Life vs. Death

What is life in prison without the possibility of parole? That is a very subjective question. To some, it is a life worth living, restricted, but a life nonetheless. To others it is not life at all, it is no more than a living nightmare of deprivation, worse than death.
I belong to this later group. I say, “Give me liberty, or give me death!”. And I mean it. But I don't mean, as the original author of that statement, that I would rather fight to the death than be enslaved for life. I simply mean that I would rather be murdered by sanction of the state than live out my natural years in a modern penal institution.
And, it's not because of the restrictions that such a life would entail. It is not because of the lost so-called privileges of a free citizen. It's not because I wouldn't be able to have, or do, certain things. I could (and for many years have) live easily without such “freedoms”. But what I find it difficult and even excruciatingly painful to live without is intimate contact with someone I care deeply about.
It does not need to be a lover, just a brother, a sister, or mom, or dad, or even a good friend. And by intimate contact I don't mean sex, or even physical contact at all. I just mean regular interaction, such that that person shapes my thoughts (and behavior) every day. Such contact would free me from my “sickness” (this is a part of what I began to realize just before I surrendered to the present authorities of this world), and it would give me a chance at self-actualization.
Without someone to love, and to love me, in my life, I have no chance of ever coming to know my purpose. Without that chance, that hope, I would rather die. Not because I give up on life, but so I can move on with it! Maybe in my “next life”, in this world or some other, I will be able to appreciate what I gave up so much to learn in this world; that without love, there is nothing. Without forgiveness, there is only insanity.

PS: I realize, of course, that a “self-actualized” person would be able to love everyone. But, I also realize that we need someone to love to help us become self-actualized.

My Children!

When I say that my fantasies have a will, motive and even consciousness of their own, I do not mean to imply that I have no power over them. In a sense, I realize that I am the “parent” of my fantasies (and thoughts and actions for that matter). So by attributing will and consciousness to my fantasies I am not attempting to shirk responsibility for them. I am only recognizing them for what they are: My children!

Learning to Drive

I do not follow where my mind leads. I instead let it wonder on its own, always watching it carefully, like a loving parent watches an immature child.
I know that my mind will never have true wisdom. So unlike a child it will never become independent of me. Perhaps my mistake in the past was to burden my mind with moral responsibilities that it was never meant to manage.
My mind is a remarkable machine, but no more (or less) of a machine than my body. My mind and body are essentially the same thing; a living organism. But I am the life in my body and in my mind.
In my dreams my physical form is frequently represented as a car that I am driving but can never quite completely control. I can actually gauge my mastery over my form (mind/body) by simply contemplating my ability to drive in my dreams. So far I'm not doing very well, but I am making progress at least.
It is possible to gauge my mastery of form when I am wide awake, but more difficult because I must watch not what just my mind does, but also what my body does and most significantly, the consequences that occure in my life. To ignore the consequences of my actions would be synonymous to driving a car without looking out the windows (which I frequently find myself doing in my dreams).
My thoughts are like a stearing wheel. So, if I don't look where I am going then it does not matter which way I turn my thoughts. This is why, in my efforts to learn how to “drive”, I am presently concentrating on what is going on around the “car”, and watching closely what effect my thoughts (and actions) have.
Slowly, but surely, I am learning to drive.

What Education Is

Education is a word that is used to refer to the process of discovering the depth of our ignorance.

“...certainty is the enemy of true knowledge. Knowledge is a process, a journey toward, not an arrival. People who believe they possess certainty are capable of any atrocity, ranging from the concentration camps of the Nazis to the cross burnings of the KKK. Because they are certain they are right, these people feel they can justify any act of subhuman cruelty. Throughout history, it has been the doubters, the assailers of accepted truth, who have moved the species forward. A corollary to this thought is that the only thing you can truly learn in life is the depth of your own ignorance.”

Al Goldstein, Publisher
Screw Magazine
New York

True Religion

Only when we fail to recognize the intelligence that created us do we feel unloved by the universe. If we think of our existence as the result of random events, then how can we feel loved at all? The love we seek from other people under such circumstances is empty and superficial because they too are only mortals whose love can and will be taken away someday.
So this failure to recognize the intelligence behind our creation is a critical failure. It keeps us trapped in a perpetual state of fear. And even worse is our attempts to substitute direct knowledge of that intelligence with the rationalized constructs of our own mind. We create false images of the intelligence that created us, and then invest tremendous amounts of time and energy into substantiating our false beliefs. This is the phenomena we call religion.
If there were a true religion, then it would not need to be promoted, defended, or even defined. It would exist regardless of human endeavors. I believe such a religion does exist, only I hesitate to apply the word “religion”, or even the term “true religion”, because then it would become too easily confused with all the other false religions that use the same term (all of them do, by implication at least).
If I could, I would define religion as the open acknowledgement of devine intelligence. By this definition then all religions are accommodated, both the one true religion (as yet undefined) and the many false ones. All religions openly acknowledge higher intelligence, though they typically go on to embellish their image of that intelligence with all sorts of human attributes and qualities. A true religion would, of course, not use such embellishments, either directly or by implication. So maybe we'd be better off to refer to it as “pure religion” rather than “true”. This at least would acknowledge the fact that all false religions have a true element at their heart. This also allows us to recognize the validity and value of false or “embellished” beliefs.
This concept is not very unlike the core principles of catholicism. They seem to believe (as I understand) that all the rituals and symbols that comprise the external church are really only humanized verisons of a much purer and truer inner church that is the charge of all Christians (Catholics) to cherish and to protect. But I believe even Catholicism fails in its mission to preserve the “true faith”, as evidenced by all the atrocities it has committed. No true religion would ever feel so compelled to establish itself in the world of men.
True religion is not only already established in our world, it is the very foundation of it! A worshipper of such a religion would know this and without fear wait patiently for his church to arise. Not only that, but he would know, by virtue of every breath he takes, that he is loved and cherished by the entire universe as well. Such a man would not seek out human love and companionship. He would not have to, for he would be loved by all seekers of the truth, who would see him in in its light. Yet, at the same time, he would be despised by those whose faces are yet turned away from the truth, for to them the truth is an ugly and sinister thing, and so anyone bathed in its light will appear ugly and sinister to them. Such was the fate of Jesus and it is why even he predicted a similar fate for all followers of the true religion.

There Are No Cruel People

I don't believe in cruelty. I believe there are people who do cruel things, but not because they are cruel, only because they are confused.
I believe that cruelty is a human invention, not a human trait. Even though we observe what appears to be cruelty in very young children, if we look more carefully we will see that the behavior they exhibit is really no more than raw survival impulses that have not yet been honed by social instinct. To punish them for being “cruel” is how cruelty itself is instilled.
The parent who punishes such behavior is the one who is really being cruel. A more responsible and loving parent, who has faith in their own child's development, will see the behavior for the aberration it is. And rather than responding out of fear that there is something “wrong” or even “evil” with their child, they will instinctively either ignore the behavior (which is usually, but not always, the best thing to do the first time or two that it is displayed), or they will take some “corrective” action other than punishment, such as distracting the child from the negative “cruel” behavior, by giving them a hug for some other positive “kind” behavior, helping to hone the child's rough edges rather than agitating them with punishment, which only teaches the child to avoid the parent (i.e. authority) not the behavior. Punishment often even makes the “cruel” behavior seem appropriate to the child. After all, the punishment itself is no more than a demonstration of the “cruel” behavior it is supposed to avert!
And when you extend this understanding of how children are taught to be cruel by fearful parents to the way a fearful society teaches its citizens to be cruel with a “punishment” based justice system – a system that demonstrates cruel behavior and calls it “justice” - then we might start to understand how we bring crime upon ourselves.

“All Penal Laws court Transgression & therefore are cruelty & murder...” - William Blake (1757-1827), English poet

“Cruelty is a tyrant, that is always attended with Fear.” - Thomas Fuller (1654-1734), English cleric

“I was trying to punish society... I wanted justice for what happened to me (in prison)...” - Joseph E. Duncan III (b. 1963), American “Serial Killer” statement to the court (September 2008)

Crime Isn't The Problem

Crime is a symptom, not a problem. This would be an obvious truth if it weren't for the tens of millions of people who have invested their lives in the “blood letting” of society. Like the so-called healers of old, they have a vested interested in keeping people ignorant of the truth and an even stronger reason for lying to themselves. If the truth were generally known, that all their efforts are all for show, and any effects they have are purely incidental, then they would be exposed for the charlatans they are. And even worse, for exacerbating the problem while pretending to cure the symptom!
The problem is age old, but that does not mean it cannot be solved. The solution is as old as the problem itself, and every great book of truth has expounded on the solution, from the Holy Bible to the Buddhist sutras, for thousands of years.
I myself have been writing about it non-stop since I stopped killing and turned myself in. This blog is centered around it. And life itself proclaimes it loudly, for those prepared to hear.
The problem is fear, the solution is faith.
The problem is isolation from the source of our existence (which begets fear), and the solution is returning to the source (which requires faith alone).
You don't need to believe in God, or Buddha, or even science to realize this truth. You have only to be honest, with yourself. The more honest you are, the more self evident this truth will be, and the less fear you will have, and the less suffering you will bring into the world.
But being honest with yourself is the hardest thing you will ever do. If it is not hard for you to be honest, then you are either still deceived – and bringing suffering into the world, even if you yourself do not realize it – or, you are an enlightened being, at one with the source of all things. Which is to say, that becoming honest is the hardest thing you will ever do, but being honest is the easiest! Or, as I've written before, the “easy yoke to bear”, is the hardest one to don.
Any observer can note that our present social system, especially the so-called “Justice System”, does everything it can to support and promote the illusion of isolation from the source of our being. It fosters and advocates an “Us-Them” mentality that denies the oneness and unity of all things.
It is easier to pretend we are better than someone else, and blame “them” for our problems (our suffering) than to take responsibility for our own actions – which is the only real “authority” anyone has! When a man robs or assaults another man, the present social system literally demands that the “victim” report the “crime” and cooperate with the “authorities” in the “persuit of justice”. But no one ever expects the “victim” to take responsibility for the “crime”, perhaps by admitting that he should not have been flaunting his gold jewelery in front of young drug addicts (and what was he doing with gold jewelery in the first place, while there are starving people in the world he could have given a job to instead of buying “shiny metal” status symbols to wear?).
It was easier for me to accuse the police of being self-righteous cowards that ignorantly drove me to commit my crimes, than for me to admit that I need the police (as human beings) and that I myself was responsible for their self-righteous attitudes by acting so cowardly myself by attacking children in order to hurt “Them”.
That is until I saw through the eyes of my last intended victim that she was me, and they were too! I saw this truth as plainly as I saw her. Even now it is hard for me to fathom how I had been so blind! But, the reason for my blindness is just as plain at the same time; Fear.
I was terrified because I believed the system's lies; that I was alone in the world, and would die alone, and forever. But when I finally saw the Truth – the same Truth that all the ancients talk about, and that modern science even confirms – that I was not alone, and that I would never die! Then I no longer had a reason to hurt “them”, because I knew that they were me! And crime, for me at least, lost it's meaning.

