I’ve been considering one thing for a while and I’m not sure I have a definitive opinion, I’ll put some of my thoughts on paper in order to clarify them.

It’s about what happens with a failed tulku.

I won’t go into details of what a tulku, or an avatar, is. You can go look that up. Basically, it’s defined as incarnated motivation by a Purusha or a Buddha, depending on the belief system. In mahayana buddhism, a bodhisattva‘s compassion when perceiving the suffering of the world causes a metaphorical “teardrop” that falls onto the Earth and is born as a human being whose purpose is to alleviate ignorance and suffering. Essentially, it’s not the God or Bodhisattva who is incarnating, but a more complex, sophisticated thing. Christianity is on the right track with its Trinity concept, where God’s intent regarding the world causes God to become a different “person” – if he remains in the original form he is the Father, if he becomes a man in order to redeem humanity he is the Son, and if he is the uplifting spiritual force he is the Holy Ghost. Essentially, God can be many things at once without actually ceasing to exist in his original state. All those manifestations, however, are completely and fully God, they are not something of a lower quality or inferior.

So, a tulku is something akin to the Son in the concept of Trinity – it is something that is both fully man and fully Buddha, and also a process of man trying to “reattach” to Buddha, to self-realize by both manifesting the Buddha’s mission of compassion and re-connecting with his own true nature.

The problem is, those tulkus usually state that buddhahood is everyone’s true nature, because it is their true nature. They see the path from being a Buddha in ignorance to being a Buddha in realization, but that’s more a description of what a tulku is, than a description of a normal human’s spiritual path. To a human soul, a realization of his true nature would look more like an NDE experience – you realize that you are in your true nature a spiritual being, you understand that you are more than you thought but there’s much that you need to learn. For a tulku, it’s the realization of that lower bird from the tree from the upanishads – it understand that the godlike bird above the tree is its true nature. This causes a slight problem in teachings, because to assume that something that applies to you applies universally for everyone else is a potential problem. It also opens us to my original dilemma – what happens if a tulku never actually attains self-realization, if he never actually completes the process of reuniting with the spiritual entity that cast it. If that tulku becomes deluded and attached in the world, is the original spiritual entity trapped, like a boat with an anchor that refuses to detach from the seabed, and the chain cannot be cut?

The main questions are, is it possible for a tulku to fail, and, second, if a tulku can fail, what is the exact nature and extent of the failure? Is it just failure to attain full realization of one’s nature while incarnated, or does it go further, into formation of attachments that bind it to samsara? If a tulku is bound to samsara, does it detach into an entity that is truly separate in both nature and destiny from the entity that had cast it, or does it bind that original entity to its fate?

So, that’s the question I’m dealing with. Let me try to find the answer.

The important aspects are “what is binding”, and “what is attachment”. An attachment forms when you are deluded enough to seek something in places where it is not. The classic example is to go after a mirage in a desert, thinking it to be a lake. You are attracted by the promise of a lake, but you are lured deep into the desert where you die of thirst. However, you can be attracted to a mirage, but realize its promise is false and you change your direction. Attachment is when you are so invested in your attempt that you refuse to acknowledge that it doesn’t work and will never work. Bondage, however, is when you are not allowed to leave due to some external influence, for instance you are in debt to a caravan leader who then sells you into slavery. So, it’s not always a simple matter of realizing the error of your ways and changing direction. You can get entangled into something that won’t let you go, and that’s where the serious problems start.

Then we get the aspect of “how are desires of a tulku different from ordinary human desires”. The main difference is the vector – the direction and magnitude. The direction of a tulku‘s every single desire is to reunite with the spiritual entity that cast it, and to fulfill its mission. You can delude a tulku into thinking that something is something that it is not, but there is no persistence to such attachments, and the illusions are very quickly tested and rejected, because a tulku doesn’t have neither time nor energy to waste on things that don’t contain what he’s looking for, and the magnitude of his desire to return to his true nature, having accomplished his mission, is such that it simply overpowers intensity of anything else. A tulku is like a honeybadger, he doesn’t give a fuck and just takes what he wants, completely ignoring or overpowering anything that might stand in its way. It eats bears, lions or cobras if they stand in its way, and you can shoot it but you can’t change its mind. Read about Milarepa’s life, you’ll see what I mean.

