# 2022-12-11

As the “will” and the “word” are separate words, we would usually think of them as different. But there might be a “sunk” or hidden spectrum connecting the two. Thus repeated patterns would often offload into the basal ganglia habits, kinetic energy of motivation. A word picked by “system two” is picked up then by “system one”.

Namely, the words are not just passive thinking implements, but are backed also by the unconscious processes formed around them. As Yeats suggested, this connection between a word and a Force can span past a local brain box and into the patterns shared throughout collective consciousness.

This sheds some light onto the surge of power experienced by some at the mention of a powerful name, such as of Jesus Christ.
Per [Ezra Pound](https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/08/28/ezra-pounds-religio-or-the-childs-guide-to-knowledge/), “*A god is an eternal state of mind*”, and as such we can compare it with a habit that gained some power through repetition. [“We went too far to give up who we are”](https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/10fawhx/acapella_group_pentatonix_created_a_daft_punk/). Sheldrake suggests that the physical laws are such habits, and so a force of a god can be compared to that of a physical law. This might be what Zelazny was intuiting through the evocation of a Pattern in The Chronicles of Amber.
“*In My Father’s house are many dwelling places*” (John 14:2) we can read as: there is space, in collective consciousness, for the cognitive processes constituting the Kingdom, and the *movement* into those “dwelling places” hints of the *accumulation* of such processes.
That is, a simple combination of letters, such as the “Jesus Christ”, can be a bookmark or key into entire cluster of minds mingling around it, and into kinetic power bound in such a cluster.

But a large power can be a blunt tool. That is, it can cancel itself out. Can be a power of a car wreck. (cf. “Swan, Pike and Crawfish”). Thus the power of the word “Father” includes the power of forces which might oppose each other (words “Jesus” and “Satan”, or “good” and “evil”, are typically seen as such opposites). “*Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste*” (Mat 12:25), and that is the kingdom of Father / Abraxos. Immense and impassive power of a “Not-I” in Chuang Tzu.

Or to draw another analogy, Death / Time / Cronus conquers everything: a good and an evil would equally be consumed by it. Like the wise man of Chuang Tzu, Death has a varied taste (Revelation 3:16).

A “Father” might be like a white light, or a white noise, and “Jesus” might be like tinted lenses coloring it. Or else pointing at a particular cluster in a “novelty search” space.

Which is to say that “Jesus” is not a passive “Not-I” word, it has a certain vector, a certain efficiency to it. One which was arguably lost in the “church”. As a political and commertial institution the “church” has expanded itself to the point of being a car wreck.

Then there's a *contamination* of the word “Jesus Christ” by the “junk values” of popular culture and “church”. It remains a powerful word, but it is on the verge of being useless (Matthew 5:13). One can posit that the Apocalypse, where Jesus comes not to save but to judge, is a last-resort attempt of said cluster to retain some of its identity and efficiency.

Wondermaker St. John of Kronstadt exemplifies the principle that to do wonders one needs access to what he calls “integrity”, capacity for resolving the inner conflicts and making a cluster of consciousness to murmurate in a single direction. But the “church” he was a part of exemplifies the opposite - a lack of direction.

Might have to do with the inclusive words “God” or “Father” as used by “church”. Unlike “Elohim”, these words invite not a person to look underneath the black box of the God abstraction, and thus offer no help in resolving the conflicts.

Which is all right if all we want is to resonate instead of moving through space, to be a passive dust (Psalm 1:4) instead of muscle and bones of a space ship.

Hence a certain measure of power is for a word to act as a Maxwell's demon, to accumulate momentum by limiting movement to a certain direction.

The manifesting bum we've mentioned at 2019-10-10, by limiting himself in some major directions, might have been training the Maxwell's demon of will.

There is a pattern to it, achieving something not by pushing matter in a direction, but by preventing the opposite. “Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It” puts emphasis on framing the opposite as impossible. Maybe the resonance, the passive oscillation of a conflicted system might be reused that way, similar to how a nuclear reaction would release the power of the atom.