“The intellectual who no longer feels attached to anything is not satisfied with opinions merely; he wants certainty, he wants a system.”
“...Whether it wants to or not, the (System) consodilates and establishes injustice. It helps men to forget their ills instead of curing them.” - Raymond Aron, French political philosopher

“We would rather be ruined than changed; We would rather die in our dread; Than climb the cross of the moment; And let our illusions die.” - W. H. Auden (1907-1973) American poet

“There is no such thing as the State, And no one exists alone; Hunger allows no choice, To the citizen or the police; We must love one another or die.” - W. H. Auden

Who I Am

My mantra: The greatest enemy of knowledge is the presumption of knowledge.

My motto: The only thing I know for sure, is that I know nothing for sure; except, I am.

My greatest hope: To know who I am.

My greatest fear: To know who I am.

My greatest accomplishment: Embracing my greatest failure.

My greatest failure: Not knowing who I am.

My current theological bent: Gnosticism (True and direct knowledge of ”God”, and/or the source of our existence, is attainable through honest introspection, and is reflected in all external experiences)

My former theological bent: Agnosticism (Experience is all there is, and the source of experience, a.k.a. “God”, is unknowable)

My current practice: Self sacrifice without self debasement.

My former practice: Self debasement without self sacrifice.

My current occupation: Seeker, student, fool (in that order)

My former occupation: Fool, student, seeker (in that order)

My greatest personal asset: An open heart.

My greatest personal handicap: A broken heart.

My favorite animal: Domesticated cats.

My least favorite animal: Domesticated humans.

My current life goal: To remember who I am.

My former life goal: I forgot.

Baal's Hypocrisy

If it is no excuse for a man to abuse children because he was abused, or to rape because he was raped, then why is it okay for society to kill him because he killed?

Randon Choices Make Us God

I read in a book on the science of chaos once, about a popular novelty random-motion desk sculpture that has three steel balls attached to stiff wires that are driven to rotate chaotically around each other by a magnet in the base of the sculpture. The book explained that a little simple math (relatively speaking) indicates that the motion of the steel balls can be completely altered in as few as 20 cycles, by the gravitational pull of a building five blocks away.
That means, if it were possible to create two machines that were identical all the way down to the quantum level, and set them in motion with the exact same force, even inside a vacuum, the mere fact that they occupied different positions in space, even if only a few inches, would cause them to lose synchronization within 20 or so cycles andstart rotating in completely independent chaotic patterns with no discernable relationship to each other's movement.
Within 40 to 100 cycles, the gravitational pull of a building sized object on Jupiter would have the same effect. And within, say, 1.000 to 10.000 cycles, such an object orbitting the nearest star (about three light-years away) would also cause our matched machines to “forget” their common origin (assuming of course that nothing else in the universe changed during those 1000 or so cycles).
With a little extrapolation it becomes clear that our machines could not remain in synch for more than a few years if nothing else changed in the entire universe, except the existence of a single molecule in a galaxy far-far away!
If that single molecule, billions of light-years from here, has the ability to alter the course of motion in our random-motion machine here on Earth (and every molecule in the universe has this ability to influence what happens), then it also has the ability to change the entire course of history on this planet, in much less than a few years!
What's my point? Is this just a novel but meaningless mental exercise? I think not. In fact, everything I think is also effected by that distant molecule. And that brings me to my point.
If any molecule in the universe can change what “random” thought I may be having two or three years from now, then how can we say that I have volition of thought (much less “free will”)?
Of course the first, and most obvious, response to that question is that, “the motion of the machine may change, but the machine itself does not change. It still behaves according to its own nature”.
But what determines the “nature” of the machine? Wasn't it “designed” by mere thought? So, this response to my question fails when you consider that the machine's very existence, and its “nature”, are determined by all those distant (and near) molecules in the first place. My question stands; where is our free will?
Actually, there is a solution to this puzzle, but not one that most people can accept (at least not yet). The answer, assuming we do in fact have “free will” (which we must, or all is lost!), and the only answer, is that we, in determining what we do and think, also determine the existence and state (location and motion in space and time) of EVERY SINGLE MOLECULE IN THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE FROM THE BEGINNING AND TO THE END OF TIME! There is no other solution.
Hense, we are God, or we are nothing!

Unconscious Realms of Consciousness

If you are conscious, then even when you “empty your mind”, your mind is infinitely far from being empty! The empty mind is merely the un-focusing of attention. Or, put another way, it is consciousness focussed on itself. In this state you have the ability to explore consciousness.
By “explore” I mean that you can effectively move about within the world of the “unconscious”, which is in fact an infinite world (as anyone who has ever achieved this level of consciousness well knows!), but that does not mean that it is without structure or laws.
In fact, the laws of the unconscious mind are the only true laws in nature! The first and most important law, for example, is “Do not be ignorant!” (Of course that is only one way to state the law in limited human terms. Another way to say this same thing is, “Love God!” And/or, “Love thy neighbor as thyself!” Which all mean the same thing.) Because this is an absolute law, it cannot be broken, but it is possible to exist in a self imposed state of ignorance (and fear, which is, to “hate God”) but this is purely illusory and has no basis in the conscious or unconscious universe.
I should explain what I mean by “no basis” just to be clear: Ignorance (and fear, which is inextricably intertwined with ignorance) is no more than a substanceless shadow. It can only be perceived at all in the same way we perceive shadows, not by what is there, but by what is NOT there! So, in the same sense that shadows don't exist, so ignorance (and fear, and hate, and “evil”) has no “basis in consciousness”. That does not mean it is unreal, or cannot cause real harm. Just as a shadow can weaken or even kill a plant (by depriving it of sunlight), so ignorance can weaken and even “kill” (destroy) a human “soul”! But also realize that as long as a plant is not kept in the shadow all the time, most can survive and even thrive on very little sunlight. And so it is in the realms of consciousness.
“Light” in the realms of consciousness is “Love” and “Understanding” (which are the same thing). The “physical” world only exists by virtue of mutual ignorance that causes “fixed illusions”, that we all share. Modern science has been studying the edges of this illusion since the beginning of the last century. Quantum physics has clearly established the link between consciousness and the “physical world” for some time now (though few scientists will even admit to themselves what the data from their experiments shows; that we don't even exist! Or, to put it another way, we only exist as “conscious energy” or “thoughts”.
So, a person with a truly “empty mind” is one who has lifted the veil, and sees consciousness for what it is; the source of everything we call “the universe” or “reality”. In such a state of understanding (i.e. Love) this person can move about to any point in space and time of the physical world, but not just space and time, to any point in consciousness itself! That is why such a person cannot easily relate their freedom of movement (a.k.a. freedom of choice, though “movement” in a much better term, it still does not fully express the actuality) into human terms. This is what it means to “know the will of God”. It is to know your own true will! (If you think you already know your own will, then think again! Who decided when you would be conceived? You did! And when you truly realize this – by “visiting” that point in consciousness! - then you will understand what I mean!).
So the next time you meditate – and if you don't meditate then why are you wasting your time by reading this! - try to realize the freedom you have, by letting go of your physical mind (your thoughts and perceptions) and “moving” into the unconscious realms of consciousness, and “see” what you find!

P.S. By “meditation” I do not necessarily mean anything as formal as Zazen (but anyone who practices Zazen regularily will easily follow what I am saying – though they'd probably disagree on a few technicalities). All I mean, is simply the practice of “emptying the mind”, or just “quieting the mind”. Most people meditate without even realizing it when they engage in some kind of “relaxing” activity, such as running, or working on a stamp collection, or such. As long as you suspend your thoughts long enough to become aware of consciousness itself, sometimes perceived as “existence” - so if you do something that makes you “feel real” then you are probably meditating.

Fantasies of Nature and Nurture

When I fantasize, I often let my fantasies “run free”. “Run free” is the only term I can think of to describe what actually happens. My fantasies seem to take on a life all their own that frequently leaves me pondering their intentions, which regularly seem to contradict my own.
I don't think letting them run free is irresponsible in and of itself, so long as they are confined to my own experience and not imposed upon others (i.e. acted out). In fact, I often think that I learn things from my fantasies, about myself, and about sexual instinct in general.
For example, when I was living as a female in prison, I was taken by surprize once by a fantasy that imagined I could become pregnant. This seemed as unsexy as anything to my mind (I had no psychological association that I was aware of that connected “getting pregnant” to the sexual pleasure of letting a man make love to me anally), and yet when the fantasy came to mind (while I was being made love to by a caring man) my arousal level unexpectedly skyrocketted! Suddenly I wanted to passionately whisper to the man who was inside my body, “Yes! Yes! Give me your babies!”
Was this mere perversion? Or, was it some sort of instinctual response to sex that lives inside all of us, not just “Jennies” (genetic females). Well, judging by the unexpected intensity that the mere idea of being made pregnant by a man I cared deeply for (and hense, wanted to “keep” him in my life) caused me to feel, I'd say it was something that came from nature, not nurture at all.
There are many other things I have learned about myself mostly, but also about being human in general, by letting my fantasies “run free”, and just paying close attention to what they do.

