karma.

The commonly understood truth between all three systems is that human birth is the pinnacle of what is possible in this world, but that sophisticated souls that explore high spirituality are very rare in this world. Basically, they would be a fraction of a percent of a population. Even great gurus had only a handful of disciples, and deep understanding was exceedingly uncommon.

Also, in Hinduism and Buddhism, the systems that work with the assumption of spiritual evolution through many incarnations, there is a common assumption that it takes an exceedingly long time for a soul to develop the level of sophistication or purity that would allow for a human birth, and also a very large number of human births to slowly evolve towards the point where liberation is attainable.

Regarding the concept of delay between incarnations, things are less clear. There is a theory according to which reincarnation is something that happens with very little delay between lives, because the momentum of karma very quickly creates another birth. There is another theory according to which the souls wait in the astral world until their karma for another birth ripens. In any case, the theory according to which there is a huge number of sophisticated souls queued up somewhere in the astral world, waiting until a human body is made for them to be born in, because there’s a lack of human bodies available on Earth, could be easily falsified even in ancient times – you see, there is a tantric concept according to which most humans are pashavi, animals in human form, without any spiritual interests or abilities. Obviously, the majority of human beings were hardly more than cattle even in those times, which is not what one would expect to happen if human body was a rare thing only the best and brightest of souls could qualify for. Yogis were exceedingly rare, and pashavis were the rule. So, let’s err on the side of caution and say that there were twice as many souls somewhere on the astral planes that were queued up for incarnation in human form, or in the lack of human bodies inhabited bodies of the more intelligent animals, some of which are in fact self-aware. So let me show you this graph:

As you can see, during the times of Buddha, when the concept of rare human birth was articulated, human population worldwide was around 300 million. According to the aforementioned model, let’s say that half the qualified souls inhabit the human form, and the other half is waiting for their turn, due to the scarcity of bodies. The total result is 300 million humans, of which 99% would be qualified as pashavi, meaning they could as well be horses, donkeys, cows or elephants for the amount of high spirituality they show interest for. This means that some 3 million souls, when incarnated, would manifest symptoms that would qualify them as obviously supra-animal by qualified spiritual people, meaning that they seek knowledge, spirituality and transcendence, rather than sensuality, possession of goods and control over other humans. Those 3 million souls are obviously something you can’t just make more of quickly; if so, we would be dealing with a situation where a significantly larger percentage of human population was “filled” by those.

So, if we concede as fact that sophisticated souls with transcendental inclinations were an insignificant percentage of a population of 300 million, and 1% is probably an overestimation but let’s leave it at that, and we also concede as fact that spiritual evolution takes a long time and you can’t just make more souls at will, or get them from some adjacent pool where they are waiting for their turn, because if you had 200 million of them, spiritual people and yogis would form 66.67% of the population of 300 million, instead of 1%, we must contend with the following situation: human population held rather steady until the advent of the industrial evolution, at which time it doubled; furthermore, with the introduction of modern agricultural technology and medicine, the population spiked exponentially – 3.5 billion in the late 1960s, 8 billion now.

So, if less than 1% of a population of 0.3 billion could be filled with souls that deserve the name, while the others could interchangeably fill humans or other smart animals, such as cows and horses, and let’s say there was a queue of souls in the astral plane waiting for a physical incarnation, and let’s say that this queue can’t be that deep, or more than 1% of human bodies would show more-than-animal inclinations, what the hell do we do to explain 8 billion additional human bodies appearing in just a few centuries?

Sure, we can’t really know how deep the astral pool of souls is, but honestly, I am willing to extend the number to one billion souls. After that point, you lost me, because even millions of actual sophisticated souls were a stretch in times of Buddha, and of 300 million, most were total animals. Having all that in mind, what the hell inhabits the other seven and a half billion human bodies? It’s not like there’s a lack of sophisticated, intelligent animals for pashavis to inhabit, either – in modern farming, huge numbers of cattle are grown, to accommodate the larger human population that needs food. There’s all that talk about wildlife extinction, but I would venture a guess that the total number of land animals actually increased due to industrial farming – you can’t say that you have less cows and sheep and more humans, so the animal souls are born in human bodies. You actually have more cows, pigs and sheep.

I thought about this for quite a while – obviously, the first idea I had was that the pool of souls of available for incarnation is unknown, which makes any theorising unreliable. However, then I understood that souls that didn’t have a human incarnation would have a really, really hard time “driving” a human body, considering how I saw humans having great difficulties driving a human body of the opposite sex they are not accustomed to, or displaying signs of mental imbalance or even outright psychosis when trying to push the human body into directions where it doesn’t want to go naturally. Let’s assume that you have a planet of sentient aliens somewhere, and due to depopulation their souls are incarnated here on Earth. They would have a huge problem “driving” a body that is completely different from everything they are used to. Their subconscious memories would attempt to manifest themselves in ways that would push a human body into directions where it doesn’t really work properly, or they would just remain autistic, unable to make the body do anything at all, or even process the sensory stimuli of this type. This, however, made me think about how incarnation actually works, and things get weirder from here, so much so that I actually have a problem when I try to put it into words.

First of all, we need to understand that incarnation of one soul into one body (1:1 relational model) is not the only concept people have come up with. Advaita vedanta, for instance, uses a 1:M model, where one soul incarnates as literally all bodies, and the apparent differences between them are on the order of the Sun transferring energy to Earth, and various gasses, liquids and solids accepting this energy in various ways, manifesting all kinds of complicated fluid-mechanics phenomena, that would seemingly have multiple and unrelated causes. Vedanta uses this highly innovative approach to explain the concept of soul – brahman is the original light, that passes through the multiple layers of maya, illusion, causing apparent difference and separation of entities, and when light of brahman attains self-awareness in human form, it thinks it is atman, a soul. As strange as 1:M model of incarnation might seem, I can easily demonstrate it by citing identical twins, who started as a single entity, which then split into several branches, and analysing identical twins they look like a single karmic entity that was spliced into several separate physical entities, and often those separate lives have all-but-identical “plots”. It’s even easier to explain this with plants, because we can take a cutting and grow it into a separate plant, or grow several plants by splitting the same potato. When you think about it from this perspective, it’s the 1:1 model of soul and incarnation that leads into paradoxes and creates serious issues.