Take the mystical practice of [Imiaslavie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imiaslavie), for example, as outlined by Hilarion “On the mountains of the Caucasus”. The typical dust of mind untrained, going hither and thither in circles, is bound into a narrow line ([2022-11-23](https://www.reddit.com/r/self_hypnosis_/comments/z2u2qe/ying_and_yang/)) of repeating “Jesus Christ”. This rock-hard dick of the bondaged mind is then dipped in the wet vagina of emotions, until the mind, body and heart are squirming in a singular [orgasmic resonance](https://medicalxpress.com/news/2016-10-orgasm-rhythmic-paper.html). It takes a lot of discipline to pull off.
When the will is honed like this, - so as to pronounce, think and feel the same word for years upon years (and in the framework of tantric mantra this stage could span over several incarnations!), and to reach a consensual bliss doing that - the system reaches a certain kind of efficacy, which might, given a compatible set of expectations, corellate with miracle working.
The power of the word “Jesus Christ” here is partly in being attractive enough for the practitioner to guide their attention, and to shape expectations into development of hypers and wantos (as in ‘Want to make the weak as strong as a lion?’). We can compare the word with a voice of a coach or hypnotist.

Now, in `“cognition.md”` we have a section on “divinity”: “how lots of people have the omniscience belief: that they can do just about anything if they'd just tap into something withing”.
There might be a connection between this feeling of hidden omnipotence and a resonance with old words (2022-10-05). That is, it might be more than idea or fantasy - but a memory of a power accrued by some clusters of consciousness. It might be a weird kind of omnipotence though, one where power is proportional to homeostasis, momentum preventing a change of direction.
It's weird how the confused lack of will, power and direction, which a human can experience, is closer to the wise panopticon of a Father (and the abundance mindset of letting all things grow), than the iron will and blind faith of a Saviour.

(p.p.s. Jordan [gives a good shake also](https://youtu.be/9ByjCwumwBM) to that sense of divinity underlying our consciousness; except in his model it sounds like some united, perfect and fixed divinity, whereas in our model there are different “words”, which can be at odds or outdated.)

p.s. Will is generally akin to a kingdom's “capacity for independent action” (Boyd). A kingdom divided is handicapped, of course (Mat 12:25). Hence ((kuros: “wu wei”, effortless action)) the effort to unite, expand, inspire and prune the kingdom from weeds is implied in development and application of will. A weak kingdom [can be likened to a paralytic (Mark 2:3)](https://www.reddit.com/r/shiftingrealities/comments/qyvqv2/from_notes_on_selfhypnosis/), which is why the application of will can for some evoke a memory of struggle.
Now, a “word” (John 1:1) can signify the evolution of will, from a direct and manual application of crude force by a single agent, to a sophisticated, layered (2022-10-05) and innovative collective of “brain agent” work groups engaged in the “goal-directed striving”.
Namely, a “word” would *delegate* the effort to subconscious “parts”, autonomic nervous system, affective networks, et cetera. The application of will is then effortless to the “emperor” of surface consciousness, which can thus focus on strategy and vision.

p.s. Note how words are distinct from basic needs and affective networks (CARE, LUST, PLAY, SEEKING, PANIC/GRIEF, RAGE, FEAR), et cetera. In terms of the latter the words can be said to *not exist* (like, apophatically, a God). And yet this abstract and ephemeral foam of a scaffold can shape the forces, producing magickal configurations and effects.
(One analogy is the spectrum between the Aikido, which is more of the conscious direction of forces, through the study of the various moves, and the Wang's Internal Energy (Qigong), which is more of the unconscious, through a sense/visualization of a natural force.)
Look at the wondrous implements in [A Physics Prof Bet Me $10,000 I'm Wrong](https://youtu.be/yCsgoLc_fzI) and [Risking My Life To Settle A Physics Debate](https://youtu.be/jyQwgBAaBag). These “Dead-Downwind” “crafts” can run with astonishing speed, whereas a typical meatbag at the same conditions would not be moved an inch! Same force of wind results in two very different effects! It is the arrangement of components which makes the miracle possible.
We are ourselves - a miracle, but the words of the DNA pull this miracle from the morphogenetic heavens down to Earth, helping a dream to manifest: similar to how DDWFTTW math turns into impossible cars. Words are the bones of memetic evolution, and they might be a “seed” also for personal reality change.
The so-called “changework” is mostly a *word* work, and some would shun psychology for that, - often rightfully so, for a word can be made into a blunt instrument. But hypnosis is a lot like those DDWFTTW crafts, it shows that the spectrum of the word can span from a castle in the sand a toddler makes - to a rocket capable of space flight.
Now, when the word is powerful, it can forget that there are those other forces it's making use of (wind, matter, a human emotion), - and try to extinguish them even.
But when the word is shown to be weak, it will deign to “*pool skills and talents*” (Boyd - Destruction and Creation).
It might thus be useful for these words to remind us - that the *word* becomes effective when *exposed* to other forces:
“*We must uncover those **interactions** that foster harmony and initiative—yet do not destroy variety and rapidity.*”
“***Expose** individuals, with different skills and abilities, against a variety of situations—whereby each individual can observe and orient himself simultaneously to the others and to the variety of changing situations.*”