Gnostic Breath

The gnostic appreciates knowledge in much the same way that an artist appreciates beauty. The appreciation cannot be taught, but it can be learned by anyone interested enough to enjoy the benefits. And as an artist portrays beauty through his medium as an expression of his own experience, so the gnostic might express his own experience of knowledge through words. But, words are not the only means that a gnostic will use to express his experience. A true gnostic expresses his experience of knowledge with every breath, and every action he takes. He cannot help but do so.

Little Choices

By exposing myself on the web I am hoping ultimately that I might solicit some understanding that might otherwise not be possible, since this kind of exposure is so severely discouraged in our society. I am acutely aware that my sickness is a “choice”, but it is not a conscious choice. If it were then I would have simply consciously chosen to not be perverted and depraved a long time ago, and a bunch of people would be still alive today. You might think that it's a simple matter of an accumulation of a lot of little conscious choices over time that has made me the way I am. And, that may very well be true, but if in the course of making those choices I never consciously knew the end result, then the choice to be what I am today was still an unconscious one. And blaming me for what I am because of choices that I made in the past that I did not comprehend the consequences of, is itself a choice that has consequences that you may not be conscious of. Just ask yourself, how did we become such a perverted and depraved society? The answer is easy: it's a simple matter of an accumulation of a lot of little conscious choices over time, like the choice to judge and condemn “sex offenders”, and thus creating a whole new pathological role in our society that will continue to grow in numbers until we, as a society, overcome the ignorance and craveness that drives us to make all those “little choices”. My “sickness” is yours too!

Help Me!

How does it make me feel to admit that I still masterbate to fantasies of raping small children? It makes me feel like crap. It makes me feel like I am a failure at self control. It reminds me that I am not better than human. And it forces me to rely on my belief that I am no less than human as well. It causes me to feel inferior to even those I have judged in the past as ignorent and cowardly. It compells me to face my own ignorance and craven nature. And it gets me to think about my “sickness” in a context I might otherwise not have been able to appreciate, an “exposed” context.
It also appeals to the depraved part of me. The shame that I experience awakens the part of me that needs shame in order to feel justified. I do not indorse this part of myself, I only ancknowledge it in order to better understand it myself; to bring it “into the light” of social consciousness. But it is craven and pathetic, and derives great pleasure from being exposed, from even exposing itself, like a person exposing their sexual parts to another unsuspecting person for the pleasure of it. (Which is why I only "expose” myself in this blog, which has ample warnings attached to it to prevent anyone from being “victimized”. Unless, of course, they want to be “victimized”, but in that case it would be their “sickness” not mine at play).
Of course, I do not “expose” myself for the pleasure of it. I am extremely careful not to give that part of myself that much control over my words and behavior. I've learned what a heinous mistake that can be, in the past. But the part that wants to understand; the part that takes no pleasure in my shame, or any pleasure in asking others for help. But by exposing myself in this way I am asking you for help, no matter who you are. If you are a caring person at all, then I need your help to get better. I am convinced that I cannot “heal” myself. It was from trying to heal myself in the past that I became so desperately depraved (i.e. “sick”).
How can you help? Simply like this: read my words, open your heart, and try to understand. You do not need to relay that understanding to me, or to anyone else. If you understand, the understanding will relay itself in ways that our conscious minds have yet to fathom.
How can you hurt? By judging me and condemning me. In this way you “feed” my sickness, the depraved part of me that wants you to be offended and “sickened” by my “exposed” private parts. If you want to hurt by shaming me, I'll certainly understand, I once needed to hurt people by shaming them too in order to feel justified. But if you have the courage to help me instead, then thanks!

It's All In My Head!

Trying to control my fantasies about sex is like trying to walk across a 14-inch steal I-beam a thousand feet in the air. Knowing that the sense of vertigo that causes you to fall is all in your head doesn't help. Telling yourself over and over that, “you can do this!” doesn't help either, at least not for long. A safety harness might help a little, if only the people manning the ropes weren't so eager to just let you fall (i.e. parole/probation officials) so they don't have to help hold you up anymore. But even with a safety harness the apprehension and dizziness don't just go away.
There is a solution though, and one that could help a lot of people: simply stop building sky scrapers! In practical terms, stop making sex such a lofty thing by placing intellectual structures beneath it that simply don't belong there (such as “love” and “commitment” and “taboos”). Let sex be what it is in nature, an animal drive without baggage. Then maybe people like me wouldn't be dropping out of the sky so much.

What It's Like

It's like trying to walk on a 14-inch wide steal I-beam, a thousand feet up in the air at the top of a sky scraper under construction. Some people can do it easily, they say it's no different than walking on the ground, you just need to be a bit careful about where you walk is all. The trick, they say, is to not look down. Some people can't do it at all! If you put them on such a beam, and all they had to do was crawl ten feet to safety, they wouldn't be able to do it. They'd cling to the beam with both arms and legs, eyes tightly closed and beg hysterically for someone to get them down.
Still others, like me, can at least manage to crawl, but never stand without support, much less walk. And the irony is that this “beam” that I can't walk is only ten inches to a few feet off the ground for most people. But it's a thousand feet to me, which most people don't seem to understand. They call me a coward and a sicko because I can't walk what to them is as easy as a walk in the park. But, a park that has children in it to me is as much a tightrope in my mind as a crack house is to a crack addict. And strangely enough I've smoked crack, but I've never had any problem putting the pipe down. I always used drugs and alcohol intermittently, and never when I could not afford to. Those were “beams” I could walk blindfolded (I'd go months and even years without getting high at all, even when I could afford to. I once gave a crack addicted friend of mine my last “rock”, then asked him politely to go smoke it by himself and not to call me anymore. To him, crack was that 14-inch beam a thousand feet in the air, and I knew that if he ever fell he could end up hurting me too. So, I respectfully ended my association with him, though I still considered him a friend. The only time I ever saw him again was once, to give him a Christmas card that featured a picture of my cat, that he had reluctantly let me have when it was a kitten and could not take care of it himself. I gave him the card so he would know I still considered him a friend, and so he could see how the cat had grown. I never saw him again after that, nor did I smoke any more crack until shortly before my arrest in 2005, about two years later).
We all have 14-inch beams that we can't walk in our lives. Most people are lucky enough to never find themselves confrontated with having to navigate their exposed beams. But others must face their beams every day. If you put a crack addict in jail where he can't get high, he's fine. But for me, my “beam” is literally attached to my body and “not looking down” is a lot harder to do than it sounds!

What I Am

In the original Fifthnail blog I was as honest as I could be without exposing myself as a child rapist/murderer. So at times I even made carefully worded denials of any interest in children at all. These denials, of course, were deliberate lies. But in this “Fifthnail Exposed” blog, I no longer need to hide my sickness or perversion. I am what I am, and attempting to deny the truth at this point would be a futile attempt at vanity, not to mention self defeating.
The “revelation” that caused me to bring eight-year-old Shasta home and surrender myself to the police, did not “cure” me. I still have fantasies of raping children, and even masterbate as often as I feel like it with little or no compunction.
Several times after I was arrested in 2005, I tried to suppress my deviant fantasies and would go weeks at a time, “fasting” from all “pleasurable thoughts”. These fasts would often include going without food at the same time. I continued these fasts, off and on, for about two years after I was arrested, thinking that I had to be able to “control my desires” in order to be “pure” and “completely honest”.
And during these fasts, I often told my attorney's about my attempts and failures, at self control, thinking that being as truthful as I could with them would help me to become more honest. I even “confessed” to the FBI, at one point, with this same goal in mind (which I explicitly explained to them as the reason for my talking to them against my attorney's advice. I said, “God told me to be honest with you”.)
But, as it turned out, it was easier to starve myself for weeks at a time (the longest I ever went was about two weeks with no food) than to get control of the violent fantasies that kept coming into my mind. They seemed to have a life and will of their own, to survive!
I started noticing that the fantasies would react to specific external circumstances. When guards, or other inmates, projected insults at me, I could be doing something completely innocuous, such as reading a book, or writing a letter, and even though I tried to ignore the insults, the fantasies of deviant sex would come seemingly all on their own.
So I started “experimenting” with different reactions and techniques. For example, I discovered that if I allowed myself to react to the insults, by shouting back for example, that the fantasies were much less likely to come, or if they did come they were much less persistent. I also noticed that even if the insults were not directed at me, for example, when I overheard inmates or guards talking derisively about some other “sex offender”, the fantasies would still react as if somehow to “defend” me from harm. I remember explicitly reporting this realization to my attorneys at the time. I told them, “It's as if some unconscious part of my mind is trying to protect me!” I was realizing that my fantasies were the product of completely unconscious processes that were attempting to attenuate the pain of reality, even though consciously they often caused even more pain! (For the first several days after my arrest in 2005, I was in a kind of emotional shock that kept any fantasies, and barely any thoughts at all, from coming into my conscious mind. I thought that perhaps I had been “freed” from them at last! But on about the fifth or sixth day I had calmed down and recovered enough that this unwanted “defense mechanism” decided to kick in, and I started having fantasies about having sex with Shasta and her brother, Dylan, at the mountain campsite. When the fantasies came and demanded my attention the way they do, I curled up on the cold concrete floor of the jail cell, and cried. The pain came from knowing I was not “free” after all.)
On the way bringing Shasta home in the Jeep, I had promised her that I would never have “bad thoughts” (i.e. fantasies) about her again, not even after I was arrested (she knew I was going to turn myself in). I truly believed I could and would keep that promise, because at the time I was able to relate to her in a completely non-sexual way. In other words, I was not having any sexual desires for her at all, much less fantasies. Not since before my arrest in 1980 had I been able to relate to a child with no sexual thoughts. So, I thought I had been “miraculously cured” on the mountain when I decided to bring her home. It was a “cure” I had been praying for, for a very long time. But, I was wrong.
I am still the same “sick” and “twisted” pervert that I have been all my life. Yes, I admit, even as a kid I was a “sicko”. But as a kid that “sickness” was only the result of a severe lack of healthy sexual information and experience. I could have easily been “cured” with just a little time all by itself (as recent studies show happens frequently – i.e. under confidential agreements, many responsible adults who have never been arrested, or accused of sexual crimes, have admitted that as youths they engaged in sexual behavior that could have gotten them arrested, often even feloniously. And I have personally known several such men, who are now very law abiding and respected members of society – one man, for example, who molested both me and my brother when we were 12 and 10 years old respectively, while he was 17, is now a Captain in the Navy. And he didn't just “touch our privates” out of curiosity. He did things to my brother and I with a bicycle pump in our butts that was perverted even by my present standards! Now he has a wife and kids of his own, and a very respected career.)
Eventually I realized that I was running around in circles trying to “control my fantasies”. I noticed that I was starting to fall into the same behavior cycles that I experienced when I was in prison years ago trying to “cure” myself.
So, I stopped trying to suppress my fantasies several years ago. I rationalize that there is no danger of me acting out my fantasies ever again, so why not “let them go” and try to learn by watching what they do. It's kind of like living with primative anthropoids in order to better understand them. In the past I tried to control them with external pressure. Now I'm just trying to understand them from within instead.
I've been learning a lot, and have even reflected on some of those lessons (in mostly non-sexual contexts) right here in this blog. Perhaps, if I live long enough, someday I will learn something that might help other people, or even society in general. But, I realize that's a thin hope. I'm just content to know that I don't have to struggle anymore. No matter what happens, for the rest of my life, I will be what I am. And that's okay.

