Focused Misanthropy: Living for the 0.01 Percenters

What does one do with a Woodchuck Pirate, aka Raymond J. Raupers, Jr USA? 

Woodchuck has dropped comments on my blog for years. He always puts a lot of effort into it. It’s sometimes a bit lost on me contextually, but since I’ve traveled in such circles for a couple of decades, I well know that anyone’s synapse firing in the moment doesn’t always line up with my own. But, I always know when I’m dealing with a thinker, rather than a regurgitator. And there are no shortcuts in that. Take a few years of focussed effort and you might become a real thinker, rather than a regurgitator. Otherwise, I’ll always catch you pretending, and will gleefully point it out.

Raymond tosses around the 99.99% figure—as we all do—to make his distinction. He’s probably being way generous, because I doubt there are 7,000,000 (7 million) people on the planet who aren’t worthy of characterizations I’d make, that you’d chalk up as misanthropic. However, I hold out hope for some of the millions of kids in underdeveloped countries now getting on the internet, but not sacked by doG & Cuntry baggage that you all embraced out of convenience, free shit, comfort, convenience…and a burning desire to get along with people spouting bullshit.

I’m posting a comment here by Raymond from a couple of moths ago that has been on my mind; principally, because of his 2-word formulation that struck me distinctively: focussed misanthropy.

(I hope Sir Raymond excuses a bit of editing for emphasis.)


The concept you raise has many dimensions. Historical, philosophical, moral, evolutionary and devolutionary, to name a few.

The first reference visiting my mind was Thoreau’s words suggesting it was preferable to have all the meanness, than to discover someday that he had not lived. While the enemies of this paradigm seek shelter in abstract ridicule, citing fact that Thoreau was geographically positioned to escape any real bodily threat, Thoreau’s pursuit of universal truth is not derided by the cowardice and evil dimensions of collectivists who attack the periphery of individualism with the aim of hiding their fear of the core. In my opinion such behavior has evolved as status-quo “civilized” behavior of self hatred.

The civilized humans are so misidentified with their ongoing “story” construction that the opportunity of remembering true self feels like an approaching death. In kind, they repel those who violate “civilized” social norms as harbingers of death; after all, if their story isn’t real, then what is real? Self introspection is the act that true self imposes to arise, and it requires little effort to observe the methodology 99.99% of humans implement to avoid self introspection.

…Civilized humans enslave themselves with social norms to maintain the illusion of livestock gates, lest they wander into reality. The appearance of threat to the illusion of those gates, is anything that doesn’t belong (conform) inside, and they are swift to engage it with collective attack.

There is no scarcity of opportunity to awaken and arise. As pain increases despite faith in sacrificing individuals to collectivism, the herd responds violently to the personal and collective fractures that assemble into patterns with great velocity. The sky is falling and intensified measures of control must be implemented, over and over, guaranteeing insanity. There are definitely powerful systems of psychopathy effected by minorities responsible for “civilization,” but the fault and answer lies only at the individual level, where 99.99% volunteer as system slaves, ultimate prisoners who learn to love their prison(s). Conscious individuals (noble brutes) must withdraw their consent and participation because, a prison within a prison is still prison.

As folks criticize you for your personal attempts to shake the bullshit from their eyes, they are mostly demonstrating how little respect they have for their own rights. Of course, if one does not respect their own rights, it’s irrational to expect they will respect the rights of others. As devolution progresses, they will embrace every “civil” attack upon freedom that maintains their psychopathic relationship with the state. Most are life-long deniers of psychopathic relationships, attempting to hide in aversion to the obvious, thanking gods and masters for their monetary escape from real freedom.

This does not mean they aren’t very pleasant people. It just reveals how the human farming phenomenon continues unchecked, characterized by monetary war (less visible than hot war). The death count rises continually as “civilized” methodology—enhanced by technology—creates less alarm. The chain of patriotism-statism-obedience-dependence has been secured by writing a cheque to the masses (bribe for obeisance).

Examples of honest attempts to discuss this process can be found widely in art and expression of self, through form (The Art of Living). For instance, the assassin character from Apocalypse Now tells a soldier that he’s not going to find out who he’s working for “in some factory” back in the states. It seems to me that If war is not a hallmark of civilization, then what is?

It follows that civilization has never been sustainable because it is diametrically opposed to freedom. Welcome to the tax farm, make your choice to stay or go, and feel free to shake immense piles of bullshit from the eyes of the system slaves. Sooner or later you will recognize that enlightenment can not be withheld or given away, and brutality is the weapon of cowards who gave up long ago. They are not victims. There are no victims. It is irrelevant whether the wounds someone receives are inflicted by the unconscious behavior of “civilized” folks, or chaos itself. Personally, I prefer the wounds of unconscious behavior, especially my own. Chaos is boring and sometimes insulting, such as the scene in Apocalypse Now where the boat Captain looks down at his chest and mutters “a spear.” Not perfectly chaotic, but close enough to ruin his personal “story” expectations of dying in Cambodia.

The important thing is to live deliberately and pursue infinite truth. The promise of an inevitable rescue by death is guaranteed. I for one have found no evidence within me that ever-lasting life is avoidable. I reject faith in all forms. Fear remains stripped from me by chronic daily pain. My perception is that the human life-form is over-rated. People still mess with me, and for the most part I discard the events, as opportunity costs are paid by myself. Generally this leaves an element of paranoia within the aggressors, which can be tapped long-term by pen. They’ve earned their paranoia, and I will do nothing to relieve them of it. Fear, ego has got nothing to do with me. If it did, I’d be setting in a jail cell building strategy to maintain control over the courtyard hierarchy, executing all in my way. I am for the living, let the dying bury the dead.

