How do I feel about esotericism? - Language of life circumstances

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

This is the last part of a series of articles. It is also the most difficult to understand. The complexity is not due to the qualities of the reader or the author, it is due to the fact that understanding the language of life's circumstances is not only a function of consciousness. Understanding it is inextricably linked with a number of internal changes. Changing yourself is a practical expression of understanding. No change, no understanding. I wrote more about this in the article "On the Difficulty of Understanding". Another difficult point is associated with such a peculiarity of perception that a person is NOT COMPLETELY in control of what falls into his field of attention, we will touch on this circumstance in the section "Discrimination".

It should also be said that the language of life circumstances does not belong to the category of esotericism, because it is accessible to everyone and completely open. It's just that people are accustomed to referring all mysticism to esotericism and something that is accessible only to initiates. In this case, this is not the case. No initiations are needed here.

Definition and clarification through feedback

The language of life circumstances is the streams of information, events or phenomena in your life, naturally arising from your logic of behavior, intentions and thoughts, conditioned by the level of your morality. In other words, this is the language in which God communicates to you certain information (including, at your request), which is available precisely for your unambiguous understanding.

A simple example: if you hit hard, it hurts you. Complicated example: I did a bad deed - something unpleasant happened to you. An almost unrealistically complex example (for most people, especially atheists): you ask a question to God - a series of events happen to you that give an accurate and unambiguous answer to the question asked, and the answer may even be very unusual, that is, instead of answering a direct question, the reason is explained, according to which you cannot know this answer (yet) (and why), or it is explained that the answer does not exist (for example, a completely incorrect question like this: “how can I continue to eat everything in three throats, but at the same time lose weight and stay healthy ), Or a place is shown where you must find this answer on your own, and so on.

There is no conceptual difference between a simple example and the most complex, but if people understand a simple example because it directly affects their physical sensations, then problems arise with a complex one, since several other senses that are not related to the material world are affected, and therefore inaccessible to people who consciously or unconsciously chose the system of atheistic-materialistic beliefs as the basis for their worldview. These people, who have the right to do this, did not make any sense to read this series of articles, and even more so it would be a big waste of time to read the article further … unless they want to change this system to a more correct one or scoff (only to the detriment of YOURSELF, of course) over people with a different ideological basis.

From the point of view of academic science, the main difficulty is this: in a simple example, everything is clear and obvious, if you hit, then immediately after that it hurts, no additional questions arise and the logical error "post hoc ergo propter hoc" is practically excluded (after that, it means because of this). In a complex example, the pattern is completely unobvious and the probability of making the indicated mistake is very high, since something bad or at least unpleasant always happens sooner or later, and therefore there is a temptation to say: "it happened because I did a bad deed some time ago." … The most difficult example for an academically educated worker in science should cause complete rejection, because here there is an opportunity to pull ANY event by the ears as an answer to ANY life question, it is enough just to show some imagination. Pseudoscientists, various scientific freaks and the so-called "alternatives" act exactly according to this logic, which will only strengthen the academic scientist's feeling of some kind of obscurantism when he sees an EXTERNAL similar logic of reasoning. That is, if an academically minded scientific worker, already tired of alternative obscurantism, indiscriminately classifies all mysticism that comes across to him as nonsense unworthy of his attention, he automatically refuses to perceive and try to understand the real mysticism that is happening to him personally. He will either not pay attention to it, or he will think that there is some kind of "rational" (read, atheistic-materialistic) explanation, but it is simply not yet available to his mind.

In fact, there is nothing complicated in a complex example; if you interpret the language of life circumstances correctly, you can always draw parallels between the logic of your behavior and the consequences that will inevitably arise after. In this case, it will be completely clear WHAT happened due to WHAT reasons. But the difficulty arises in the fact that it is impossible to teach this in the way that they learn at school or university, since the interpretation of the same event by different people must be performed in different ways. The event will tell one person about one thing, another about another. That is, one of the six classical criteria of scientific character, called "intersubjective testability", does not apply here, since the nature of the feedback is rigidly tied to the personality and its qualities, and not to the physics of material processes.