The “Serial Killer” Fence

Attempting to classify the traits of a “serial killer” (or any criminal for that matter), in order to determine what causes them to become killers, is as stupid as trying to figure out why some snow flakes land on the edge of a fence by studying the characteristics of the snow that has landed there.
Yes, the snow there has certain properties that are distinctly different from snow that has landed in the yard. The snow on the fence is more loosely packed, but harder (colder) at the same time. But those characteristics are not what put the snow on the fence. They were developed only after the snow had landed on the fence, from the additional exposure to the cold and wind.
Actually, the snow flakes that land on the fence may be a bit larger, or perhaps more damp, on average, than other flakes, allowing them to stick better and not getting blown off again by the wind. But knowing these characteristics still won't help you keep snow off the fence. There will always be variations in the size and dampness of snow flakes, after all, “no two are ever alike”, remember?
And so it is with studying “serial killers” (or other “social flakes”). They might be “harder” and “colder” than the average “flake”, but that has little to do with why they kill. Killing causes a person to become that way. And sure, statistically, they may have more often been bed-wetters, or fire-bugs, or abuse victims, before they ended up on the “serial killer” fence, but that information is completely useless. More than 99% ot the people who wet their bed, start fires, or were abused as children, never become “serial killers”.
In one of the books, that I was studying for my case (“Using Murder: The Social Construction of Serial Homicide” by: Philip Jenkins), the author points out that the famous FBI Behavior Sciences Unit (B.S.U.) is as helpful to police as the Psychic Friends Network. The information they provide is generalized and useless. Any specific details that they do come up with are as often wrong as right.
The only reason for the B.S.U.'s popularity is due to movies such as, “Silence of the Lambs” and “Red Dragon”. But while the profiling techniques in those movies were authentic enough, the characters being profiled were fictitiously “shaped” in order to let the FBI profilers be the heros in the end. There was nothing authentic at all about the overall pathology of the killers in these movies. While the “Cannibal” and “Dragon” may have been based on real people, their psychology in the movies was a hodgepodge of unlikely combinations of various mental illnesses.
And yet after these movies came out the FBI Behavior Sciences Unit in Quantico, VA, received overwhelming public support, despite the fact that in the real world this Unit was floundering from a series of serious profiling errors, and no significant successes. The only thing positive most police investigators can say about the BSU information they get in a case, is that it helps them “think outside the box”. They say the same thing about consulting with psychics.
So, if we want to keep snow off the fence, then we'd be much better off taking a closer look at the fence itself! For example, how do we define a “serial killer”, and how does that definition help to actually put people on the “serial killer” fence?
The whole concept of “serial killer” is new, but there have been people who fit the definition all throughout history (see Jenkins's book, “Using Murder” for a really good analysis of this). So tearing down the “serial killer” fence wont stop “killer flakes” from falling out of the sky, but it would, perhaps, at least get people to start looking up!

P.S.: Incidentally, for what it's worth the FBI's profile report on my crimes (that was written after my arrest and “confession”) said that my case was anomalous. Almost none of the “elements” of my crimes matched up with their general profiles for other “sex killers”. I keep trying to tell them that my crimes weren't about sex, or even violence. (Believe it or not, I loath violence, and have only ever resorted to it after much deliberation. “Violence when there are alternatives is immoral. Violence when there are no other alternatives is survival.” I had alternatives to my own violent behavior in the past, but even after the most careful and maticulous deliberation I never saw what my alternatives were. At least not until a certain eight-year-old little girl named Shasta helped to open my eyes!)

Freedom of Sexual Expression

I just read that it is important for gays (generally speaking) to believe they have no choice about being “gay”. Supposedly, they need to believe they have no choice in order to attenuate their shame.
Wow. I should have known this already, considering my predominantly gay sexual adventures. But I did not realize this (in the general sense). I knew that some gays felt that way, but not most of them. I always assumed that most gays understood that being “gay” was a choice. To me, it has always been important that my sexual exploits were the product of my own volition. If who I enjoy having sex with is not my choice, then what choices do I have at all?
There is no more intimate form of communication between two people than sexual expression. If I cannot choose what I “say” sexually, then I have no choice in anything I say. Because of its extremely intimate and personal nature, sex, to me, is the most meaningful form of speech. Without freedom of sexual expression there is no freedom of speech.
Perhaps this is why men who seek power over other men throughout history, i.e. religions and governments, have always suppressed sexual expression. It is only obvious that if men cannot express themselves satisfactorily they will readily turn to other men to do so for them, which is what we call social intercourse. If so, then it becomes obvious how social concepts such as “justice” and “freedom” and “security” can be so emotionally charged, because they are proxies for pent up sexual energy!
Wow! So governments and religions derive their power by suppressing and then redirecting the emotional energy of our libidos! How weird is that? No wonder we are constantly fighting and killing each other. If all this is true, then in a better world, sexual expression (and so-called “preference”) will be completely untethered. I suspect the only “law” in such a world would be the One Law that Jesus speaks of in the Bible, “Love thy neighbor as thyself” (which is the same thing as loving God when it is understood correctly), then the thought that “God condemnd homosexual behavior” will be seen as ludicrous by everyone, because everyone will be “gay” (i.e. willing to do whatever feels good without compunction).

Fear No Evil

If I were afraid of death I would not have been able to bring that little girl home and turn myself over to the present authorities. In fact, you could say that it was the fear of death that I overcame which allowed me to do what I wanted to do in my heart all along (stop killing). It amazes me that people do not understand that threatening someone with death only alienates them and makes them that much more likely to try to hurt someone. But I suppose I should not be too amazed, since I also once rationalized my own fantasies of how people would react to my threats, by thinking that they would regret what they did to me. Of course, now I realize that no one regrets my having been sent to prison as a kid for 15 years, to be raped and perverted by the System. And, even those who realize that what happened to me was wrong don't seem to realize that they were the ones who did it to me (or, more precisely, the attitudes and beliefs that allowed me to be crucified as a child). I too once could not see my ignorance. And now that I have had my false beliefs illuminated for what they are, I do not suddenly believe that I know the truth. Instead, I realize that I know nothing! How could I possibly trust my own knowledge ever again after learning that my most basic lifelong beliefs were all lies! I can't. But, at least I'm not afraid of death any more. Nor am I afraid of being deceived, because I realize now that as long as I do not believe that what I think is true, then I cannot be deceived. I suspect this is what Jesus meant by “believe in me”. He was simply trying to tell us to believe what is in our heart, not our mind. If you believe that Jesus was a Man/God that lived 2000 years ago, then you believe what you have been told by other men. These things exist only in your mind. But if you believe that it does not matter whether a man called Jesus of Nazareth ever walked the earth at all, but that His “teachings” are still important and useful for guidance and instruction, then perhaps you will be saved yet.

Fabrications Don't Help

I sincerely hope that when people read the parts of this blog that talk about my past life's experiences and present experiences, including dreams, that they don't try to analyze the information in order to support, or even form, some “theory” about what made me a “psycho-sex killer” (or whatever). I gave up trying to figure that out when I picked Shasta up and brought her home, and I know more about me than anyone else will even begin to know. (Which is why I openly deride all the psych-doctors who attempt to “evaluate” anyone.)
I have said that I am writing this blog in hopes that people might understand; not my experiences , but themselves. I write about my honest experiences because I'm sure that at some point what I write will contradict any “theory” about me out there. I predict this based on the simple belief that all such “theories” are mere fabrications that ultimately explain nothing except how the mind works in the person who fabricated the “theory”. So by exposing the fabrcation I hope to expose the fabricator to themselves! Only then will they even begin to understand me! (The best psych-doctors are the ones who see me in themselves, or vice versa. But, even they fail catastrophically as soon as they pretend to document, or otherwise articulate, their understanding.)