It's interesting to note how a *word* can spin faster and faster in circles (as mentioned in the [ball exercise](https://youtu.be/iOktN5fQYbE)) - when it is detached and remains a thing in itself.
(Chesterton: “*A small circle is quite as infinite as a large circle; but, though it is quite as infinite, it is not so large. In the same way the insane explanation is quite as complete as the sane one, but it is not so large. A bullet is quite as round as the world, but it is not the world.*”)
The understanding of having those other forces in play can *center* a person, putting things in perspective somehow.
The paradox is that by turning in upon itself, a *word* is increasing the *friction* (Boyd - Organic Design):
“*Arrange setting and circumstances so that leaders and subordinates alike are given opportunity to continuously interact with **external world**, and with each other, in order to more quickly make many-sided implicit cross-referencing projections, empathies, correlations, and rejections as well as create the similar images or impressions, hence a similar implicit orientation, needed to form an organic whole.*”
“*Get off the toilet, Bodo.*”
Even though darkness (σκοτία) would not possess (κατέλαβεν) the light, it is by posessing the darkness that the light shines (John 1:5).

To sum up, there is a kind of monodualism, the “wringing clothes” pull in opposite directions: Towards the “effortless action” on one hand, where the simplest and smallest abstraction of a *word* is enough. And mingling with “forces” on the other, where direct “*appreciation*” is available through exposure.

p.s. To escape the bluntness of the old words, both magick and science invent the new ones. We can imagine a circle, where words are personified into gods and demons - and back: the names of the gods becoming the days of the week.
A deity becomes a hostage of its name, being remembered for its function, like a spleen.

p.s. Now, in order to achieve something with words, one might use plain English: to study, invent, or to guide Phenomenological Control. Another might call on ancient deities, mantras, spirits listed in secret grimoires. Someone else might focus on feeling and visualization. Or mix the two by performing a ritual.
All and any of these would work, some of the time (including the option of doing nothing of the sort). The time invested in searching for the method is also a factor. We lack statistics though on what will work best, or for most. The cases presented to us would oft suffer from the Survivorship bias.
Sprinkled with Domain Independence, we can assume by analogy that the answer is largely individual. Thus we can approach the problem of word selection with a little experiment. Picking a particular effect we could devise prayers, rituals and hypnosis scripts all targeted at it. By monitoring the practice of applying said implements we can orient on what seems to be working best at the moment. Albeit some of the approaches might hit the hidden traps or roadblocks later on: like when a person believes that magickal spells are dangerous, and might unconsciously be engaged in the [Cold Control](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-45647-001) of proving them so. (Or else the opposite: “*And the ones that mother gives you / Don't do anything at all*”)
The syncretism of combining the various termins (English words, divine names, et cetera) might work for some and ruin the experience for others.
Profiling (or selecting for) the cultural background of a person seems like a useful endeavour. (cf. “*So, for White, Hammer and Sutcliffe, to understand hypnosis one needed to understand: the relationship between the hypnotist and the subject; the subject’s interpretation of the hypnotist’s communications in that situation; the abilities, expectancies and strivings of the hypnotized person that influenced their response to those communications; and, perhaps most importantly, the mechanism by which ‘mere words’ lead to convincing alterations in experience (see Kihlstrom, Chapter 2, this volume). As we will see in the next section, the asking and answering of these questions about hypnosis **has depended on the people and places, the generations and landscapes**, of the field of hypnosis over the past 50 years.*”)

p.s. Consciousness is like a dust (pulvis, kam·mōṣ, Ps 1:1). And “word” is like an (emergent) magnet that aligns it into a useful structure.
p.s. There's a curious phrase in New Testament: “*shake off the dust from your feet*” (Mat 10:14) - which is a bit like “do throw the baby out with the bathwater”, detach (2023-01-08, 2020-07-26) from that which you can not (yet) structure.
(And this is, again, a major idea behind Hell and Apocalypse: to clear the ranks.)