Let's take a look at some other simple examples. A person belligerently violates traffic rules and drives quite impudently. Gets in an accident and dies. We can say that God punished, and this is, in general, so. But if you unroll the very logic of the event, it will be clear that in the language of life circumstances the person was told that it is impossible to militantly break the rules. There are traffic rules, there are traffic signs, road markings, the culture that a person studied at school and, perhaps, at a university (if he did not study, his problems, there was a chance), in other words, the person was warned that it was impossible to behave insolently, especially on the road. In order not to harm a large number of people, a person is liquidated "from above". It looks as if he himself is to blame: he broke the rule and paid. In general, he really is to blame himself, because God does not punish, he only removes his protection from those actions that a person has decided to voluntarily perform, realizing that he is going into the area of Allowance.

When analyzing such events, you need to be very careful, because the specific causes of the tragedy before its implementation could ONLY be known to the victim. For other people, this will either be a lesson in the form of a demonstration, or it will mean nothing at all. I know only rare cases when it is possible, by indirect signs, to reveal a plausible picture (but not necessarily true) of what happened, guessing about the reasons. For example, you might know that a person often takes unjustified risks while driving and has already received warnings many times in the form of unpleasant but not tragic circumstances, from fines to minor hassles on the road. Thus, if one of these warnings becomes the last in his life for the offender, then for you and other knowledgeable observers it is a good demonstration of the language of life's circumstances.

This is how feedback works: any of your actions (inaction is also a kind of action) generates a stream of events that comes back to you along the feedback loops. It is important to understand that you are NOT ONLY the only one influencing the flow of events that generates such feedback, other people also take part in its formation.

Warnings

The language of life circumstances is far from always being a punishment for a person for some mistakes. According to my observations, he, most often, on the contrary, prompts a person what he can do and what not, leaving a wide enough scope for the realization of free will, but in a certain limited "corridor" of possibilities. The width of the corridor is different for different people in different circumstances, therefore it is wrong, mistakenly referring to some imaginary “justice”, to demand from God the same rights and opportunities for oneself as for someone else.

Here I have to make a small digression in order to explain to some people one important feature of their behavior. Most people I know have a tendency in the event of "injustice" towards them, it is imperative to look for other people like them, who were not punished in similar situations. I wrote a little about this in the article "About one of my experiments in the classroom at the university." The situation, for example, is this: a person parked under the No Stop Sign, seeing that many other cars have already been parked here in violation of the rules, and then his traffic police officer grabbed him and said: “Ay-y-yay!”. The perplexed would-be driver, pointing at other cars, answers, they say, but why is this possible?

This is a gross mistake! Justifying your violations by the fact that it can be done by others, DO NOT. Typically, in situations like this, you fail an important exam. You should NOT be concerned about why others are different, be responsible for yourself. Once I just got caught by a traffic police officer, did not notice the sign and stood next to a bunch of cars, thinking that it was possible. The employee got around the corner and said that I was breaking. I was surprised and asked to point out the sign. He took me 50 meters back and pointed. I agreed that I violated, without even trying to somehow ask questions about why everyone else is here - this does not concern me. The employee, seeing that I honestly admit the mistake and really did not notice the sign, took, and simply asked me to leave for another place. I apologized and left immediately. I was really ashamed of such inattention.

Another situation, again, from my practice: one student receives a lot of difficult questions on the exam and leaves with a C, and the other, having got off easily, leaves with an A. The C-grade student is indignant, they say, everything is somehow unfair, that person doesn't know anything and got 5, but they flunked me. The grief-student does not know how the correct education system should be arranged and what principles are guided by the professionals in their field. He naively believes that everyone should be treated the same, as in the picture:

Remember guys. NEVER do this. It shouldn't concern you why other people are different. Your life is different, and the local rules of the Game may be radically different for you. Never justify your stupidity by saying that the same thing has gotten away with (or has gotten away) with other people! Likewise, do not take on what you cannot pull, although you see that the same is available to other people.