If tulku is killed while dedicated to his mission, he reunites with the casting entity. If he is deluded by something effective, persistent and deadly, lead to believe that his destiny is to go into a desert, where he fails in his mission and dies, we have a question: what if the illusion survives death? What if attachments of binding character were formed under the influence of that illusion? What if something effectively presented itself as his Master and offered fulfillment of his nature and mission and that resulted in failure? What if a combination of bad training, bodily weakness and poor judgment resulted in failure? What if a tulku has been seriously contaminated and compromised by wrong beliefs and wrong choices, and is that actually possible? If it’s possible, can it be undone after death, in full clarity and retrospective? I don’t know.

I’ve seen high spiritual beings bound to Earth, as by a thread, with obligations formed in a state of ignorance, that proved to be permanent and binding, and couldn’t be dissolved after death. I therefore know that it’s possible for a high being to be caught in such a trap, caught in the world like a bear or a wolf by its foot; can’t tear it off, can’t force it to let go. The danger seems to be quite real and this seems to answer at least a part of my question. The other part is, how to avoid this kind of entrapment. My personal solution is never to be human, always be a shadow of God. Follow the will of God in all things, and renounce any opinion, belief or a course of action if it is not sanctioned by God. Complete surrender to the will of God, which amounts to being God. You cannot threaten something that doesn’t care if it dies. You cannot bribe it if it wants only one thing, and that’s the one you don’t have to offer. You can’t convince it that it committed sin, when it doesn’t even believe that it exists, because only God is, and in Him there is neither sin nor impurity. So that answers that question.

The question that remains is, do other tulkus conform to this pattern? Will another of my kind respond to being trapped in bear trap not by trying to outpower the trap, not by trying to break off his leg, but by understanding that there is no bear to be caught, and it’s not a God trap, but a bear trap?

I’m still considering all this and my answers are by no means final.

ps.:

I think I know of a way for a tulku to really, really fail.

It would need to recognize Sanat Kumar as God and pledge itself fully to him, initiate itself into his resources and basically become his servant. I think such a tulku would be absorbed by Sanat Kumar and would be permanently lost to its original caster; it would share Sanat Kumar’s fate.

There are two main schools of thought in regard to surviving trauma.

One, of modern “psychology”, seems to think that any kind of trauma necessarily damages you and nothing can be either healed or overcome, only avoided.

The other, older and especially espoused by Nietzsche, states that whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, basically saying that trauma is the main instrument of personal growth.

It’s easy to respond to unpleasant experiences by whining and adopting the attitude of perpetual victimhood – woe is me, bad shit happened. This is the most useless attitude one can possibly have and it simply keeps you stuck in a position of perpetual impotence and incompetence.

It is also easy to overcome trauma and rationalize how it was actually good for you because it made you into who you are now, and you turned out fine. That’s how people who were beaten up as children learn to beat up their children, and the circle of evil persists and propagates.

It would be very easy for me to say that the bad things that happened to me forced me to overcome them and thus develop an incredible amount of mental strength. It would be easy to justify everything from my past in hindsight, and say it was all for a good purpose, and now I finally understand. But that would be to adopt falsehoods and to rationalize evil.

The only purpose of that evil was to destroy me. It wasn’t there to help me do anything, and it wasn’t designed so that I would grow by overcoming it. It was designed to prevent me from incarnating my full potential, to cripple me in such a way that I would never become capable of even believing who I actually am. It didn’t make me into what I am now – my consciousness is the same now as it was before. It’s only my knowledge and abilities that grew. If you knew me then, I couldn’t say the things I now know. I couldn’t do the things I now can. My mind was uncomfortably tight and lacked power and reach. My consciousness and essential character, however, were the same then as they are now. I am aware how the events in my childhood and youth were designed to gradually destroy me and put me out of circulation. I know that Sanat Kumar did it on purpose, because he actually bragged about it. It was also designed in such a way that if I overcame, he could claim the credit, he could say that he set everything up just so to make it possible. But I saw the pattern, in myself and in others. He trains us like one would train lions to believe they are sheep, to love eating grass and to hate eating flesh. He trains us to fear, to be small, to be vulnerable, to be alone and unprotected and threatened, and he does so in order to permanently, fatally cut our personal connection with God, to cripple us in such a way that connection with other humans, within the confines of his plan, would remain as our only option.