There remains an important paradigm to guide one amidst the herd, and that is the observation that the noble brute knows who he is without ever considering the needs of others. In contrast, the “civilized” person never recognizes himself, except when reflected in the eyes of others. The distinction is consciousness. Civilization exists only through destruction of consciousness. Unconscious behavior has serious results in the real world, which guarantees collapse, to fulfill the minority interest and refresh the herd. The minority orchestrates this process as and through the art of dying. I’ve withdrawn consent and participation long ago, through focused misanthropy.

Humans suck.

For an accurate prognosis based on current events, I recommend the movie Idiocracy. I find misanthropic art the best practice in erasing the myth that humans are special. I am not special. Fuck the self-professed special people; there’s too many of them to be anything but mediocre. It’s much more satisfying to observe the vulnerability of congress-critters squirming under gray-haired masks of superiority, while a black hole at the center of the milky way waits to strip their true self from form. This “civilized” world may be populated by monsters, but they can’t recognize the silent, conscious, noble brute that walks among them.

The Hollywood zombie stories have it deliberately wrong. The zombies prey upon themselves. Zombieism is the normal status-quo. It’s not something that will outbreak. The congress-critters and their owners are equally infected. As the law of exponents is now washing the stench of civilization from the globe, I prefer to expect a final collapse and return to evolution. This is my last tour of duty in human life-form and if I didn’t have children I could care less. But then every human lifespan is mercifully short and I hope their tour of duty is as productive as mine. That’s their choice.

I could write on this topic forever, but I’ve given up most of my flair for shaking bullshit from the eyes of the faithful. I’ve taken to writing lyrics and continue to pursue my goal of DIY record label Woodchuck Pirate Productions. None of these elements of form (the art of living) could assemble from my personal lifespan choices without the blessing of pain and brutal assault from my childhood to current day.

In conclusion on this topic I would like to recommend the new self-titled debut album of Tau Cross on Relapse Records. This is recommended to anyone walking the fringe of the zombie infected system slaves. At the fringe there remains opportunity to leap between segments of fractured ice comprising monetary hell, historically called civilization. The opportunity, by definition, is not collective. The monetary hell will only expire through evolution (preceded by current devolution). I celebrate the devolution from a reasonable distance, straight-edged and focused.

I do not lift a finger to impede the slaughter of zombie versus zombie.

They do not belong to me. The devil knows his own, or so they say.


I spent some time in sleeplessness figuring this post. I wrote this in a Facebook entry.

A point of order for friends, family, followers…wherever you may be.

A good friend of mine, Erwan LeCorre—the Frenchman founder of ‪#‎MovNat‬ was once asked about me from someone else.

“Just don’t get yourself fucked up with Richard.”

It makes me laf and cry at the same time. I practice what a commenter on my blog once called “focussed misanthropy.” Am I a misanthrope generally? No, no more than I’m a nihilist. I’m a social being who loves people just like anyone else. Unless you’re a psychopath or sociopath, you just can’t help it.

The difference with me is that I see the liaisons of life as a continuum of ebb, flow, feast, famine, failure, success, bounty and paucity.

Friends and allies are a commodity. There’s an endless supply, but just like fruit, you should pick and chose the best. And sometimes, shit goes rotten. Maybe you go rotten.

I don’t begrudge that. But what I will not do is sacrifice my 25 years of keen reading and learning, all the way back to Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle—heavy on enlightenment thinkers—and pretend that I don’t think some other person, regardless of standing in my life, is anything but ignorant in context of the subject matter—being plain fucktarded: in application of some regurgitate flavor of the day for mass consumption.

I never try to just get along. I have, at times, created far more antagonism than was justified, but I often just shut the fuck up, too, and it’s only me who deals with my own conscience on that score.

At root, I take life as my one shot to live it for its own sake, for better or worse. I have no interest in heaven.

I prefer life: making the heavens, and suffering the hells, as I create them right in front of me, and live it for the betters and the worses.

But I’ll always adore certain people no matter what they think of me, and while it may be presumptuous to say that they were ‘tried by my fire,’ it is, still, my life and I can like them if I want.

Memberships are $10 monthly, $20 quarterly, or $65 annually. The cost of two premium coffees per month. Every membership helps finance the travel to write, photo, and film from interesting places and share the experiences with you.


  1. woodwose on September 18, 2015 at 23:28

    I can relate to this since i have been in a a bible study group for awhile. I feel drained emotionally from being present and it feels like i am basically just a “scalp” for the clergy to count at his congregation. I wonder if the L*rd really was present why would the psychological energy only flow upwards to the church elders. Many of the younger laymen has already left.

    • Woodchuck Pirate on September 19, 2015 at 13:45

      Hello woodwose,

      I thought I would speak to your paradigm of psychological energy and what appears a possible underlying assumption that the “flow” is dependent upon anyone other than yourself. Immediately upon reading your words I was visited by imagery familiar from conversation(s) between myself and Laurent Seiter whom runs the Church Of Zer blog. Please be advised I am not intending to offend you as I am not an altruist and therefore do not seek the conversion of others. The content at COZ is anarcho-capitalist and equates to no gods no masters. I bring up Laurent’s name and blog as a matter of transparency in sharing some details of concepts and dialogue progression ongoing.

      Is your descriptive “flow of psychological energy” perhaps a personal definition of consciousness? If so do you have a natural intuition that consciousness is far too important to delegate to any authority that postures from a collective ego based upon altruism? I do and as there is no separateness, perhaps you and I share common ground.