Further development of this deficiency leads to rather serious errors in the logic of the subject's social behavior. Here is the most common example. Everyone knows the rule that a doctor, before treating another, must heal himself. This is quite logical, but people often over-generalize this rule to those situations in which it is inapplicable and justify their stupidity when you point them to people with phrases like: "But you do it yourself first, then I will follow your advice" or "But you yourself do it, but you want me to stop." Such defects in the psyche, leading to the desire to follow this argumentation, must be eliminated in oneself as quickly as possible. After all, you must admit that if, for example, a drunkard talks to you about the dangers of alcohol, then it may be a fatal mistake for you to question his words only on the grounds that he himself drinks. Is not it?

End of the retreat.

I quite often come across clues in the language of life circumstances, in which there is still an opportunity to correct the situation in order to prevent the flow of negative events (which, of course, will act as feedback to those actions that I have not yet performed). So, a number of events from my life are described in the article "Fate is multivariate", and something from the field of observation of acquaintances in the article "Inclination to confirm. Part II ". All the events described there are essentially clues in case of uncertainty, and preliminary troubles mysteriously occurred in such a way that they were quite successfully resolved.

Let's say you made the wrong choice and are already going to implement it, when suddenly you start to get very sick, or other events arise that force you to postpone your plan for an indefinite period. Later it turns out that this is even better: you have more time to think about everything and realize the fallacy of an act that has not yet been committed, or new circumstances may arise that completely cancel the expediency of what was previously conceived. If you are trying with extreme perseverance to accomplish your plans, then God will give you such an opportunity, but then the feedback from the Universe will become even more terrible for you than the disease, designed to give you a chance to change your mind or slow down your actions until new circumstances arise. If you survive, you should consider failure as an important lesson given to you in the language of life's circumstances in the form of a warning.

Warning should not be confused with testing, as I talked about in one of the articles.

Discernment

If God wants to punish a person for something, then he deprives him of the ability to discern in the stream of events His prompts and His indications of dangerous situations and delusions. In other words, God never punishes you directly, as vulgar idealistic atheists think. It simply removes the protection that you were inside (even without noticing it) earlier. Depriving a person of the ability to discriminate is one form of this indirect punishment.

In other words, a person is deprived of "discrimination", the ability to distinguish "THIS" from "NOT THIS". The fact is that the flow of events observed by a person does NOT depend entirely on himself. Certain details of the surrounding reality are visible or not visible to a person ONLY by the will of God. So, you can find lost keys right away, or you can NOT find them literally under your nose. You can accidentally glance at an object that allows you to solve a lot of your problems in one fell swoop, or you can pass by without noticing the saving thing, you may catch your eye with an article with explanations and solutions to your problems, or you may not, and so on.

You may think that it depends only on you, but I will disappoint (or maybe please), a number of details also depend on God, and some of the circumstances depend ONLY on God, and is completely beyond your control, no matter how you try to control it … So, guys, the ability to discern is one of the highest gifts that everyone has, but if God wants to punish you for some sins that you have committed consciously (that is, after a clear and completely clear warning for you), then It will temporarily deprive you of the ability to discriminate, and you will feel that your usual way of life is leading you “somewhere in the wrong place”, you will stop distinguishing some events and soberly assess the situation, you will begin to lose things, connections, trust of other people, status and authority. In other words, you will cease to distinguish ONE from the OTHER: right from wrong, good from bad, good from evil, and so on. Life will go up and down, although you have just arrived confident that you are holding the situation with your own hands.

Answers on questions

The language of life is often the answer to your question to God. Perhaps this will be a revelation for you, but you can ask God a question and ALWAYS get an answer. However, some conditions are important (with a caveat: different people may have different conditions): the question must be sincere, you cannot find the answer yourself, although you really tried it, the question and the answer to it are really important to you, that is, you you understand well what you are asking. If you do not observe these restrictions, the answer will still be (it will always be), but you will not be able to interpret its meaning correctly, and it may take years before it reaches you.

