Explorations in spiritual heteronomy part one.

I am very clear in my Self: for me there is no necessity of ‘authority’ because the sui generis demonstrates ‘authority’ to be anathema to evolution and free will. The cosmic Consciousness recognises the necessity for sui generis if there is to be any evolution: in my multiverse this Consciousness is as delighted to evolve and grow as I Am, because I Am part of that Consciousness. There is no ‘god’, there is Consciousness creating layer after layer of Beingness in order to both explore its Self and expand- evolve- its awareness of this Self through infinite layers of Being. Consciousness is aware that in order for this fractal expansion to happen in ways that creates new expression, there can be no ‘authority’; it creates its creations in a sea of absolute freedom, knowing that sui generis free will must be present if there is to be any exploration. There is no ‘authority’ because ‘authority’ purports to state what ‘is’ and ‘must be’ as ‘this is how things are': as soon as this happens dogma begins, dogma strangles evolution and recreates Empire.

Simply the fact that any individual would refer to this Consiousness with a gender specific pronoun is an indication of the beginnings of the underlying dogma of male-female and the heteronomy that this produces is visible all over the planet in the persecution and killing of those who identify outside the gender dualities and proscribed behaviours. Fundamentalists of all flavours are fond of pointing to this duality as the only acceptable arrangement and have no hesitation in killing those who are outside it, particularly gay males.

I have zero interest in dogmas because I have zero interest in anything that provides fertile soil for the heteronomy and the Empires it spawns, so there is no ‘saint, scripture or spiritual master’ for me. None is possible within the framework of the sui generis- *unique, without peer, of its own authority, its own designation* means there is none that can judge or that it can judge, none that can critique or that it can critique.

“God controls with love” is *not* what I have read or observed, therefore I perceive this as simply yet another fiction: to control another is to predetermine the scope of their evolution and experience based on the foundational belief that they are too incompetent/unbalanced/corrupt to evolve. “We should control money not money control us”- in a sui generis world there *is* no money because money is another fiction: how can we ‘own’ a sui generis planet and its resources? If we cannot own anything, what are we doing when we create ‘economies’? We’re lying about who we are and we’re stealing. Only the heteronomy claims that which is not its own- it’s called tortious conversion- so if we’re behaving like the heteronomy then that is what we are.

What *is* love? Language is utterly subjective, which is why I was interested in developing a remedy to the heteronomy that was independent of concepts and ideas that rely on subjective interpretation. Sui generis needs no such interpretation because ‘unique, without peer, one of a kind’ is clear language in anyone’s perception.

‘Gods’ are an individual choice that they are free to immerse in; they are not a platform on which peace can ever be created. I’m interested in peace and evolution for *all* Beings, across the entire multiverse, hence my disinterest in dogmas.


The issue of the ursurpation of power by the controllers has lead me into some interesting places lately regarding ‘the law’ and immersing in responding to fiction with fiction- I am beginning to perceive that a clear expression of the sui generis, in *all* its fullness, is the absolute response to the entirety of the fictions… I’ll work on a post about that…  :)


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *