All genius is predicated upon past lives. There are no random acts or random anything in the structure of existence within the Universe. Life and existence are predicated upon intelligence. There is no bias or respect of persons in the Universe. No arbitrary events or arbitrary selections of favoritism!
 Now why do I say genius is predicated upon past lives? Well, it's either past life events or divine favoritism which contradicts the saying that God is not a respecter of persons, because clearly God would be respecting or showing favor on certain individuals (those who are genius) and not showing favor on other individuals (those who are not genius).
Now clearly my article here will cause concern with the average Western religious minded individual, especially Christians, Muslims, and Jews, because claims of past life automatically tie into the doctrine of reincarnation which Western religions (especially Christianity) do not embrace and are diametrically opposed to, even though the New Testament contains a hint of reincarnation in the passage whereby Jesus' disciples asked him a question of who sinned, the man born blind or his parents.
"And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? John 9:1-2
How could a person sin before he was born unless the sin came from a past life?
If the sin was in fact blindness, the Bible clearly states the man was blind from birth, so the sin was there before the man's birth. There's no other logical explanation to justify the man's blindness from birth than past life events which ties into karma and reincarnation. What could his parents have done in order to cause the man to be born blind? Clearly, blindness is not linked to genetics. However, Jesus goes on to elucidate to his disciples that neither the man nor his parents sinned. Clearly Jesus understood the difference between sin and past life phenomenon.
Reincarnation poses a serious threat to Christianity (and Judaism and Islam as well) because it threatens the doctrine and dogma of eternal damnation as well as eternal heaven, well, at least in the communal sense of heaven and hell, which could never be, especially if our thoughts shape our reality in life as well as death, the theme of the metaphysical and paranormal classic movie, "What Dreams May Come."
Metaphysician H.W. Percival explains it (no community heaven) best in his words infra:
"Heaven is not a community heaven, or a theological heaven. It would be impossible as a community heaven, because no two heavens could be alike. The ideals of earth life are very different to everyone, and although each one includes many others in his ideals, his ideals of them to him are different from their ideals concerning themselves. If they were to carry out their ideals, that would interfere with the carrying out of his, and then there would be no heaven for him; but there would be discords of earth. In order for each to be in heaven, it is necessary that it should be in his own heaven and not in that of someone else, because then neither would have one. But each can be in the other's heaven according to the ideals of that other."
Metaphysician and Gnostic, Vera Stanley Alder, states the same thing as Percival supra, though slightly a little different, in that each person creates their own heaven based upon their own ideal of heaven:
"We are told that often it may take a little while for the individual to realize that he is 'dead.' But for some time prior to this he has been building in the astral stuff the kind of heaven or after-life to which he aspires. Of course, thousands build a Heaven with golden streets and angels playing on harps. These numberless living 'thought-forms' cohere by the law of attraction into one great whole, so the conventional (ideal of) 'Heaven' is actually there awaiting its owners. Those who expect, because of their guilt, hell-fire and goblins, have created that charming reception for themselves also. The miser will probably have made for his use a heaven full of nothing but gold pieces. The Eastern pasha will certainly get his Paradise of Houris. The disbeliever in afterlife will have created for himself a horrible blank abyss."
Also, just as we saw in "What Dreams May Come," we have a situation explained by Percival and Alder (and many others) that our thoughts really do create our reality here on Earth in addition to creating our heaven and/or hell (after-life) after the flesh body departs from the Earth.
We also see in "Five People You Meet in Heaven" how our ACTIONS in life on Earth also shape our after-life destiny, that thought and actions go hand in hand in shaping destiny in Earth life and the after-life.
I know this statement supra is going to shock many people because now heaven (and hell) is incumbent upon thoughts and actions on Earth, and not a mere single and idle belief in accepting some savior such as Jesus Christ to serve as a mere first class ticket to the heavenly abode despite one's lifelong thoughts and actions.
I'll admit it sounds very good and tempting to be able to get into heaven by accepting and believing in someone (that you never met and will never meet in the flesh, at least not in this lifetime) or some theological doctrine (sole acceptance of a figure saves your soul and gets you into heaven), but unfortunately (especially for simple minded religious individuals), it just doesn't work that way.
Heaven is not already created by some God (concocted by the minds of theologians). Heaven (and hell) is an individual thing or ideal created by single individuals via their thoughts and actions. Basically, heaven requires serious work via thoughts and actions while you're ALIVE here on Earth, NOW! Many people will be mad at this statement because when they reflect upon their lives on Earth NOW and their thoughts and actions thus far in their lives, they will realize they have been creating nothing but a hell for themselves after death and such cannot be neutralized by mere simple belief that a man of 2,000 years ago is the savior of the world and the only way into heaven. No disrespect to anyone, but this is infantile thinking at best, a collective infantile thinking, because the people who embrace such (e.g. Christians) did not create the concept or belief. They heard it preached over and over by reverends and priests, family members, in society, on television by tele-evangelists, etc. and because they heard it so many times over and over again, it has been successfully recorded to memory of the heart and mind. After all, repetition of a message constitutes mental programming.