Gnosticism

Everyone knows that an agnostic is someone who does not believe in God. But, actually that's not quite right. Agnosticism is really just the belief that it is not possible to know whether or not God exists. So, it is even reasonable for a Christian to be agnostic. Such a person would say, “I can't know that God exists; that's what I have faith for!”
But few people know what a gnostic is (no “a”). Gnosticism actually dates back to before Christ. But the first Christians, or at least some of them, considered themselves gnostics.
Gnosticism is not a religion. It is merely a way of thinking about religion and life and anything for that matter. A gnostic views all knowledge as coming from a single source. This does not contradict the Christian view that all things are created by the One God. It is just a different way of viewing the same thing. But, perhaps an important difference.
The gnostic Christians were actively suppressed very early after the birth of Christianity. Many of their doctrines were seen to contradict the teachings of Christ, which is rather strange since a true gnostic would never subscribe to any one doctrine. So accusing them of contradicting Christian doctrine would be like accusing someone of not liking vegetables just because they like meat.
But to the early Christian church, anyone who did not believe exactly what they believed were considered heretics. (This is proven over and over throughout Christian history and accounts for so many “denominations” and divisions of the Christian religion today.) To this day, the very hallmark of Christianity, is the insistance that you either believe what we believe, or you are wrong. In other words, Christian's by their nature (the nature of Christianity) believe they are “right”, and everyone else is “wrong”, even when only a very few of them think they are “right” (i.e. Christian cults).
But the gnostic Christians were not like that. They believed that all knowledge (and hense, all beliefs) led ultimately to the source of Knowledge, that being of course, God. So there were as many different paths to knowing God as there are different things to know. But they emphasized being able to know the difference between true knowledge (or just “knowledge”) and false knowledge (or, more correctly, “deception”).
To a gnostic, deception is “the devil”, in the same sense that knowledge is “God”. Deception is the source of all “evil” and “suffering” in the world. The “devil” is not a magical creature that lives beneath the earth (or in some other reality, as Christians believe today) but he is a very real and present phenomenon of intellectual action that we must resist not in fantasy, but in reality.
Learning to recognize and resist the “devil” is the obligation of every servant of God. And we do so by seeking true knowledge, which allows us to discern deception. The only weapon against deception is truth. But truth can only be properly wielded against deception (evil) by those who have the necessary qualities of a “true believer”.
Those qualities are outlined in the Bible (and numerous other books for that matter), so I won't go into them here. But I should point out that merely pretending to have these qualities does not qualify you to do battle with evil. The qualities I speak of can only be granted by God himself, no man can obtain them according to his own desire or will (which the Bible also clearly says in many places and many ways in order to be clear on this point). And hense, no man can come to know the source of all knowledge unless they have indeed been chosen by God.
The popular Christian belief that we have so-called “free will” (or the oximoronic “limited free will”) and that life is some sort of test to see who deserves to live forever, is a spiritually childish notion to a true gnostic.
Even though gnosticism was suppressed and literally outlawed by the church, it has quietly survived all these years. To a gnostic this is no surprize. They know that the truth (i.e. source of knowledge, a.k.a. “God”) is the living and conscious force behind all of nature. So gnosticism cannot be destroy like some belief system or religion. Even if all men were destroyed, and a completely new intelligent species envolved, there would still be gnostics, even in the new species.
But, of course, gnosticism is just a word. You don't need to know the word to be a gnostic. I call myself a gnostic only very hesitantly after studying the history of gnosticism and learning that its principles are precisely my own. I did not adopt gnosticism, it adopted me.

P.S. It is difficult, if not impossible, to ever completely, or even correctly, define gnosticism in terms of human language. Like I have said, it is not a religion, not even “pure religion”, it is only a way of seeing things that allows one to “see” the religious paths, but it is not a “path” itself. It is like Ti-chi, in the sense that Ti-chi too, when correctly practiced, is a “way of seeing”. You could say that gnosticism is a kind of intellectual Ti-chi. Except, unlike Ti-chi, gnosticism can not be taught person-to-person. It can only be learned God-to-person.

Thank Godness For Ignorant People!

I blog a lot about fear and ignorance, but only because I have been, and yet remain, one of the greatest cowardly ignoramuses that I know. My only claim to accomplishment is that at least I realize that that is what I am. And I'm not ashamed of it either! But, nor am I proud; why would I be? Realizing that I am a deceived person keeps the blinders of pride off my eyes, and helps me see the world around me much more clearly. It helps me to not be so quick to judge, and hense destroy any chance I might have to learn and experience new things!
So, while I observe the ignorance of other people often, I do not condemn it, nor would I even wish they were not a part of my world. For so wishing would be to wish for my own demise, and that would be silly. The man who spits in my face is as much my brother as any other.

Shame On Me

It is satisfying to know that I will be murdered by consensus of the people of the most powerful nation in human history. Shame on me for feeling that way, and shame on you for wanting me dead. It makes me feel like some sort of martyr. :)

Worse Than Rape

Anyone who claims that child rape is universally the most evil and despised crime in the world has obviously not been around the world very much, nor even studied history. In fact, it has been only very recently in history that any society has been able to generally value children at all. Even the great United States not very long ago legally condoned the commercial and systematic abuse of children in ways that would make most modern child rapes seen kind by comparison.
And I'm not defending child rape as no doubt some idiot would claim if I did not specifically say so (and will probably claim anyway just because it makes them feel righteous to denounce a child rapist). Child rape is clearly wrong, but there are far far worse evils in this world. And, you don't need to look to history to find them; just check your back pocket. Any U.S. Currency you find there is evidence of your own guilt in causing millions of children to suffer from hunger, sickness, homelessness, exploitation, and worst of all, hopelessness! I won't bother explaining why this is true, because if you don't already know then you really shouldn't be reading this blog. You should be learning about world economics, and about how easy (and common) it is for strong countries to just take whatever they want (resources) from weaker countries. Talk about rape! Right now the U.S. Has it's economic hard-on so far up the Middle East's ass that they can't even take an economical shit unless we let them. And their very real flesh and blood children are the ones feeling it the most. (Please don't tell me you thought 9-11 was about religious fanaticism! You'd be fanatic too if you had to watch your children starve, and go without medicine and shelter, just so some stronger country could have its pleasures.)
Like I said, check your wallet next time before you cry out ignorantly about child rape being so “evil”. You might just discover that you are the one with a hard-on for vulnerable children!

One is Enough

I happen to know that there is at least one person who reads every word of this blog with an open mind, and an open heart. And that one is more than enough to justify the effort. Thank you, silly girl!

Consciousness Arising

Consciousness and probability are inextricably interwined, I have observed in the past that consciousness is the product (or “offspring”) of infinite probability. This is a very difficult realization for even me to grasp, and I am certain that the words I am using to express it fall miserably short of being even an inspiration for most. But, alas, it is my task to at least try.
In another post, I have expounded on what I refered to as evidence of a “probability limit”. But now, I realize that what I was contemplating was really just consciousness at work. The purpose of consciousness is inexpressible, and hense, so is its “work”. But we can observe consciousness as it is expressed in the universe around us, and more intimately within ourselves. We can even experience pure consciousness directly by various means (from drugs, to meditation, and many other ways). But we will never be able to express that experience in terms of the limited experiences we have through our senses. So what I am about to state will be meaningless, unless you are one who enjoys intimate contact with consciousness directly. Then perhaps you will be able to make some sense of this, since it comes straight from my own direct experience of consciousness. And, while how we express true experience may differ (as all the different religious attest) the experience itself is always the same. It is only how we relate it to our limited experiences that differs.
First, I should be specific about what I mean by “infinite probability”. In order for there to be any probability at all then there must be some event that can happen in at least two different ways. This is simple probability. The simplest event of all is whether something exists, or does not exist. I call this the prime event. A variation of the prime event is what I call the time event. The time event is really the same thing as the prime event, only how we view, or describe, it changes. Instead of something either existing or not, we say that it is either moving forward or backward in time. This “view” is better for understanding pure (infinite) probability, because it allows us to think in terms of something we already experience, time. But, keep in mind that this “time event” view is actually less “true” than the “prime event” view, yet neither view is absolutely true (though the “prime event” is perhaps the purist definition of “God”, or “infinite intelligence” that I have ever proposed, by itself it is also the most meaningless!)
With the time event, we say that something exists when it moves forward in time, and does not exist when it moves backwards in time. So, with this view, it is clearly possible for something to go from a state of existence, to a state of non-existence, and back again. So then, our simple probability is defined by the two possible directions in time.
As strange as this sounds, there is a corresponding event that has been observed numerous times by particle psysicists. When a positron (i.e. anti-electron) collides with an electron both particles cease to exist in a burst of energy. Positrons are also known to be mathematically identical to an electron moving backwards in time. (I'm not making this up, see my earlier post “Time Travel is Real” posted August 16, for a further explaination and references). One theory is that the positron and electron are really the same particle seen changing direction in time, and appearing to us to cease existing in the process. But, I do not need particle physics to support my ideas here, because I am speaking from my own direct experience of consciousness, not external observations (the later being quite primative in contrast).
So, now that we have defined a probability event, we can begin speaking in terms of probability. In the simplest terms we say that the probability that something is moving forward or backward in time (i.e. does or does not exist) is finite. That means that even if we cannot calculate what the probability is, we know at least that there is some value for the probability by virtue of the fact that only one or the other state can be true in any given infinitesimality (yes folks, that is a real word, even though it may not appear in your dictionary. It means an infinitely small instant, or for the purpose of this discussion; a timeless instant). Either the something is moving forward or backward in time (and does or does not exist).
Now here is the reason we use the time event instead of the prime event for our visualization: if an entity (i.e. “something”) does exist, and hense is moving forward in time, then given any length of time (a non- infinitesimality)said entity can in fact either exist or not exist in an infinite set of infinitesimalities. In other words, there can in effect be an infinite number of time events! And since each time event is said to have a finite probability, then an infinite set of finite probabilities is, of course, the definition of infinite probability.
Now, what does all this have to do with consciousness? Well, hopefully, if I had laid my words right, I have set up an interesting test for an age old dilemma. We have only to ask, what exactly determines the probability of a time (or prime) event? Or, to completely rephrase the question, what ultimately determines the choices we make? This is the same exact question, only now you can see the direct relationship it has to consciousness!
The answer is consciousness, of course. What else could it be? If it were pure chance then there would be only chaos and profound lawlessness in the multiverse (since we're talking infinite infinities, “multiverse” is a better term for “universe”, since the former refers to all possible universes, not just ours). As I have already expounded on in my previous blog post on the probability limit, pure randomness cannot account for the obvious law and order that makes up our universe. There must be consciously directed probability, which is what I previously refered to as the probability limit.
And so, infinite probability (a.k.a. “God the Father”) gives rise to the very consciousness (a.k.a. “God the Son”) that shapes and determines the space/time experience we call reality (a.k.a. “The Spirit of God”). And if you carry through with this revelation correctly, then you will discover that is meshes perfectly with not just the true teachings of the Bible, but also with the basis of every other world religion. Everyone of the Fifthnail blogs serves this revelation. Every word that has ever been written is about this revelation. Though many words have been written to conceal the truth, all words are written about the truth. When you can see the meaning in this, then you will never be deceived by words again. Consciousness, which is the “Word of God”, cannot lie.