      I’ve been pursuing a concept of “infinite truth” for what seems like years now, perhaps all of my life without recognizing the paradigm. The paradigm has evolved in considering that if infinity exists, surely truth would be infinite, and in kind consciousness might be infinite as comprised of infinite truth. This led me to query as to how consciousness could be infinite unless it was devoid of matter.

      In considering the realm of infinite consciousness I understand that consciousness does not require beliefs or even thoughts, and so why should I accept a leap of faith that matter (biology) is required for consciousness to exist? In rejecting faith in all forms I moved forward to grasp a concept I call “consciousness as a state of information”. This query and associated imagery visited me after learning Hawking’s explanation that information is recorded upon the event horizon of a black hole.

      The imagery of info recorded on an event horizon haunted me because it must have purpose. Why must info be recorded upon an event horizon when simultaneously all matter is stripped away by crossing the event horizon? Could the purpose be “consciousness as a state of information”?

      It seems all my observations of consciousness conducted while in the human life-form confirm that consciousness happens despite biology, not because of it. The ego as biological mechanism of the brain is always dysfunctional and true self arises as ego dies. Therefore infinite consciousness if it exists must be devoid of human biology (matter). This led me to understand that consciousness as a state of information might suggest everlasting life was unavoidable.

      I can not discover any scenario where cognitive dissonance does not emerge when considering the concept of consciousness as a state of information simultaneously with life (existence) as finite. Cognitive dissonance always arises when purpose is negated. In contrast I find everlasting life and consciousness as a state of information (devoid of matter) sharing common ground with Hawking’s explanation that info is recorded upon the event horizon of a black hole. There must be purpose.

      I may be completely wrong but I do not feel like anybody’s scalp. I think it’s ok for me to be wrong especially if I recognize my errors, but I never feel it’s ok to let somebody else be wrong for me. I have not encountered a scenario where collective ego has redeeming purpose. Collective ego by definition is enhanced dysfunction.

      I may be completely wrong in my paradigm observations, but I continue rejecting faith in all forms. It is my conclusion after 56 years inhabiting the human life-form that faith is always a tax on consciousness. If scientists are now staring at black holes, absent a unified theory, struggle to identify best questions to be asked, and can’t decide if they should define consciousness, then they have bigger obstacles than I. Faith in science is not science. It’s the posture of science taxing its consciousness parading as worst leader. I’ll find my way on the individual level.

      The resources I’ve accepted and implemented in paradigm construction include work by Eckhart Tolle and share common ground with many artists such as Amebix in their lyric “I am for the living, let the dying bury the dead.” Also my first introduction to the concept of “focused misanthropy” was from Shai Hulud in their album “Misanthropy Pure”. What I love about Tolle’s work is how he states that nothing he has to say is something you don’t already know. What I love best about Shai Hulud’s work is their denotation of “birthright and obligation”.

      I never feel the “psychological energy flow” away from me, rather I only know myself as the flow, and in that flow there is no separateness. In my best conscious states I recognize interconnectedness, not obedience or dependence. But then I’m not looking for leadership, I’m observing as per my birthright and obligation, in pursuit of infinite truth.

      A video I recently shared with Laurent may interest you. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Enjoy your evening.

      Woodchuck Pirate
      aka Raymond J Raupers Jr USA

    • Woodchuck Pirate on September 20, 2015 at 21:01

      Hello again sassysquatch,

      I’ve just completed watching this youtube video on Krishnamurti:

      I will surely watch more videos to observe his viewpoints on specific topics.

      The introduction of the brief documentary revealed a monstrous collective ego narcissistic movement against him as an individual. It’s bad enough to find every child routinely commanded by social constructs to “be something” rather than just be, but to be told “be the world teacher and prepare the world for the coming Messiah” is worse than the stolen the childhood I endured. While I watched this biography unfolding I feared a deepening unconsciousness would frame this story, not the self-redemption that ultimately prevailed. What a relief.

      I infrequently found Krishnamurti’s viewpoints expressed much differentiation from mine. His comments identifying nationalism and outward order construction as the root cause of disorder is specific and universal. The religious and secular collectivists escaped blame no more than the alliance of both (witchdoctor/tyrant archetype). His words in this video at least those that I captured without distraction of thought, revealed no aversion to principle. That’s important to his “cause” as most collectivists seek out a collective ego mainly to align themselves in diametric opposition to other collective egos. While Krishnamurti appears to assert no marketing plan, I’m still vexed by the conclusion of the biography as the “cause” arises to visibility through underlying assumptions.

      Krishnamurti expressed his personal fixation on “mankind”. Mankind as form has purpose, however mankind is not true self, it is form. Krishnamurti speaks in a manner to equate the “behavior” of mankind as some legitimate identity of true self. This is where I depart from Krishnamurti’s purpose as it appears to exterminate consciousness.

      I do not share Krishnamurti’s apparent perception of identity as the human life-form. I do not share his affection for the form and he appears to make no explanation for his affection. This suggests he simply assumes mankind is special simply because he found himself inhabiting a human body as environment. This implies he is suffering cognitive dissonance if one considers his viewpoints suggesting one is blind if they do not discard tradition. How can Krishnamurti seek infinite consciousness if he does not shed the traditional viewpoint of man as identity?

      In my paradigm of consciousness as a state of information, it does not require true self correlated with life-form, rather it insists on a possibility that form is merely convenient mechanism to segregate purpose, and that purpose seems most likely to be briefly important or even fickle. If form is the art of living, surely a life-form that expires almost exclusively in less than one hundred years represents much less utility than what Krishnamurti appears to imagine. But then perhaps the erroneous behavior I perceive in his conclusions may be the result of my limitations and experience in self observations as well as his. However I’m not a self-professed teacher.