He trains us to be weak, crippled and damaged, because that is how he wants us. That is what the God of this world has in store for us if we just believe in his plan. We get to be the bonsai kitten, a part of the human caterpillar.

If someone wanted me to manifest my power, I know exactly what was to be done, and it is essentially the opposite of what my life looked like. You don’t train someone to be a king by giving him over to psychotic people with servant-mentalities to teach him how to be a broken servant. You don’t isolate him from knowledge and truth. You don’t bombard him with humiliations every single day and teach him by bad example. No, that’s what you do when you want to destroy someone so permanently and finally, that he never, ever has a chance to grow to wield any kind of power, and if he does, he will retain fatal vulnerabilities that you can exploit to either control or neutralize him. I have no illusions about that, and although I went through the events of my past considering the possibility that it was the only way that would realistically lead to the present-day results, I quickly saw that it wasn’t so. In fact, I learned more useful things from those rare few positive things that happened to me, than from overcoming any difficulty. If anything, having to overcome difficulties convinced me that I’m alone and without help, that I’m unimportant and that I don’t matter. Those were all things that I had to deal with later, with help from above, but they were the actual intended result of what this world and its maker had in store for me. That I overcame is not something he rejoiced, as he would have had he indeed designed it all as temptations to provoke growth. No, he saw it as a disaster, a peril and a grave threat. There is never light at the end of the tunnel he digs for us, and it’s not a tunnel, it’s simply a hole in the ground he intends to close behind us when we get to go deep enough. It’s a grave for souls.

The main difference between myself and most people who have had shit happen to them, is that I saw a great deal more, as it happened. I was not as blind as most. I was, however, very much inclined to justify everything in hindsight, but I saw that as an emotional response and I stopped it in its tracks, and proceeded to look into things calmly and rationally. I saw the design of the trap. In hindsight, I was supposed to see how it’s all designed to produce great things, if I succeeded to get out. If I failed, I would get to see how it was all my fault, because I did things that broke God’s perfect plan for me. I would then try to fix my mistakes in the next attempt, where I would be further weakened and damaged, and so ad nauseam, until there’s not much left. The mechanism that is supposed to weaken the captives is completely ridiculous now that I broke it on the global scale, and actually keeps bombarding me with “failure, mistake, sin, failure” emotional charges, without any sense or pattern, only because it’s what it’s designed to do and its guidance is broken so it does it randomly.

I actually get to see the inner workings of the system; my analysis isn’t merely a theory. I see the metaphorical cogs and wheels. It’s interesting how you can’t really believe it’s all for some greater good once you’ve seen the inner workings, once you’ve seen the guidance scripts and their triggers. It’s even more interesting how you continue desperately wishing to forget what you saw and rationalize it all away, to believe that some good God designed this world for the purpose of evolution, to help us grow and know his greatness in the end. It’s interesting how we have the desire to attribute our victories to God’s prescience and plan, and how desperately we desire to interpret everything bad as our fault, our willful action that broke God’s perfect plan.

And it’s even more interesting to see how this motivation is external, how it’s the result of a script running in the system.

There is a danger of people seeing me as an example that spiritual evolution is possible in this world, if only you are good enough. This of course implies that everybody who failed did so because they weren’t good enough, and I am certain the scripts of the system will make sure that everyone self-depresses with this thought. There are two problems with that, though. First is that I haven’t changed much, my consciousness is the same as it was when I was born, so the theory about me evolving is questionable. The second thing is, how many others like me, who started as equally good, didn’t make it? How many had killed themselves, or died in despair, or were so damaged that they kept running in senseless circles trying to heal themselves unsuccessfully?

If this is a place for evolution, why does an NDE experience of the astral world have greater positive transformational effect than all the things specific to this world? Wouldn’t the opposite be expected if Sanat Kumar’s story were true, if the higher worlds were those of stagnation, and if you want to evolve you need to subject yourself to the rigors and temptations of this one? How is it then that a brief experience of the astral world does more for one’s spiritual condition and is more transformational than the rest of one’s human life? How come the spiritual people aren’t seen as more spiritual because they had more experiences of matter, but because they had more experiences of God?