It is important to be able to understand this answer correctly. First, God understands you much better than you can imagine, so He will still understand the question much better than you formulated it. Secondly, you may not like the answer and it will seem that it is not an answer, but something else. Thirdly, the answer may be something completely surprising that you did not expect, and therefore you will not immediately realize that this was the answer to your question. Thus, an effort must be made to understand the answer correctly.

Let me give you an example to illustrate what it means to make an effort. For example, you cannot choose from two difficult options. You asked God a question and are waiting for the weather by the sea … nothing will work out. Continue looking for an answer and analyzing the situation, believe me, at the right moment something will happen that will remove the controversial situation in favor of one of the options. It may be a certain person who simply dropped a phrase, after which it suddenly dawns on you, it may be an article or a book that comes across to you, adding such facts to your analytical work, after the interpretation of which everything immediately becomes unambiguous, or maybe a dream in which someone will say in plain text "do this." However, in the case of a dream, I would have doubted, but here you need to analyze each case separately, I will not speak for everyone. For example, I have such dreams always duplicated in reality, that is, there are several more real clues in the same direction (both before and after sleep). When turning to God with a question or request, one must remember the most important rule: He cannot be deceived. Any insincerity, an attempt to "negotiate" or somehow make excuses, morally dodge for you will turn out to be such a set of circumstances that will be aimed at eradicating these vicious ways of interaction, even at the level of thoughts. Know that you are absolutely open and transparent to God, nothing can be hidden. The better you understand this, the clearer the answers to any of your questions will be. It is only important to understand that you must WANT to receive an answer, STRIVE to receive it and make the most of your efforts. Any insincerity and an attempt to cheat will lead to the fact that you will be warned not to do so, and the warning form may be the most unpleasant for you.

Don't "push" other people

You must understand well that the language of life circumstances also works for other people, and therefore there is no point in putting pressure on anyone either psychologically or physically. Circumstances will do this, and only one position is required of you: explain, tell and share your thoughts, and then, perhaps, do the same in the spirit of “I told you so” … sometimes I pronounce this phrase a little differently: “Well, what did you want (a)?.. "(see also the story of the same name and the First Epistle of the Forester, parts two and three). This allows you to reach a completely different level of teaching methodology, which consists in the fact that in case of controversial situations you should not force you to take your position, motivating it even with logically flawless arguments. If a person does not want to understand you, then such attempts do not make sense. But sooner or later, something will happen to him that will force him to take the right path (it is not at all necessary that it will be even close to what you were trying to prove to him). Your task: to show, explain, argue, etc., what is required in the classical methodology. But I would not press and coerce, as well as go out of my way in attempts to be the most convincing. There is NO SENSE to argue, to prove by coercion and by all means (even through insults) to try to "rub in" something to someone, as "reasonable people" do. By doing this, you only distance the person from real understanding, and you KNOW about this in advance, you know that an attempt to "rub in" will only further close the person from your arguments, but still maliciously deprive him of the opportunity to understand the situation on his own.

Of course, what was said in the previous paragraph does not mean at all that one should remain indifferent and abandon harsh forms of behavior. No, no, a harsh and even extremely harsh reaction to some events can be sanctioned from above (that is, allowed for you). In each specific case, an attentive person can UNFULLY determine what to do. And if it is "said" to beat someone, then regardless of the degree of preparation of your opponent, you will by some miracle emerge victorious if you are not afraid. But what I have just written in this paragraph should NOT push you to ridiculous heroism, you need to be VERY careful to distinguish a sanction from above from your own pride and permissiveness. A mistake in such a case is likely to have very dire consequences.

Outcome

The language of life's circumstances is a way of communicating with God through the flow of events. Individual events in your life are letters, words, sentences and paragraphs of text written in a language with clear and clear rules, but these rules are individual for each of you. You must realize them according to the same scheme by which a child learns a new, unknown language of communication, being in constant practice of interacting with native speakers and the world around him. Trying to figure it out in one way or another, you will gradually be able to compare YOUR stream of events with YOUR reality, forming individual rules of the language, that is, concluding an implicit agreement with God on how you will communicate. By combining individual events into a single picture, you get a complete text of the message, which is the answer to all your questions. Already set and not set yet.