      It’s refreshing enough to find Krishnamurti’s message in this video devoid of altruism. There’s nothing more altruistic than a teacher’s strike; there are no selfless deeds. The entire concept of a spiritual “teacher” or “leader” in my opinion is intolerable because it is fraudulent. Learning happens in all disciplines despite “teachers”, not because of them.

      I wonder how many collectivists dismissed Krishnamurti as a misanthrope? His viewpoint appears misanthropic except for his flight into cognitive dissonance with affection for mankind as identity. That segment appears entirely egoic. I would have preferred the truth.

      Thanks for the lead on this remarkable story. Enjoy your evening.

      Woodchuck Pirate
      aka Raymond J Raupers Jr USA

    • sassysquatch on September 20, 2015 at 10:15

      Woodchuck – ever read a book or seen a video about Krisnamurti? A deep thinker with a slant on life that Tolle conveys.

    • Woodchuck Pirate on September 20, 2015 at 18:27

      Hello sassysquatch,

      I don’t recall the name Krisnamurti however I’ve spent the past couple years captured by projects on my two 19th century plank board houses. I may have forgotten given my fixation on hard labor. It’s been a perfectly brutal affair through chronic pain and I’m the better for it. I’m looking forward to unleashing my creativity into the void created now that the urgent renovations near completion. It feels awkward to accept better living. Your mention of Krisnamurti couldn’t come at a better time. Thank you.

      I’ll settle back in a few moments and search youtube for Krisnamurti. Thank you for the reference and please don’t hesitate to contact me if you wish to share more.

      Enjoy your evening.

      Woodchuck Pirate
      aka Raymond J Raupers Jr USA

    • FrenchFry on September 21, 2015 at 01:36

      Which Krisnamurti ? If you look him up, there are actually 2 of them:

      1- the ex-new-jesus who decided to screw it all and give free speech all around the world (telling folks to experience “direct experience” ‘scuse the pleonasm)

      2- a bitter guy dwelling in the same matters but who ended up rather angry, even on his death-bed

      The more famous is #1. Once he was asked: if direct experience is key, why do you give speeches to crowds of people, robbing them of their time to experience life directly ?

      Answer: I can’t help, I am like an artist with words of wisdom.

      Funny eh ? I vaguely remember reading that he had no expense whatsoever, he was a “flâneur” in his life, all his needs being taken care of by others. Good karma eh ?

    • sassysquatch on September 21, 2015 at 03:50

      You are very perceptive Woodchuck. I dislike much of Krishnamurti’s talk of ‘humanity’. I did like his ‘believe in nothing’, don’t follow others beliefs, don’t follow any Guru (including him), ect…..

      He was also a little too serious for my tastes. My personal opinion is that life is not ‘serious business’. Tolle can laugh at things, including himself.

    • Woodchuck Pirate on September 21, 2015 at 05:15

      Hi sassysquatch,

      I decided to accept what Tolle says in defining ego mis-identification as the root cause of mankind’s unnecessary suffering. It is integral to my observation that consciousness exists despite biology, not because of it.

      I’ve enjoyed a past role as salesman for enough years to know that nothing ever gets done until something gets sold. After wringing out the fascination factor within marketing, I discovered the seriousness of it all was symptomatic of ego mis-identification, not pursuit of infinite truth, not characterized by conscious behavior. This was long before I ever heard of Tolle. I had already withdrawn my consent and participation with the systemic festering of monetary hell in exchange for personal search for valid philosophy before I picked up a Tolle book.

      When I began reading “Power Of Now”, I was immediately visited by imagery of childhood reflecting upon memories of recognition as true self, and knew my radical slaughter of beliefs and thoughts was not only a correct choice but an unavoidable one. I’m sure Tolle would agree that I returned to this realization on my own rather than claim he taught me. Essentially all I did was remember what I had forgotten.

      What a beautiful first Autumn day this will be. There’s been deer and turkeys in my field morning and evening for the two weeks I’ve spent nights in the cabin. The anarchy flag hangs over the hammock I’ve learned to sleep in. Twin Altec 1590C mono 70volt line amplifiers keep me shrouded in music while consciousness rises. Life is good. Thank you for your company within it.

      I have a selfish wish that Richard may expand upon the concept of the human body as environment in his future writing. Every enemy of freedom has gravitated to the venue with arrogance intending to make freedom slavery. This will be their undoing as devolution continues toward Idiocracy. Thieves make worst leaders. It’s more than healthy to laugh at it. It’s unavoidable.

      Woodchuck Pirate
      aka Raymond J Raupers Jr USA

    • sassysquatch on September 21, 2015 at 05:48

      Life is indeed good, Woodchuck. And very simple. A simple life for a simple man, lived in a mysterious land called ‘Nebraska’.

  2. Amy on September 19, 2015 at 06:54

    How ironic that there is an ad for the Weight Watcher’s “You-stab-’em-we-slab-’em” approach to weight loss *right next* to this post urging me to “Be the girl who lives in the moment”. Har

    Anyway, there’s also a PUR water filter ad that is refreshing the web page right back to itself every 30 seconds or so so that I have to “re-find” where I am on the page. REALLY hard to read a long post like that.

    • Richard Nikoley on September 19, 2015 at 07:10

      Amy, the funny thing is that the ad experience is different for each person based on what their cookies are, i.e., what you’ve been looking at recently or related products or services. Most ads have a thingy in the upper right to turn them off or not see them anymore.