“Lights out for predators on Halloween”

Sometimes the depth of the ignorance of people in American society still amazes me, even after being so amazed so often in the past.
In the news today was the bold headline. “Lights out for predators on Halloween”, that was accompanied by an article boasting of “Operation Boo”, carried out by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (uh, isn't “Correction” and “Rehabilitation” supposed to be the same thing? I guess some genious state official figured that two lies were better than one, even if they are just different words for the same lie!) Apparently, all registered sex offenders who are on parole are forbidden to participate in Halloween. They must remain at home, with lights off, and are not even allowed to answer their door.
Talk about alienating sex offenders (which in most cases is exactly why they became sex offenders in the first place). This is a perfect example of how “the System” works against proven effective rehabilitation efforts (such as community re-integration) by imposing “media friendly” programs that do absolutely nothing to reduce criminal activity. Of course what “Operation Boo” does accomplish is that it gives “visibility” to a government agency's supposed efforts to “protect our children”. But, the only thing they are protecting of course is their jobs, and perhaps their delusion of heroic purpose.
I would be willing to bet dollars for dirt that if anyone did an effectiveness survey for “Operation Boo” (though not surprizingly there is considerable resistance by the System to all such surveys), they would find not only any significant reduction in sex crimes committed by the targetted sex offenders (parolees), but over the course of the few weeks that follow “Operation Boo”, they would discover a distinct increase in the number of sex offender parolee parole violations and re-offenses.
Of course, no one will ever do such a study, and I suppose that makes my prediction a safe one to make. Which makes a point not so much about the potential results of such a study as much as the point that so many operations are carried out by government agencies while the only ones reporting on the supposed effectiveness of the operations are the agencies themselves. And, they invariably use extremely slanted, controlled, and unscientific data to make their programs appear effective. Not even the press steps in (like it claims to do) to provide any “public oversight”, because then they would be cut off from getting so many lucrative headlines handed to them on a silver platter, like “Lights out for predators”. How juicy is that?

Crapshoot Justice

You come home after a hard day at work and discover your front door kicked in and several valuable items (T.V., stereo, laptop, etc...) are gone. You feel violated and even terrified by what has happened. What should you do?
In our crap shoot justice system, you are expected to call the police, so the burglars might be caught, and justice served. There are many theories that support this course of action, such as; that catching the criminals (and locking them up) will stop them from being able to commit more crimes. We also rationalize that the punishment will somehow discourage other would-be criminals from violating the law once they learn about the potential consequences. Then of course there is always the retribution itself, which makes us feel better.
But in truth, none of these theories hold water. The criminals eventually get out of jail, or prison, and typically end up committing more crimes than they would have if they had never been caught (this bears out statistically). Other “would-be” criminals are actually incouraged by the thrill and danger that the possibility of getting caught provides. Tougher punishments have historically resulted in more, not less crime (with few, but highly touted, exceptions). And the retribution is of course just another word for vengence, and we all know where that leads.
So what can we do? We can't just ignore the crime and let the violator run free, can we? Or, can we? What if we did?
Most burglaries are committed by immature people (under the age of 25). That means that if we leave them alone there is a good chance that they will “grow up” and become responsible member of society all by themselves. You never hear about all the criminals who don't get caught and end up becoming very law conscious citizens over time (usually a few years). You may think that's ludicrous, but once again, statistics bear me out.
Consider that, in areas of the world with practically no crime, such as rural China, there is also practically no law inforcement. Sociologists have known for a long time that the hands-down best deterent to crime is a close knit community. Even in America, the best crime prevention/reduction programs are the ones that emphasize community integration, and re-integration of the criminals back into the community. These programs are proven to work, and the cost-benefit analysis is astonishing as well. But the “justice system” itself is the primary opposition to these programs, both in the polls and on the streets! (For example, by pushing for longer sentences that only increase the length of time a criminal is kept seperated from society while increasing the chance he will commit more crimes when released.) That is, of course, because the justice system needs crime to survive, and there are no official mechanisms to check it's appetite for criminals. It is a “beast” that only appears to control crime as it consumes criminals, then blames the fowl smelling excreta that oozes out its other end on the criminals that it feeds on. I know, because I was once excreted from the system's ass. So when I hear a cop or some other “official” refer to me as a “piece of shit”, I just smile and say, “exactly”.

“Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied”

I have suggested that we use “clear and present danger” as a measure of the validity for the reasons we use to commit violence (i.e. to kill). But I realize of course that there are no simple rules for determining when we should or shouldn't kill.
For example; I have also asserted at times that perhaps it would have been best if someone had simply put a bullet in my head at that Denny's restaurant in Coeur d'Alene five years ago (where I was found in the company of a little girl I had kidnapped after murdering her family) instead of putting me under arrest.
You may think that society must determine my guilt before it can justify killing me. But that is exactly the kind of irrational fear based thinking that makes real justice (justified action) impossible.
Despite what our fear motivated system wants you to believe, it is simply not possible to determine rationally what should be done about a dangerous (or tragic) situation out of the immediate context of the situation itself! As soon as you change the context of the situation, you also change the appropriate rational response. And attempting to re-create the circumstances in court in order to determine a rational response is impossible. It can only result in the fabrication of rationalizations (i.e. excuses) for delayed actions.
In other words, by arresting a suspect in order to delay justified action (i.e. justice), we completely destroy any chance of genuinely justified actions (true justice). It does not matter how meticulously preserved the crime scene is at the time of the crime, or how carefully the evidence is weighed in court. No matter how hard you try, you simply cannot just suspend the crime so you can decide what to do about it later. This is a fundamental flaw with the entire justice system. And the system itself is acutely aware of this flaw, so it expends tremendous resources just trying to cover it up, and even more effort futilely trying to fix it. Better and better crime scene preservation and evidence analysis only results in more money being spent while justice is delayed and perverted further and further.
Attempting to invoke any kind of social justice by delaying action is clearly never going to be accomplished. The outcome can only be less and less justice the further we move the rationalizing process away from the circumstances being rationalized. It is a sand trap with only one solution: don't step in it!
They say “justice delayed is justice denied”. I wonder if they realize how true that is. As for taking justice into our own hands, perhaps there is no place else where it belongs!

A Definition For Murder

I have written profusely about the destructive and anti-productive properties of fear, often even refering to it as the source of all “evil”. But like all other aspects of our experiences in life, fear has a purpose. So I should stress, that like all “evil” things, it is important to learn how to master and control fear, not eliminate it. Fear needs you to “be afraid, be very afraid”, in order to control your thoughts and behavior.
Our goal should be to feel fear without being afraid. Roosevelt would have been more precise (though less dramatic) if he had said, “The only thing we have to fear is being afraid.” All he was really saying, of course, was, “Let's not be cowards!” Isn't the definition of a coward, someone who is afraid of fear, and thus allows it to determine what they do, and, perhaps even more significantly, what they think.
When we let fear control our thoughts then we end up rationalizing our cowardly acts. The murderer thinks, “He deserves to die because...” It doesn't matter what excuse he invents, or even whether it is invented spuriously in the mind of a cowardly killer, or formally in the courts of a fearful society. All that matters is that the excuse justifies our submission to fear, so that fear can stay in control.
But what is a coward if not a child? Perhaps being afraid is the only way we can protect ourselves while we are still too immature to respond rationally (and without rationalization) to the threats we perceive. So maybe we should not be so quick to judge and condemn a coward, because doing so is itself a cowardly act. Instead, maybe we should see the coward for the child they are, whether that child be a 35 year old man, or a 200 year old social system. (Notice how only the young and immature social systems in the world still have criminal death penalties. The European Union will not even accept a country that still executes its criminals.)
If “being rational” means acting on reason, and “rationalizing” means inventing excuses, then how can we tell the difference? Actually, there is a simple test that the militaries of the world have used for thousands of years. They call it, “clear and present danger”. If you kill for any reason less than this, then you are only rationalizing a cowardly act. And, that makes you a murderer. But, don't worry. You'll grow up someday. I did.