I read a story once, that hit incredibly close to home. It’s a story about a prince who angered his father the king, who disowned and exiled him. He spent years and decades of his life as a beggar, forgetting that he was once a prince. At one point, his aging father changed his mind and ordered his servants to find his son, reinstate him and fulfill any wish he might have.

When they found the former prince and offered to give him anything he wanted, the beggar begged them to give him a meal.

I know I’m contradictory. Somewhere I speak about attaining salvation/enlightenment as something that is easily achievable for anyone willing to actually invest proper effort, and in other places I make it sound as if enlightenment is almost unattainable.

The fact that I talk about Gods is enough to conclude that there are beings who did in fact attain a state of Godhood. I don’t think any single one of them just happened to be created that way; they all created themselves with their choices and actions. Also, most of them give off a feeling that makes me think they were once human; some feel female, some feel male. Some, however, feel like nothing you can possibly imagine, like having a sentient black hole simply be essential consciousness.

So, there’s my definition of salvation and enlightenment: if you end up as a God or a Goddess, you succeeded. I don’t care for definitions that see enlightenment as basically a lasting samadhi-state, or salvation as God not being pissed at you anymore. I’m more pragmatic, I know it when I see it. If I feel you and I think you “taste” like God having taken form, you’re enlightened. I also understand quantity and gradation. Even if you’re a God, there are often greater Gods. Even if you’re Buddha, you can find yourself in a position where someone greater needs to clean up after you. I don’t see it as some simplified single-point destination; it’s much more complex than that. I don’t see evolution as a path and God as a goal; I see God as material from which you evolve, if you evolve at all. I see it as finding new ways in which to be God.

In the previous article I wrote about the concept that was introduced by Jesus, the narrow vs. the wide road:

“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” Mt 7,13-14

Here’s what it’s about. The huge majority of people will say that they desire salvation. However, they aren’t willing to go much out of their way to attain it. They want to keep their old life, and add salvation to all the great things that they perceive there. That’s the wide road.

The narrow road is to perceive that there is nothing of value in your old life. All is already lost, and trying to preserve anything is insane, like someone being born a pig and trying to preserve his piglets and pigpen.

People who think they already have something of value are disinclined to invest effort into salvation, and will perceive it as a sacrifice. They will see their shackles as jewelry. The people who understand their problem will not see investment of effort into spiritual practice as time and effort taken away from their worldly life, they will see it as the singularly important thing, and everything else as time and effort lost.

Jesus actually talked about that, too:

When one of those who were reclining at the table with Him heard this, he said to Him, “Blessed is everyone who will eat bread in the kingdom of God!”
Parable of the Dinner
But He said to him, “A man was giving a big dinner, and he invited many; and at the dinner hour he sent his slave to say to those who had been invited, ‘Come; for everything is ready now.’ But they all alike began to make excuses. The first one said to him, ‘I have bought a piece of land and I need to go out and look at it; please consider me excused.’ Another one said, ‘I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to try them out; please consider me excused.’ Another one said, ‘I have married a wife, and for that reason I cannot come.’ And the slave came back and reported this to his master. Then the head of the household became angry and said to his slave, ‘Go out at once into the streets and lanes of the city and bring in here the poor and crippled and blind and lame.’ And the slave said, ‘Master, what you commanded has been done, and still there is room.’ And the master said to the slave, ‘Go out into the highways and along the hedges, and compel them to come in, so that my house may be filled. For I tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste of my dinner.’” Lk 14,15-24

That is the meaning of the other frequently quoted section:

“He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it. Mt 10, 37-39

Also, that is the meaning of “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” Mt 19, 24