      Me, I’m currently getting ads for solar panels, inverters, etc. LOL

    • FrenchFry on September 19, 2015 at 13:25


      I see 0 ad. I have the AdBlock and ghostery browser addons. Blocks all of that and more (tons of trackers, etc).

    • Richard Nikoley on September 19, 2015 at 14:57

      Everyone has that option. I prefer otherwise.

      I’ve made some damn good purchases over the years as a result of the technology. I’d prefer that over time, Google et al do learn about my buying habits and interests, and serve me up relative content, rather than just spend my life buying better and better locks.

  3. Amy on September 19, 2015 at 08:16

    Hmmm. I forgot about the target ad thing. But I don’t DO (and wouldn’t do, ever) Weight Watchers. Haven’t searched for them. Although I am losing weight. So maybe that got figured into a search somewhere or a link I clicked.

    Interestingly (or perhaps scarily), I just had to go pick up something at my local supermarket and now an ad for them is what’s showing up in the big ad space where Weight Watchers was before. :-/

    At least the constantly-refreshing-itself PUR ad is gone so now I can read the post.

    • Richard Nikoley on September 19, 2015 at 08:49

      “Interestingly (or perhaps scarily), I just had to go pick up something at my local supermarket and now an ad for them is what’s showing up in the big ad space where Weight Watchers was before. :-/”

      I gotta give ’em credit. Advertising pays for huge numbers of stuff we just like. It’s a fact of life.

      It amuses me that mostly what I hear is people cheering for more government force, over those who hold no guns to your head but do their damn level best to entice you to voluntarily fork over some cash.

      In ways, I find it beautiful.

    • Amy on September 19, 2015 at 09:59

      Personally, I’d rather deal with enticement into an action that is ultimately voluntary than deal with involuntary compulsion via jackboot. YMMV.

      Please note that the above is a “preference”, not a “cheer”, and should not be construed in any other way.

      PUR is back.

    • Amy on September 19, 2015 at 10:47

      I just realized that I misread your last comment. I’m-a blame it on the “PUR refresh syndrome” and not any lack of attention on my part. :-)

      It would be nice to have a delete or edit feature on comments here, although I realize there are various reasons why you can’t or don’t.

    • Hap on September 19, 2015 at 11:23

      Yes….you find it beautiful because The logic is compelling. Attractive but ultimately coercive and destructive to freedom.

    • Richard Nikoley on September 19, 2015 at 14:52


      Oh fuck off.

      It pays the bills so you get to read any of the 4,000 posts I’ve written here, and the 100,000 comments, not requiring anyone to pay a penny ever. “Coercive.” You don’t know what the word means. Don’t pay your taxes, learn what the word really means.

  4. Resurgent on September 20, 2015 at 14:56

    ‘Humans suck’ … But humans are also, perhaps, the only ‘things’ on the planet who can realize thoughts like yours.. It was a indeed a compelling read – @ Woodchuck Pirate.

    Consciousness is just a part of one’s reality, the reality of the inner. Unconsciousness is also there, as much as consciousness.
    That is the true meaning of the word ‘God’. God is not only consciousness – God is consciousness plus unconsciousness. God is both dark night and the bright day, summer and winter, life and death – It is the beginning and the end.

    God is beyond duality. And the duality is intrinsic in the word: It is both matter and mind, the manifest and the un-manifest.

    Consciousness is just a part of the great oceanic unconsciousness. Consciousness is just on the surface. Deeply hidden are layers and layers of unconsciousness. One has to transcend both.

    If the conscious part thinks itself to be the whole, it becomes the ego. Then it forgets about the unconscious; then the part imagines itself to be the whole. Then it is the ego.
    If the conscious turns back, looks back, and also becomes aware of the unconscious – the dark night within – then the conscious knows that, “I am conscious. I am also unconscious, and my consciousness is just a wave on the ocean. The unconscious is vast.” Then the ego disappears. Ego is the part thinking itself to be the whole. Non-ego is the part becoming aware of the whole.

    So how to define the nature of consciousness? It has never been defined, it will never be defined, because who will define it? To define it you have to be away from it. To define anything one has to stand outside it; one needs a distance.
    You are consciousness, you are unconsciousness. There is nobody who can stand outside and define it. You can know it but you cannot define it. That’s why it is mysterious, mystical.

    The subject cannot be made an object. I cannot put myself in front of myself, so I cannot define. Definition as such is debarred by the very nature of the phenomenon. Everything else can be defined, because consciousness is the definer. Everything else is before consciousness. The consciousness can know, go around, watch, observe, experiment, define, dissect – but who will define consciousness? You cannot get further away from it. You are it. You can know it, but you cannot define it. Knowledge is not possible, only knowing.

    That is why all ancient, non ritualistic religious masters, all BTW human, have only tried to help humanity to create a meditative state where one can know what it is. But even they can only give you the method, but cannot give you the definition. That’s why with the advent of science, religion began to look a little suspicious.
    “Why don’t you define your terms? Just do as science does: define! If you cannot define your terms that simply shows you don’t know what you are talking about.”

    A great linguist and positivist philosopher, Alfred Jules Ayer, says that if we take two terms, “God” and “dog” the second is true and the first is false because nobody can define God. The word is meaningless. God cannot be defined. Dog can be defined. Dog is more meaningful than God.

    If one insists on definitions, then only things can be defined; persons cannot be defined (Try and define Richard N). Laws can be defined; love cannot be defined. Gravitation can be defined, but grace cannot be defined. That which is without is definable; that which is within is elusive. One has to understand it.
    So, the enlightened can only show you the way: you have to move. One day you come upon the goal. Nobody can give you the goal beforehand. Not even a definition is possible. And it is good that a definition is not possible, otherwise you will settle with the definition, you will settle with the information and you will never travel, you will never journey to the goal. And sometimes it happens that the very map you were thinking to use for the journey becomes the barrier. You become satisfied with the map itself.