A World of Real Miracles

Life is eternal and there is no escape. We try to escape by lying to ourselves, but in the end (usually our end) the truth prevails, and life goes on without us.
Didn't I just say that life was eternal? How then, you may ask, does “life goes on without us?” Simple, we are not eternal, but the life that gives us consciousness (and the ability to understand our experiences) is eternal. We are finite and limited beings that life created and occupies according to its own intentions. Life's intentions accommodate all of eternity. Our limited intentions are pure fantasy by comparison. Life is forever; we are not.
But, we can live forever with life, and through life; as life lives through us. We can share the eternal nature and consciousness of life. All we have to do is stop lying to ourselves, telling ourselves that we create life (that is, believing ridiculously that somehow our consciousness is a product of our brain). We pretend to be gods, with god-like “free will” and even eternal existence. This fantasy prevents us from realizing and sharing the true eternal nature, and continuity of being, that only the life inside of us can offer. Life, consciousness, does not belong to us, and we certainly did not create it with our puny little monkey brains! And even though life does not need us, it loves us. Even the most dispicalbe person is a treasure beyond the value of the universe itself, as far as life is concerned. I know, because I am one of those “most dispicalbe” people, and yet I witness life's love for me every day! The first time I witnessed it (or, more correctly, the first time I had the courage enough to acknowledge it as my creator) was on the mountain with Shasta. Shasta's innocence was like a healing salve that freed me from the iron like grip of the mask (lies) I wore. I truly wish people could see the miracle in this alone, then perhaps they would stop believing in their fantasy miracles, and start living in a world of real miracles.

“Imagine there's no heaven.
It's easy if you try.
No hell below us,
Above us only sky.”

The Fine Art of Non-imposition

For the most part, I still believe pretty much the same things I believed before the “revelation” in the Montana wilderness that caused me to turn myself in. The one main difference is – and this is a big difference – that I no longer believe that I have the “right” to impose what I believe onto other people.
Every critical decision, and most lesser ones, that I have made, since the revalation, has been in accord with this simple realization. Including my decisions to bring Shasta home, allow myself to be arrested, cooperate with the authorities (prosecution and defense lawyers), to not speak to media (and write a blog instead, so the truth as I see it would be freely available instead of packaged and sold), and to not resist, attempt to influence, or appeal, societies decisions in my regard.
I spent the whole first part of my life believing the lie that I needed to change people to my way of thinking in order to make the world (any world) a better place. After the “revelation” I saw that this was as far from true as night is from day (which is an analogy with deliberate innuendoes concerning the fact that night and day can only be properly observed by someone standing on the surface of a revolving world). The world can only change, and is changing, according to the will and intentions of infinity. There is nothing I can do as a limited being that will ever cause the world to change any differently.
But, I also came to realize that my limited self has an infinite counterpart that is very much capable of changing the world. And, as I have just stated a moment ago, already is! I do not need to make a conscious effort to improve the world. All I need do is have faith that it is already being improved. I will then do whatever needs to be done without thought or effort. Joseph Campbell calls this, “following your bliss”. The hippies called it, “believing in Him”. I have called it, “listening to your intuition”, but it can also be simply stated as, “letting go (and letting God)”. Whatever you call it, it is a delicate balancing act that can be (and fortunately is) maintained only by ridding oneself of worldly fear, which is not easy to do, until you have done it, then it is the easiest thing in the world. “An easy yoke to bear”, as the most famous man in all of history is purported to have once said.

The Christian Dilemma

If you are not willing to admit that everything you believe is wrong, then how will you ever know if you are wrong? All the faith in the world wont help you if you don't believe in the right thing. In fact, if you are wrong then your so-called “faith” becomes the instrument of your demise, because it prevents you from realizing you are wrong.
There is an answer to this dilemma, and the Bible even tells you what it is. But the Bible can't help you until you hear the Word of God directly for yourself.

“You search the Scriptures, for in then you think you have eternal life; and these are they that testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.” (John 5:39-40, NKJV)

Are We There Yet?

What if the reason it is so important for us to overcome fear in this world is because heaven is a terrifying place? If we could control our fear then heaven would be as wonderful as promised, but if not, then it would be hell!
Maybe we are in heaven right now!

The Word of God is Spoken, Not Written

All scripture may very well be “inspired by God”, but only life itself is spoken by Him. So, where do you think we should turn when we seek the Truth and Meaning of our existence? With what “words” should we seek to understand? God's spoken word? Of, man's “inspired” ones?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1, NKJV)

…

“All things were made through Him (the Word), and without Him nothing was made that was made.” (1:3)

The Beautiful Ones

They do not confine themselves to the flesh (at least, not usually). They live in a world of pure conscious energy. They are born twice, but only die once. Their enemy is fear and ignorance; their nature, love and understanding. Their enemy is overcome, and their nature is forever. To them, life is truly just a dream, and their waking reality is all of eternity. To us they are, angels, gods, and saints. To them we are children. They are the Beautiful Ones, and they love to help us learn and grow.

“The Beautiful Ones always smash the picture, always, every time.” - Prince

The Temple of Life

When we hide from our feelings (i.e. pain) we are only fooling ourselves. Our feelings cannot be hidden from those who can see the Truth. We can only hide from those who are also hiding. We cannot hide from the ones who walk in the light; the “Beautiful Ones”.
They see us for who we truly are, scared little children, weak and dominated by our fears. So they do not condemn us. But, they do allow us to condemn ourselves. This is so they will know when we are ready to be “re-born” and they can come to our side. When we stop judging ourselves and our world, then we are no longer afraid. Only then do we become more than human, and join the Beautiful Ones in the Temple of Life, where death has no authority.

Being a “Man”

There are those who believe that the “definition of a man” is someone (a male) who keeps his suffering to himself (i.e. “doesn't cry like a girl”). In my book, such “men” are weak and cowardly.
It takes strength and courage to own up to and express who you are in your heart (emotionally). Attempting to hide what you feel is akin to hiding from who you are. The definition of a coward, is someone who lets fear determine their behavior. Someone who hides from what they are afraid of is a coward.
I am still such a coward. I have yet to summon the courage to express, and thus let go of, my deepest fears. It is not something I can do with words alone. I think words can help build courage though. But in order to truly face myself, I must do so in front of others.
I question whether the System wants this to happen. I suspect not, but I could be mistaken. It is the only way I will ever “heal”. It would be a miracle if it ever happens.
In the mean time, I am stuck with just being human.

The Sacrifice of Understanding

Our ability to understand is the very gift of life, not our ability to “think”. Thought is something else entirely. Understanding is love. It is the offspring of infinity, and the Living Truth. We routinely sacrifice our understanding to the false god of reason everytime we put our faith in human rationality. We even sacrifice our children's understanding by teaching them to trust reason over intuition.
But understanding allows this sacrifice, because if it did not then we could never come to realize that understanding is eternal, and freely given (never earned).

The Question of Faith

“Faith” does not mean not questioning what you believe. That is how fantasies end up becoming religious doctrine.
Faith means trusting that there are answers to all your questions, even when you don't know what the answers are yet. But, it does not mean that you should not ask the questions!
Only someone who is lying to you (consciously or unconsciously) would want you to not question what they tell you (e.g. government, religions, corporations). An honest entity loves to be questioned, even challenged. It is a chance for them to be known, and to learn.

Creations of Belief

It is only when we think that we have attained some ultimate understanding (or belief) that our ability to understand ceases (dies). True understanding is a living, breathing, changing thing all unto itself. It has its own purpose, and intelligence. It lives through us. We cannot create it or own it. It creates us!

Constant Scrutiny

I don't claim to understand what the ancients (wise men) understood. At least, not all of it. But, some of it is very plain to me, and even the part that I do think I understand is subject to my constant scrutiny.

Your Brain On Reason

“We are led to conclude that the human being, at this stage of evolution, is a biological robot (biot) automatically responding to genetic template and childhood imprinting.” - Timothy Leary in Info-Psychology (1987)

The human mind is a machine. Albeit a very complex machine that, when combined with the human body, is capable of amazing feats. If you doubt the machine nature of the mind then you probably have just not yet learned how easy your thoughts are to manipulate.
The brain is biological, yes; not mechanical or electronic. But biology is as much a system of cause and effect as any of the other machine types. So to deny the machine nature of our brain is to deny the very principle of cause and effect.
Our brain is the epitome of reason. Its primary purpose is not to determine us, but to serve us. Its function is to give us the ability to manipulate our experience. We call it “reasoning”, but that is a misleading term. It implies that the mind has the ability to understand. But it does not. The mind can only process finite information. Understanding requires consciousness, and consciousness requires the comprehension of infinity. So when we “reason” we are not understanding at all. We are merely manipulating our understanding to suit ourselves.
This is why there are so many different “understandings” in the world. Because people mistake reason for understanding. We worship cause and effect as though it were a god. Or, at least some “law” of the universe set down by a god. But cause and effect is an invention of reason. And reason is the latest in a long line of false gods. We have turned to such gods for thousands of years (at least) in our dellusional attempts to control forces in the world that we can not understand.
As our understanding changes, so the nature of our gods change. Any student of modern religion knows this to be true, but only a few realize the religious nature of the modern state. Our government is a religion of the false god of reason. The Christian Bible even warns us of the dire consequences of such false belief systems. So does the Koran, Tora, Buddhist sutras, and many other writings from those who genuinely understand. Unfortunately these writings have been left to the interpretation of those who still bow to reason. But fortunately the writings themselves have been preserved. So, they might yet serve their intended purpose to “guide and instruct”, but not, “speak for God”. Any real god must be able to speak for itself, or it is only the product of someone's imagination, and reason.

Unleashing Intuition

Modern science induces us to mistake reason for understanding. Reasoning is a mechanical process that allows us to manipulate and share understanding. But, it is useless without the understanding for it to manipulate. Even a computer can manipulate understanding. But, a computer cannot itself understand anything.
We reason with our thoughts. But our thoughts are not what allow us to understand. In fact, the process of thinking does more to inhibit understanding than to facilitate it. Thinking is a regulator, not a conductor. It restricts our understanding in order that we can do work with it. But thinking alone does not allow us to understand anything.
Monks experience their most profound understanding by turning off their thoughts (the computer-brain). Without the restriction of our thoughts to inhibit our understanding it becomes possible to experience “pure understanding”. That is, perhaps, to understand understanding itself. This is sometimes called enlightenment. But it is really no more than intuition unleashed!