So, if we take identical twins as an example of a single incarnation line that can be split into multiple physical beings, and explain it as a separation that took place below the astral plane, creating two separate physical beings, we can also imagine a single karmic being that creates several apparently separate astral incarnations, each of those proceeding to create multiple physical incarnations, such as a colony of bees or ants.

One of the viewpoints within Hinduism, Sankhya, works with Purusha-Prakrti dichotomy, where a spiritual entity, Purusha, animates an entity in nature, Prakrti, thus creating a soul-body composite, also known as an animate being. A relational model of 1:1 is possible, but not obligatory, so you can have one Purusha animating a whole planet of beings, and within that planet you can have additional influences by multiple Purushas, each creating either singular or plural incarnations, manifesting respective spiritual trends (and if you replace “Purusha” with “Bodhisattva”, you essentially understand what Mahayana Buddhism teaches about Bodhisattva manifesting tulkus). In essence, this would create a situation where one physical being is a manifestation of several different spiritual motivating forces. Also, since the control would reside with the physical being, it can accept or refuse “initiation”, by accepting or refusing to identify itself in certain ways. To put it in Christian ways, saying that a being is “born in original sin” would mean that originally, all humans are “evaporations” of Satan’s will and intent that is manifested as the whole of humanity, but Christ also manifests his influence in the world, that is optional, and one can choose it as his own, and choosing Christ as the Purusha that incarnates through him one “chooses Christ as his personal saviour”, and is “redeemed from the original sin”. One can thus say that “live not I, but Christ within me”.

This makes explaining the process taking place when you suddenly and exponentially increase the number of humans in the world in a short period of time much simpler. You see, in order to drive a human body you don’t actually need a soul at all; if anything, most living beings would simply grow into manifestations of the primary Purusha manifesting through that world; in essence, they would be incarnations of Sanat Kumar’s will and intent – the body of Satan, as I poetically put it in the previous article. This is the lowest-energy, basic state of being, and those incarnated are all of the same “spirit”, they all want the same things, fear the same things, share the same principal goals and are for all intents and purposes interchangeable.

If another Purusha casts his presence upon the world, this inherits, extends and overrides the methods of the basic state, to put it in terms of the object-oriented programming. Essentially, it’s similar to the situation where all things on Earth are heated by the Earth’s core, this overlaps with the heat coming from the Sun, and some places are locally heated by human-made nuclear reactors or combustion of fossil fuels. As a result, you can have multiple overlapping sources of heat, creating local thermodynamic manifestations, or, in spiritual terms, you can have multiple spiritual influencers, or Purushas, creating overlapping phenomena, where human will and choice basically implement formative decisions – you, basically, decide who you are, by accepting and rejecting spiritual influences that make up what you perceive as your inner spiritual life.

So, things are very far from being as simple and clear-cut as they initially appeared – instead of having a situation where you need to have 300 million souls to populate 300 million bodies, which raises the question of what happens when you increase the number of bodies by an order of magnitude, you have some sort of a field that manifests through all human bodies – 8 billion as easily as 300 million, and they are what the tantrics would call the pashavi, in essence the beasts of Satan, trying to fuck, own things and be famous. What you actually need to account for in this theory are the exceptions – the souls that manifest real spiritual interests and real spiritual diversity, and they can be overriding manifestations of other spiritual forces, superimposed upon the default field, which they locally outshine and create local divergences. This can be explained by understanding that we live in a palimpsest of superimposed forces, where the satanic one is the default – the obvious, the easiest, loudest, the non-choice almost everybody lives. However, as one navigates through the maze of inner spiritual choices, it becomes possible to navigate into segments of the labyrinth where other forces are dominant – in fact, by veering into those segments you choose to be influenced by those forces to such a degree, that your self-identity switches from the satanic default, to the high spiritual reality that dominates there; the Christians would phrase this as entering the Church by choosing to be of Christ, or something like that. In essence, those are initiatory choices, because they re-define what you are, as a spiritual being, and it’s not so much that you survive death by making the right choice so that God will recognize you as his own, it’s more along the lines of existing on a higher plane of being and seeing that plane as “self”.

This answers multiple questions at once – who will be saved, who will be destroyed, who will go where after death and so on. It’s trivial – that which you have chosen to be in life, will be your fate after death. If you were one of Satan’s “basic bitches” – the non-choosers who always do what is easy, believe what everybody believes, do what everybody does, the non-awakened, the generic – they are not really souls, they are merely the manifestation of Satan’s basic field of this world, and since they never chose to truly be, they have no future or destiny. They are reabsorbed into the pool of satanic energy that is born again in this world in some form, generic, main-stream and thinking it’s of course on the right side because every other side is wrong, and numbers are on their side because that’s what everybody believes.

If you chose to weave the fabric of self out of other, higher influences that permeate all, your true existence is already “up there”, made of That, and when death washes away the body, you awaken in the fullness of your choice, once the satanic darkness and illusion whimpers out of your existence. That’s all there is to it – those who chose to initiate themselves into higher realities, who made the actual choices to belong to God in one way or another, will see that this choice determined their destiny by making them partake in eternity. Only that, which is of God, can have eternity; the rest dies in time.