The Zen version of that would be that in order to put something in a cup, it’s better to start with one that is empty. If one thinks he already has something of value, he will seek everything else only as an addition. Such people then obviously make half-assed attempts at spirituality, and they of course fail. You can’t organize your life so that you fuck yourself up for 16 hours and then sleep, and expect to attain high spirituality. No more can you expect to replace one of those 16 hours with some spiritual practice, as a compromise, and attain high spirituality. No, you must find a way to make the largest possible part of those 16 hours into a spiritual effort. You don’t need to quit your job and live in a cave for that to work. However, you need to have your priorities straight. Washing dishes is one of the most important tools for learning how to meditate during daily activities, and I was surprised to find out that all my students failed at that. It’s not about washing dishes, it’s about being able to occupy the body with a repetitive task that takes time and you’re not bothered by others, during which time you can meditate as deeply as you could if sitting in some asana in a cave. Part of the lesson is what the great Ram Gopal told Yogananda: if you have a room in which you can lock yourself in and be alone, there’s your Himalayan cave, there you will find the kingdom of God. Another part is that meditation can become the norm of your consciousness, rather than the exception. It’s the foundation of karma yoga: the form of yoga where you act as an expression of meditation, act by following the inner spiritual guidance. This is the highest, most demanding form of yoga, but it is also the form of yoga that is most likely to result in high spiritual achievement, because it is inherently immune to bullshit. In every other form of spirituality you can deceive both yourself and others, but in karma yoga, that doesn’t work, because reality of daily action gives a harsh feedback and if you’re doing something wrong, you will either be unable to meditate or you will be unable to work. If your actions are wrong they will snap you out of meditation, they will switch you out of inner alignment. If your meditation is crap, it will interfere with the things you have to do and you’ll do shoddy work.

However, in a realistic situation, it might be the only way for most people. It certainly was the only way for me, to the point where you can live with me 24/7 and not see me meditate, not because I don’t, but because it’s so expertly hidden in everything I do, it’s never obvious. It started with things where I had to do something repetitive and could be left alone – washing dishes, vacuum-cleaning the place, washing the car. Then I added things where I was surrounded by others, but without interaction; taking a ride in a bus, walking through the city, sitting somewhere in a crowd. Then I added intellectually demanding tasks (Object Pascal coding). Eventually, I added interaction, and it didn’t take all that long – it took me less than a year, perhaps, to make meditation the foundation of everything else that I do, instead of an addition that tries to squeeze itself into some miraculously vacant time slot, which never works. That’s the thing about the narrow path, that’s less travelled: instead of finding excuses for failing, you find ways to succeed. There are no important, static elements that can’t be rearranged or removed if necessary. It’s all a matter of priorities.

I have an interesting dilemma.

Let’s say you’re Superman. What is moral high ground for you, regarding mankind? Are you bound by ethical principles to help humans? Are you immoral if you simply ignore them and go your own way?

Are you immoral for ignoring ants, mice and crows? When was the last time you sacrificed your interests in order to help a hamster?

Is the analogy correct? Isn’t mankind a phenomenon of a higher order compared to those? I don’t know; maybe if you tried asking a hamster, it might tell you helping it is a praiseworthy effort. I know why you don’t bother with them. First, it’s none of your business, and second, you don’t really give a shit; they are beings of a lower order and bothering with them means to neglect your own, more important business. Sure, if it doesn’t cost you anything you might help an animal and feel great about yourself for doing it, but if you’re honest with yourself, it’s usually the farthest thing from your mind.

But why do the authors of the comic books and movies assume that the higher, more powerful beings would find helping humans supremely important; at least if they are “good” powerful beings, the superheroes. Why would a superhuman find humans interesting? When was the last time you were interested in a human who is 3 standard deviations in IQ distribution below you, and with whom you have nothing in common?

And yet, people assume someone like Jesus sacrificed his life for their salvation, because of course a Superman, a God would do that. He had nothing better to do but find a bunch of total fucktards, teach them something they were sure to misunderstand, and then get himself killed in a very painful way so that their sins would be redeemed, and pray for their forgiveness while they ridicule him.

Really? Honestly, look at yourself and tell me, do you consider yourself worthy of that? Of a God sacrificing his life for your salvation? Would you accept it at this cost? Let’s make it less abstract – let’s make it your best friend or a beloved family member. If you had to push a button and cause that person to die and you are instantly saved, would you do it? OK, let’s make it less causal. Let’s say someone killed that family member or a friend and you need only to accept that it was good and proper for that person to be sacrificed for your salvation, and you’re saved. When does this stop being monstrous? What is salvation, if not loving God so much you want to spend an eternity with him? And if the price of admission is signing off on his murder, isn’t it so contradictory as to negate itself?

Accepting such a sacrifice is morally wrong, but does offering it make any sense whatsoever?