    Definitions of God are maps, lines on paper. Definitions of consciousness are maps – and sometimes people get too obsessed with maps. The best way to be lost is to have a map. You cannot fail. If you have a really detailed map you will be lost in it and the mind will think, “Now I know everything.”
    In the world outside you, maps have some relevance, but in the inside world they are absolutely irrelevant.

    All the current religions in the world have given their faithful, maps: and they have ensured that the real journey will never begin for most… It almost seems it is a planned misanthropy.

    When one attains one’s consciousness – One will laugh at the stupidity of the mapmakers. Then one will know that they have never been to the innermost source of life, they have never been human; they have been copying other mapmakers and have gone on adding their own fantasies and their own ideas.

    All maps are false because the innermost remains indefinable. There is no need to define. Consciousness is there within oneself.

    When the river is flowing, why ask about the definition of water. And you know you are thirsty, and you know that the definition cannot quench the thirst. But you say, “Unless water is defined, how can I drink the water?”. If people had just waited for the definition, and only then had their thirst been quenched, humanity would have disappeared long ago, because water is still indefinable. Scientists say that water is two parts hydrogen, one part oxygen – but when the scientist is thirsty, 2 parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen does not quench thirst.

    Find your inner happiness Woodchuck Pirate..
    And stay well.

    …Because Happy people are dangerous.!

    • Woodchuck Pirate on September 20, 2015 at 18:03

      Hello Resurgent,

      Richard N defines himself.

      I do agree with Tolle when he mentioned that it is impossible to lose” one’s life because life is existence not form, and it is impossible for something to be set apart from itself. However I do not perceive that is what you intend to say.

      I have stood under sky with hawks in flight as often as I have meditated with beliefs, thoughts brushed aside as consciousness arises, and never observed disparity from one life-form to another. However I do not perceive that is what you intend to say.

      I do agree as Tolle mentioned that words are never perfect substitutes for the truth as they are art-forms and therefore may only point toward the truth; form is the art of living not true self, existence (life) is not life-“form”. Existence is no”thing”. However I do not perceive that is what you intend to say.

      I find no evidence that my true self is less than infinite consciousness, and no hierarchy but perception, and perception if manifest by form and not consciousness, is not true self. Therefore in considering your offer to consider your artform(s) “gods and dogs”, if I accept your logic I may be one, both or neither, dependent upon how much I tax my consciousness and substitute the story offered by your collective ego, as replacement for true self. However I do not perceive this is what you intend to say.

      What I am most grateful to Richard for is the wisdom he imparted to me through his virtue of selfishness in writing extensively about the “human body as an environment”. Richard’s passion is clearly more focused than mine upon the biology of the human life-form, where I fall out of context in fascination. He dropped a key element missing from my pursuit of infinite wisdom. That wisdom in my perception is recognition that the human body is an environment, not a religious or secular venue to prostitute ego as truth.

      It is my experience that the human life-form is far over-rated and consciousness exists despite the intrinsic biology, and as I perceive consciousness as a state of information devoid of matter (biology) I share no common ground with your affection for the notion of hierarchical consciousness correlated by complexity of biology. However upon analysis of the history of mankind, I would require little faith to tax my consciousness enough to leap upon the notion that humans are least conscious of every species on the earth.

      There is a great artistic divide erected where you may perceive form as identity, consciousness as deity, happiness (emotions) as anything but biological consequence of thought processes. However none of it is I. I see no evidence of infinite truth greater than I. I am not god, I simply am.

      The human life-form I inhabit is nothing more than purpose; it’s intuitive that purpose is indivisible from form (the art of living) not life (existence).

      Thank you for your warm commentary.

      Woodchuck Pirate
      aka Raymond J Raupers Jr USA

  5. Resurgent on September 20, 2015 at 22:33

    @Woodchuck Pirate – Thanks for your reply. I would like to elaborate a bit, at the risk of hogging so much of this blog’s comment space. I hope I can bring some clarity to my intent vs your perception.

    Evolution is unconscious. No volition is needed, no conscious effort. It is just natural. But once consciousness evolves, then it is a totally different matter, then evolution stops. The work of evolution is to create consciousness, after that, the whole responsibility falls upon consciousness itself. Let me explain this.

    Humans are no longer evolving now. Evolution has stopped as far as man is concerned. It stopped when consciousness came in; evolution’s work was over at that point. Now it is up to the human to endeavor to evolve. Now, beyond human, everything will be conscious. Below human everything is unconscious. Once consciousness enters in, the whole responsibility is on consciousness – It is the peak of evolution, the last step. But it is not the last step of life – It is the last step of evolution, of all animal heritage. But for further growth, it is to be the first step. And when I say evolution has stopped, I mean that now an inner effort is needed: unless one does something, one will not evolve. Humans are aware, now they know; When one knows, one is responsible.

    A child is not responsible for his acts, but an adult is.
    A madman is not responsible for his acts, but a sane man is.
    If severely intoxicated, and not behaving consciously, one is not responsible. With consciousness, with the faculty of ‘knowing’ there, one become responsible for oneself.

    Jean Paul Sartre has said somewhere that responsibility is the only human burden. No animal is responsible. Evolution is responsible for all that an animal is. Humans are the first to be responsible – So whatsoever we do now will be our responsibility. If we create a hell and go down, it is up to us. If we evolve, grow and create a blissful state of being, it is up to us.

