Mystic Life - LTU 5

[Mystic Pymp]

Day 1 (0)

First day of the new run and funky stuff is already happening. On a subreddit I follow someone told me about hypersigils, especially in the context of funny Scottish fellow named Grant Morrison. If you know more on the topic feel free to either post it here or PM me, I'm gonna do some research on him and his ideas so any and all information may end up useful

I'm not sure if I want to use his techniques but at the same time there is merit to it from my point of view. I don't want to discuss this here in detail, I'm not sure how well it will stick with rule 4, but needless to say it's all about sigil as a way to externalize and make your desire material. As thoughts are in constant flux and one's desire change depending on mood, needs and for all, I know, the population of the emperor penguins, it might be a good idea to assign a symbol to a given desire.

I believe I tried something like that in the past and it did not work too well. But at the same time I did not put much thought into it so it hardly counts.

Now, the idea of hypersigils is more complicated and that is what I seriously need to research. But, like I said, research I will. There is great 40 minutes long lecture of his and I think I will listen to it 2 more times or so, making notes and posting my thoughts here on the forum. He says interesting things about nature of time for example as well as individuality and this whole "make your reality" stuff. I have some objections to his ideas but most of it holds quite solidly.

Before I end I want to ask of you to give me your thoughts on one more questions I was thinking about recently. This goes to @Shannon  in particular but all can contribute. Assuming the theory of multiverse, a so uncertainty of the future as many potential futures are possible, does the same hold for the past? Is there only one Past or are the many pasts, the only requirement being that all these pasts led to the Present? The goal of this question is as follows - does the past (which we know from memories and little less, and even that is filtered through the lens of our experiences and reasoning) really objectively matter or should we simply focus on (certain as we experience it Now) present?

First, sigils and hypersigils do not qualify for discussion on the main forum.

Second, to answer your question, you must understand what time is actually like.  Most people imagine it as a ray, a line going in one direction, starting at a point and going on forever.  Some will imagine it as being an infinite corkscrew.  That is closer, but still not really accurate.  There is no accurate way to describe time for the human brain.  But if we stop imagining it as a linear thing, we are getting closer.

In the 1980's, computers stored data on magnetic tapes, like the ones you would use to record audio on.  This was a linear recording and playback device.  In the 90's, CDs became popular, and it was, at the time of their introduction, amazing to be able to just skip from one song to another in a second or less on a CD player.  This was possible because the recording medium was now "random access".  The same is true of a hard disk that uses a spinning magnetic platter.

This is about the closest I can get to describing how time really exists within a human nervous system limited context.  And what I'm getting at here is that all possible futures aren't just possible.  They all actually exist at once.  The key to which you experience is which you focus into from moment to moment via your thoughts, feelings, beliefs, intentions, choices, etc.  Something like moving down a tree branch, and teleporting from branch to branch as you do it.  You still experience the tree seamlessly (analogous, in this case, to your life experience), but each branch (possible life) is different.

Now you're asking if all possible pasts also exist.

If all possible futures exist, then all possible nows exist, and so do all possible pasts, because all of them actually exist as "now".  There is no past or future.  There is only the limit of what out nervous system is capable of processing and comprehending.

It would be more accurate to say that all possible experiences exist now, and we simply choose which to flow into alignment with and experience.  More accurate still to say that we exist as all possibilities which are being expressed or left as potential according to the will of the point of awareness doing the perceiving.

Viewed from a linear filter of the nervous system's limits, this leaves us with a memory of the specific path we chose to take to the perceived "now", which adjusts to accommodate every "now" we choose to experience.  The past cannot be experienced again by the awareness limited by the physical nervous system except through memories, so it is generally best to focus on the now and shape the future instead.

Thanks Shannon, this is actually very helpful. I really have to pay more mind to the idea of non-linear time. Also your note about sigils is duly noted, I might mention it if it will be relevant for some reason but I will not discuss it in detail.

Day 2 (1)

In my today's walk, instead of listening to podcasts like I usually do, I decided to listen to some music. That gave me room for thinking and wondering. My thoughts quite quickly went to my ex from last year and one powerful idea which I'm sure I've heard somewhere but I have no idea where and I cannot be bothered to look for it now.

Mediocrity is death

And death by a thousand cuts at that. If there is one adjective I can use to describe it would be mediocre. Average. Typical. Boring. Ultimately that's the reason I'm no longer with her. If she was "interesting", inspiring me our problems might have been the same but I would have fought quite hard for her. Instead I became tired of the relationship and gave up on it even before it ended.

I think of her for two reasons. First one is quite silly. Recently via messenger I've learned she has new boyfriend now. When I learnt of this back in Japan I felt pinch in my heart for a second or two but then it went away. I'm not jealous or envious or anything. I wouldn't want to be with her even if she tried. Via her mediocrity she lacks charm and magnetism needed to give me such reaction. But it made me realize something else.

The second reason is I still hold grunge towards her for how she behaved. And that's surprising. Unlike my first girlfriend she didn't do anything wrong per say. The first one would cheat on me, play me etc. and still I forgave her. I don't want to have any contact with her but I forgave her and if anything I pity her. But this one? She's done nothing wrong but didn't do much good either. She just... was. And if she was in a sense of "being there for me" that would be enough. Instead she was in a sense of "she existed". After year of relationship there are no songs that remind me of her, no place bearing her persona, no memories worth cherishing. I think that, in a sense, that left me more scarred than being cheated on.

That grudge comes partly (but I don't think fully, I cannot figure out rest yet) from an interesting observation. I don't understand her. I am extremely analytical person and so, in a sense, I treat people like a puzzle. I like to understand people, why they do what they do etc. And again, after a year of relationship, I cannot tell you why she did what she did. I don't understand her motives and her actions. They are not mysterious as much as... nonsensical? Like going against human nature and common sense. I know it stems from her fears and her upbringing but still.

Main argument comes down to my obsession with Will. If you want something truly you fight for it. That's how I realize what I want - not by how much I feel I want but by how hard I fight for it. I know she felt she wanted me but she never truly acted on it, no matter how much I showed her it's fine, how much time I gave her or the circumstances. There were small cute gestures, sure, but never any initiative. And after a year of showing her intimacy is fine and me bringing initiative I got bored and quite frankly sick and tired of the doormat-like attitude.