I have serious problems with the bodhisattva concept, where someone renounces enlightenment and instead tries to help others. The entire thing looks like a trap, because there’s the assumption that the world is full of people who would immediately choose to be enlightened if only a bodhisattva stumbled along and offered to teach them. That certainly doesn’t look like the world I know. What would actually happen is that people would ask him who the fuck does he think he is, trying to impose his silly beliefs on them? Of course they know better. The first thing the world would tell a bodhisattva is that he isn’t needed and nobody really gives a damn about him. The saints seem to think that humans are in a terrible need of salvation and he has just the thing for them. However, what humans would actually think is that the saint is in a terrible need of psychiatric help. He needs to be taught that there’s no God or salvation, and he in fact isn’t anything special. In fact, he’s worse than they are.

So, basically, spiritual people live in cognitive dissonance compared to the rest of mankind. They think salvation is in high demand and short supply, and it’s therefore their sacred duty to provide supply in order to satisfy the demand. However, I will offer a different interpretation. Salvation is in great supply and short demand. Whoever wants it, gets it. I can’t remember a single person who was known for making a serious spiritual effort, who actually failed to attain enlightenment. People just don’t care to take it when offered. They simply have other priorities, and different ideas about what would be the best use of their time and efforts.

I once heard a story about Ramanuja, who for a long time wanted to receive a holy mantra from his guru. Eventually, the guru told him the mantra, but warned him not to reveal it to others because that would be a terrible disaster and he would end up in hell. The mantra had such a profound effect on Ramanuja that he decided it makes sense to reveal it to everybody, because it’s not a big deal if one person goes to hell and thousands attain liberation. When his guru found out what he did, he was furious, but when Ramanuja offered this explanation, he was supposedly amazed at his disciple’s compassion and holiness.

But let’s consider an alternative ending, the one I find more likely.

The guru finds out about Ramanuja’s action and his motive, and tells him this: “You stupid, ignorant fool. A mantra is not a hammer, so that anyone could wield it. It’s like a musical instrument, that produces wonderful things in skilled hands, but only terrible noise in unskilled hands. It’s a portal to higher levels of existence, but it’s a door that opens only if you approach it just right, with the proper attitude and motives, in the proper state of mind and emotions. If a mantra is revealed to the impure, ignorant people, they will defile it. They will ridicule it and contaminate its ability to reach the higher spheres of existence, for both them and those who witness such defilement. The mantra works only if it causes the subtle workings of mind in just the right way. That’s difficult to accomplish and easy to disrupt. That’s why it is kept secret, and why it is revealed only to the pure minds of dedicated and holy students, after training, purification and testing. It’s not kept secret because of my lack of compassion, because I would like nothing better than everyone to attain enlightenment, but that option simply isn’t available. What you did, exposed the mantra to the impure minds, and this inhibited its effect on you; you can now no longer use it to reach God. Those others who heard it without proper context and outside of proper training, created a wrong impression of the mantra and its meaning, and that will forever stand in the way of their ability to really understand it; they are forever lost for the mantra, and even if they went through the proper process, the wrong understanding would stand in the way so powerfully, the subtle effects would be impossible to achieve. Basically, you ruined them, you ruined yourself, and you ruined me, because the holy mantra, that was so closely bound with the inner workings of my mind, was exposed and defiled, and this path within my spirit is now broken. And now that you know what you did, tell me, was it really worth disobeying me because you though you knew better, and you thought you were more compassionate than me, in your bloated arrogance and egomania? You, the savior of mankind, will sacrifice yourself in order to save many, and will teach me a lesson in compassion? Isn’t it just great how it turned out, yes?”

As I said, this bodhisattva concept of teaching God a lesson in compassion, that looks exactly like Satan’s motive in creating this whole mess here, because he wanted to demonstrate some collective concept of evolution, that was supposed to be better and more compassionate than God’s concept of individual evolution and initiation of souls. The entire concept reeks of egomania and narcissism and I am incredibly wary of it.

Mahayana means the great vehicle, that can carry many to enlightenment. However, that sounds suspiciously like that wide road Jesus talked about, that leads to ruin and damnation.

Only the narrow path, and the small vehicle lead to salvation. The path isn’t narrow because of some intent to bar access – it’s simply because few choose to traverse it. The small vehicle isn’t small because it’s designed as too crowded – no, it’s small because it automatically resizes itself in order to fit all occupants. The concept that everybody would be doomed if not for your compassion, it’s just incredibly arrogant and deluded; yeah, God didn’t know how to design the Universe and he needs you to teach him. Stand in line, because Satan had this idea first.