“And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.” (John 1:5, NKJV)

Dependent Parent Support

Why is it that our society demands that parents support their children, while the children are young and dependent, but we don't demand that children support their parents, when their parents are old and dependent?

If You Believe Me...

If someone wants to tell me what is wrong with the way I think, then I will eagerly listen to them with an open mind, and even expect to learn something. But if someone wants to tell me what is right about their own way of thinking, then I see no reason to waste my time listening to them, as I would expect to learn nothing.
And if someone wanted to tell me what is right about my way of thinking, then, if I was bored, I might listen to them merely to humor myself. Yet, if someone wanted to tell me what was wrong with their own way of thinking, then I would drop whatever I was doing, and listen to them carefully. Not so that I could learn something, but so that we all might.

If you believe me,
And you receive me,
We will be together this day.

Dependent Choices

The debate of free will verses predestiny is as old as civilization itself. But the debate is a distraction from the truth of the matter all together. “Free will” is a silly human invention that has no correlating concepts in the natural universe. And “predestiny” is likewise a mute argument in the light of a little simple introspection that anyone can do. But the debate persists for the same reason that all debates persist; because both sides contain truths, and both sides contain deception. Only because there are any “sides” at all does the solution remain a mystery. The solution I am refering to in this case is one I like to call “dependent choices”. It completely ignores the concepts of “free will” and “predestiny” and instead simply observes the obvious without trying to turn it into something “devine”.
The dividing question in the aforementioned debate is, “Do we have the ability to make our own choices, or are our choices predetermined?” If you consider this question without prejudice then it can seem rather silly.
First of all, the terms are not even clearly defined, and because of this most actual debates on the issues digress quickly into pointless arguments over what “choice” means, or what “freedom” is. If both sides ever did actually manage to rephrase the debated question in terms that both sides agreed to then there would be nothing to debate! The arguments are all semantics and definitions, not conceptual at all.
For example, what exactly is choice? If we agree that it is a machine-like function that any computer can demonstrate, then the predestiners win. But if it is an indeterminable “spiritual” event, then the advocates of free will have the best argument. But what if we define “choice” as, “the finite result of infinite causes?” I'm only suggesting one possible definition that the antagonists in this case might agree on. You can plainly see that if they were to agree to some such definition, then the question could almost answer itself. So lets consider that question again, and see how silly it becomes using the definition for “choice” that I suggest above.
“Do we have the ability to control the infinite causes that result in a finite choice?”
It should be clear that this question has no answer. Or, if it did have an answer, it would be both yes and no. We can only control a finite number of causes, not infinite. So it's a silly question after all, as is the original version of this heavily debated paradox, when it is so carefully considered.
The question we might actually be trying to ask could be, “How can we make better choices?” So let's apply my definition for “choice” to this question and see what comes out:
“How can we improve the finite result of infinite choices?”
Ah! Now there's a worthy question that we might actually be able to answer. But, I'll leave the answer to that question up to the “experts”, if they ever stop arguing over semantics. Besides, I've already found my own personal answer to that question about five years ago. :)
The only remaining point I'd like to make for now is my own definition of “dependent choice”. Like I've already said, it sidesteps the silly ideas and comes straight to the point: “Every choice we make is the result of infinite causes and has infinite results” (note, I am no longer using my earlier definition of “choice” here, but I am proposing a completely new definition and concept).
With this definition I have stated only the obvious. And yet, it gives us a different way at looking at the “choices” we make that I think can spur whole new realizations, and perhaps even an authentic “paradigm shift” in social consciousness. Or maybe I'm just dreaming. Who knows.

Unconditional Love

Unconditional love is not what you think it is. If you have any ideas at all about what love is, then it is not unconditional love that you are imagining.
Unconditional love cannot be imagined. It can only be directly experienced. Once it is experienced then all other “sensual” experiences become much less important, but more intense at the same time.
Unconditional love doesn't mean ignoring your resentment toward someone. It means giving into your resentment while at the same time repenting your ignorance. In other words, it means embracing the pain we inflict upon ourselves. Not in the self-flagelation, but in the humbleness of self-effacing honesty.
Unconditional love seldom (if ever) results in one's feeling any sense of personal pleasure. The only “pleasure” a person gets from this kind of love is the pleasure that comes through our empathy for those we care about. This “real pleasure”, (a.k.a. “Joy”, a.k.a. “Bliss”) emanates from the inside out, not outside in. And, it causes all our personal external pleasure senses to tingle with the simplest experience. Drinking a glass of water can be more intoxicating than the most potent wine, for a person who truly loves.
Unconditional love does not condone ignorance. But, neither does it feed ignorance the fear that it craves. We do not “turn the other cheek” if we are afraid of being struck again. We only offer an ignorant person such an opportunity to strike us when we are not afraid, and when we truly love the person about to cause us pain. Only then will it have the power to heal.
Unconditional love does not comprehend fear. Some say that if you are not afraid then you can not know courage. But such courage is a misleading human invention that caters to false pride. I'm not saying one should not be “courages” and face their fears. We absolutely should! But, do not then take pride in your courage, for all fear is the result of your ignorance and nothing else. And, only by facing our fears can we learn this; there is nothing to be afraid of. (Or, as I believe Roosevelt once said, “The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself!”)
So, unconditional love is not something I, or anyone, can tell you about. But I, and almost anyone else, can tell you what it is not about. Just about anything you think it is, is what it is not! But, it does exist. And, it only takes faith in its existence in order to experience it. Once it has been experienced it is simply no longer possible to confuse “imagined love” with “real (unconditional) love” ever again.
“The Tao (way of love) that can be taught is not the eternal (unconditional) Tao.” - Lao-zi

An Alternative To Free Will

“Free Will”, by definition, demands that we able to choose independently of all influences. It does not mean we must choose independently, only that we have the ability to do so. But if we can choose independently of influence, then what determines our choice? If you say, “our character”, or “our nature”, then what determines those? If you say, “our choices”, then you have made the age old logical error of circular reference, the same kind of logical error that kept people thinking that the world was flat for so long despite overwhelming evidence that it couldn't possibly be flat. It seemed flat, so arguments were invented (many of them circular) to explain away the evidence.
Of course, ultimately the evidence won out and now we take gravity for granted. And, we don't even bat an eye at the idea of men standing upside down some 8.000 miles below us.
Someday too, we will not question the concept of dependent choice. “Free will” will seem as silly as the idea of a flat earth. But before that day comes we are going to have to collectively let go of certain absolutes that keep us from grasping beyond what our minds can directly perceive. Just as we let go of the concepts of “absolute up” and “absolute down”, we will need to learn that there is no “absolute right” or “absolute wrong”. Once we accept this then the idea of dependent choice will seem obvious.
And, if you think that our “character”, which ultimately determines our choices, is itself determined by nature, or “God”, or “the Universe”, then you have already admitted that we have no free will.
Because if our choices are determined by our character, and our character is determined by something other than ourselves, then our choices are not free, they are determined by whoever (or whatever) determined our character. And that is what “dependent choice” is all about.
Dependent choice does not imply pre-destiny. In fact, the concept of dependent choice has nothing to say about our “destiny” at all. Whether or not our choices are predetermined becomes a mute question when the idea of dependent choice is fully explored and understood. It is like asking, “what holds the earth up?”, after gravity is understood. The question itself no longer makes any sense, since gravity allows for a whole new way of looking at “up” and “down”.
And so, dependent choice provides a whole new way of looking at “right” and “wrong”. Suddenly, anyone claiming to be “the most right” about their view of the universe is exposed as a fraud. They will appear as foolish to us as a man who climbs a mountain in order to be “the closest to heaven”. Most religions of the world will become empty shells of impossible “righteousness”. Ironically, most religions of the world were based on the teachings of men who seemed to understand that there is no absolute rights or wrongs. When you re-read the teachings of Jesus, for example, in the light of dependent choice, suddenly what he is saying makes real sense, and no longer requires faith in imagined ideas, like absolute rightness (a.k.a. “righteousness”) and absolute wrongness (a.k.a. “evil”). The “miracles” that Christ performed are seen as very good metaphores for concepts that dependent choice supports.
Just for example, Jesus healed many “lepers”. Leprosy is a “skin disease” that eats the external flesh of the body while leaving the internal organs intact. Because of the way lepers were outcast and blamed for their own disease, leprosy is an excellent metaphor for how “sin” (i.e. deception) will eat away at the external “skin” of a person's “character” while leaving the internal “organs” of a person's “character” intact. Such a person's behavior (external skin) becomes more and more hideous as the disease progresses, and society soon casts them out (e.g. sends them to prison) and blames them for their sickness (behavior).
But dependent choice tells us that these “lepers” do have a disease, and, just as Jesus tried to teach us, it can be cured. Not miraculously in the “magical” sense of miracles that religion has imagined. But, in the very real “miraculous” sense of the mysterious force of “devine (unconditional) love”. Just as gravity (a miraculous and mysterious force itself) allows men to orbit the earth, seeming to set them free from the very gravity that holds them there, so devine love will some day set men free from “leprosy” (i.e. deception based behavior). Some day we truly will perform “miracles” even greater than those performed by Christ (as Christ himself promised we would). But, they will not be “magic” or “supernatural”. They will be achieved by mere understanding.
Faith in understanding is devine love. It is what Jesus and St. Paul really means by “righteousness”. Fear and ignorance is the cause of all suffering (i.e. deception based experience). It is what Jesus and St. Paul really meant by “evil”.