    Existentialists make a very fine distinction, and a beautiful one, and meaningful also. They say for animals essence is first and existence is a later growth.
    This is difficult to understand, but try. They say for animals, for trees, essence is first and existence follows. There is a seed: the seed is, in essence, the tree. The essence is there, the existence will just follow. The essential thing is there; it just has to be manifested, expressed. The tree will follow. The tree is not going to be a new thing; in a way it was already there. So, really, the seed has no freedom – the tree exists in it. And the tree is also without freedom – it is destined by the seed. This is what is meant: essence is first, below human, and then existence follows.

    With humans, the whole thing is just the opposite: existence comes first and then essence follows. You are born with no fixed future, you will have to create it. You are born, so you have an existence, simple existence, with no essence. Now you will create the essence. So man creates himself. A tree is created by nature, man creates himself.
    Man is simply born as an existence, with no essence. Then whatsoever you do will make your essence; your acts will create you. And the freedom is multidimensional. A man can become anything. He may remain just an existence without any essence; he may just remain simply a body without any soul. The soul is, in a way, to be created.

    Georges Ivanovitch Gurdjieff used to say that humans have no souls. Unless you create it, how can you have it? It looks contradictory to all the teachings of religions – it is not. When religions say that everyone has a soul, it only means that everyone can have a soul. That’s a possibility. You can grow to be a soul. If you already have a soul, then there is no distinction between a seed and you. And if you are growing like a seed into a tree, if you are growing just like a seed into a man, then there is no difference between man and all that exists below man.

    Being Human is a freedom – freedom to be. One can be many things, One can be anything. And it may be that one remains just a possibility without being anything. That creates a dizziness and that creates fear.

    Danish Philosopher Søren Kierkegaard has given a concept of dread. He says that man lives in dread. What is that dread, the fear? This is the fear: you are simply a possibility, nothing else. You have only existence, no essence. You can create it, you may miss it. The responsibility is yours.

    This is a very dreadful state. Nothing is certain, every moment many directions open, and you have to move in some way, somewhere, without knowing where you are moving, without knowing what the result will be, without knowing what you will be tomorrow.

    Unlike a seed your tomorrow will not come automatically out from your today. The death of an animal will be the automatic result of his life – not so with you. That’s the difference. Your death will be your own achievement: you will be responsible for it. And that’s why every man dies in a specific way.

    With consciousness entering, you are responsible for everything, no matter what. This is a great burden and a deep anguish and it creates fear. To be human means entering a field of conscious evolution. Millions and millions of years have created you, but now nature will not help, It has done already all it can.

    Sartre also says man is condemned to be free.! The whole of nature is at ease because there is no freedom. Freedom is a great burden. That’s why we don’t even like freedom. Howsoever we may talk about it. Everyone fears freedom. Freedom is a dangerous thing.
    In nature there is no freedom; that’s why there is so much silence. You can never say to a dog, “You are an imperfect dog.” It is absurd. Every dog is perfect – because a dog is not free to be. He is goaded by evolution. He is made, he is not a self-creator.

    A rose is a rose. Howsoever beautiful, it is not free, it is just a slave. There is no freedom to flower or not to flower. There is no problem, there is no choice: a flower has to flower. The flower cannot say, “I don’t like flowering,” or, “I refuse.” It has no say, no freedom. That’s why nature is so silent, a slave. It cannot err, it cannot go wrong. And if you cannot go wrong, if you are always right, and if your “right” is not in your hands, then it is just goaded by eternal forces.

    We talk about freedom, but no one likes freedom. So we go on talking about freedom, and creating slavery. We talk about freedom and then create a new slavery. Our every freedom is just a change of slavery. We go on changing from one slavery to another, from one bondage to another. No one likes freedom because freedom creates fear. Then you have to decide and choose. We ask, we want that someone should tell us what to do – the society, the guru, the scripture, the tradition, the parents. Someone should say what to do, someone should show the path, then we can follow. But we cannot move by ourselves. There is freedom and there is fear.

    Friedrich Nietzsche has said, “Now God is dead and man is totally free.” If God is really dead, then man is totally free. And man is not so afraid of God’s death; he is much more afraid of his freedom. If there is a God, then everything is okay with you. If there is no God, then you are left totally free – condemned to be free. Now do whatsoever you like and suffer the consequences, and no one else will be responsible.

    And that’s why there are so many religions. They are not because of Jesus or Moses or any other, they are because of our deep-rooted fear of freedom. You cannot be just a man. You have to be a Jew or a Christian or something else. But just by being a Christian you lose your freedom, because now you say, “I will follow a tradition. I will not move in the uncharted, in the unknown. I will move on a well-trodden path. I will move behind someone. I will move in a crowd, I will not move as an individual, because if I move as an individual, alone, there is freedom. Every moment I have to decide, every moment I have to give birth to myself, every moment I am creating my soul. And no one else will be responsible. Only I will be responsible, ultimately.”

    • Woodchuck Pirate on September 21, 2015 at 04:30

      Hello Resurgent,

      Thank you for your effort in pursuit of dialogue. It appears I did and still do understand you. I simply reject it as your paradigm maintains a blanket rejection of what I hold as first principles.

      In my paradigm the human body is an environment, is not special, it is not true self, is not identity, is not a vehicle to manifest consciousness, and is possibly no more suitable to purpose of true self than any life-form.

      In my paradigm infinite consciousness exists devoid of matter, has likely always existed and is not prejudiced toward life-form, matter or energy. This suggests form as the art of living is in the infinite realm entirely irrelevant. It appears entirely obvious to me that the human life-form has demonstrated history of irrelevance if nothing else. What relevance or specialty is revealed in art that demonstrates itself as someone once called a virus wearing shoes? The human life-form is art, an environment and if all form were eradicated or never appeared true self would remain unchanged. True self never changes.

      It is my understanding that you reject a first principle of freedom that true self is the only identity, devoid of matter. If I were to accept what you offer as belief(s) it would require rejection of my true self, in exchange for ego (story). It requires very little focused misanthropy for me to decline. I seek to reject faith in all forms.

      Thank you and have a very nice day.

      Woodchuck Pirate
      aka Raymond J Raupers Jr USA

    • Duck Dodgers on September 21, 2015 at 09:23

      Woodchuck Pirate,

      I’ve heard consciousness described as a kind of energy that brains can tune into—as if it were a radio station that runs throughout the Universe. I’m sure you’ve heard of the electromagnetic theories of consciousness? Apparently, there is a noticeable magnetic field that surrounds our heads when we are conscious.

      Wikipedia: Electromagnetic theories of consciousness

      Some cultures—and many religions—have regarded the pineal gland as an eye, gateway or antenna that can tune into different channels of consciousness. Dreaming, which involves the pineal gland, is an example of this. Death is believed to heavily involve a giant secretion from the pineal gland—based on what it does during near-death experiences. (Interestingly, you never remember falling asleep and dreams can skew time, dramatically. Makes me wonder if dreaming involves a similar mechanism with whatever happens inside the pineal gland immediately after death. An immortal dream could take place in the blink of an eye).

      Michael Pollan wrote an interesting article in the New Yorker about research into psychedelics for cancer patients. It also describes the patients tuning into a different level of consciousness.

      So, if there is anything to those theories and observations, it too leads me to think that consciousness may be something we tap into—not necessarily something we create.

      We don’t know where the “movie screen” is in the brain that lets us visualize things. For all we know, our own consciousness could be a field surrounding our heads, getting tuned by the brain and modulated by the pineal gland.

    • Woodchuck Pirate on September 21, 2015 at 10:27

      Hello Duck Dodgers,

      Thank you for sharing insight and providing links I will consume. I’ve not heard anything of these details you mention. I’m quite unashamedly ignorant of what must be vast amounts of theories and data compiled about biology and consciousness. Motivation appears through some natural process that I suspect in many ways is beneath my awareness. I’ve modeled some imagery occasionally questioning how understanding arises within me through disparate motivations that lead me to conclusions I could not have arrived at through more calculated measures. Recently this phenomenon more frequently leads me to consider the possibility that the human body as environment is correlated with consciousness as a state of information encoded at molecular level (or lower) according to some larger system purpose. I attribute much recent motivation directly to Richard’s writing on the immune system and the micro-organisms role(s).

      It seems reasonable that consciousness as a state of information may be accessible according to purpose by the human body as an environment or vise versa, the human body as an environment may be accessible according to purpose by consciousness. I’m inclined to follow the latter concept, of course I see no purpose in eliminating the possibility that both are correct.

      I’ve observed enough of my own behavior to know that I’m prejudiced away from grand ideas of the human body as the center of all things noble and sacred. A system designed, evolved or creating itself out of nothing to establish human biology as the fixation of philosophy, cosmos, consciousness and love is something I can not feign affection for. I haven’t the energy to view the human race as any greater a waster and destroyer of opportunity than I already do now. I prefer to hope the failure is intrinsic to the human body as an environment constructed inferior to access infinite consciousness. Does this mean the human body as environment isn’t perfect to an encoded purpose? No, it means that the human body as environment is not the center element in the topology of unified purpose.

      Additionally I would likely expect an infinite system topology to be devoid of hierarchy by virtue of perfection. Perhaps centering adapts interactively as correlated with purpose. This imagery affords some room for me to consider how ever-lasting life facilitated by infinite consciousness as a state of information could exist seamlessly devoid of matter. It seems scientists have become aware that the present moment requires identification of what questions should be asked rather than pressing into infinite reach in singular direction(s). If this awareness is correct then the reward of gov’t cash flow established through theft by taxation is damning to collectivist science, as the observer effects the observation(s). It will be enough for me to understand their failure as it compels me to recognize they have not escaped infinite truth.

      My purpose is to seek infinite truth. Words can not express how grateful I am that nothing escapes the individual level. I thank you and everyone here for their tolerance as I press forward into my unknown. I only maintain voluntary relationships and would disappear from this sight finally and forever should Richard simply make such request. I’m no heart of stone, but I’m no stranger to pain.

      Thank you and have a very nice day.

      Woodchuck Pirate
      aka Raymond J Raupers Jr USA

    • sassysquatch on September 21, 2015 at 11:13

      Not to sound all ‘mystical’ here, but I’m not sure consciousness can be described with words or explained by science. And quite honestly, I don’t believe it has anything to do with the brain or with thoughts. I prefer the term ‘awareness’, as opposed to ‘consciousness’. Awareness is what we are. It is the ‘observer’ of thoughts – or what proceeds thoughts . The brain or ‘mind’ is a fantastic instrument. But the mind is also an expert at conjuring up a false sense of self (ego).

      Nothing here to do with religion or the supernatural. It’s all quite natural and just the way of things.

  6. Rita on September 21, 2015 at 08:51

    I don’t know, Resurgent. To me, it sounds like you are over-complicating some concepts, like freedom (the freedom of a rose??), and being inconsistent about other concepts, like essence (essence of seed, dog and human). Some animals I’ve met have far more essence than some humans I’ve met. And soul is such an anachronistic understanding of life force that I can’t even take the talk of soul remotely seriously. Sometimes, if you try to be too philosophical, you actually fail to make a point.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.