The majority of your religious people don't think. They simply believe. They believe what has been written by others many hundreds and thousands of years ago and they accept what they read as authority at face value which negates the God-given intelligence to think for one's self and also to serve as a self-authority predicated upon self thought and free and independent inquiry. Remember, after all, most religious people, mainly Christians have been successfully conditioned not to question God, which creates the mental and spiritual diseases of ignorance, darkness, and perpetual obfuscation.
Simple belief in Jesus (or anybody else) cannot possibly neutralize the effects of lifelong, chronic, and consistent thoughts and thinking. Certain individuals, who live and think like this, live by default. Their lives are controlled by random external events and circumstances which usually cause them to doubt their belief in God and what they claim to believe in because when random events and circumstances (negative ones, of course) do occur and the events do not match their desires and belief system (predicated upon what they have chosen to believe in via conditioning or free inquiry), they become confused, upset, and angry, mainly at God. This is the foundation of the question: "why do bad things happen to good people?"
Number one, who's to say what has happened is bad? Clearly this is all perception. And what makes good people good? Who determines what is good (and what is bad)? Are bad things really bad things? Are good things really good things? It's all relative if you ask me. People, especially religious people, are judging life events from the eyeglasses of a pre-conditioning software devised by the Rulers of society, political, social, and religious. These people do not understand, or much less, live by immutable Universal law. Their well-intentioned belief(s) ends up making them live outside of and/or go against Universal law (as well as the laws of Nature and human biology). This is why so many well-intentioned and beautiful religious people end up dying from horrible and insidious diseases such as cancer, AIDS, and heart attack. This is especially so of Christians, Muslims, and Jews. Religious people are just as sick as non-religious people because both are unconscious to Universal (and the other various) laws that regulate existence.
Belief in Jesus (or Allah or Yahweh or any other God) alone does not create your reality, but your THOUGHTS, constant, chronic, and repetitious thoughts do in fact create your reality. You don't make a journey with ONE step, but with consistent steps. You don't create anything with ONE thought, but with many consistent thoughts. Repetitious thoughts and thinking is what is creating.
To me, it is far wiser to have constant and repetitious godly thoughts and actions than to have mere belief in God with constant and repetitious thoughts and actions that are not godly or ungodly. It's fine for you to believe in Christ, but you better have some constant and repetitious Christ-like thoughts and actions to go along with such belief.
The concepts of reincarnation and karma are older than all three major Western religions. The funny thing is, at least to me, is that the things overtly rejected by the three major religions, e.g. reincarnation and karma, overtly exist within the sacred texts of these religions.
Did not Jesus ask the disciples whom people claimed he was the return of? Didn't he ask if people said he was the return of Elijah (Elias) the prophet? How could Jesus be the return of Elijah without a FLESH body? Elijah existed in flesh before Jesus. This alludes to, if not outright admits to, reincarnation or at least the familiarity of reincarnation amongst the people of old in Jesus' day. If Jesus and his disciples acknowledged reincarnation some 2,000 years ago, how come modern Christians do not accept or acknowledge reincarnation today?
And what about KARMA and Christianity? Does not the maxim "Ye shall reap what you sow" not pertain to karma? Karma is basically "that which goes around comes back around." This is the same as reaping what you sow, just said slightly different.
Christianity (and Judaism and Islam) shares many of the age-old Eastern philosophical teachings, adages, and maxims. However, while Christianity shares these teachings, sayings, adages, and maxims, Christians (the followers) in general are too linear in scope to acknowledge them or anything without the Christian or Christianity trademark for that matter. Most of them are very linear and biased and most can be found to compare and contrast Jesus with other great historical sages and wise men such as Lao Tzu, Confucius, Buddha, and/or Muhammad, saying Jesus was the greatest of them, which is only a subjective opinion held by the Christian which the average Christian will speak it out as an objective; and if truth be told, the average Christian doesn't read (not even his/her Bible) and surely has not and will not read any foreign scripture pertaining to other wise men or faith/religion or philosophy, such as the Analects (of Confucius), the Dhamapada (of Buddha), the I Ching (of Lao Tzu), the Tibetan (or Egyptian) Book of the Dead, the Holy Qur'an, the Upanishads, or the Manual for Living (Epictetus).
They are quick to rank Jesus over these other sages but if you study the actual lifestyles of the Taoist, Buddhist, or Confucian, it is far healthier and more harmonious with the laws of Nature and the Universe than compared to the Christian's, especially those in Western nations.
The English word "Genius" derives from a Latin word meaning "guardian spirit," coming by way of the Arabic word "Jinn," which referred to "an ethereal being (created by Allah before the creation of man)."
Genius as an English term seems to be erroneous or a misnomer at best when we have a deeper understanding of the nature of a genius.
Genius is defined in modern dictionaries as:
Genius. noun. 1. particular spirit of a nation, place, age, etc. 2. natural ability; strong inclination (for) 3. great mental capacity and inventive ability 4. one having such capacity or ability. Webster's New World Dictionary (1987), pg. 254
Modern day definitions of the word "genius" truly do not do any justice to the word. If anything, the modern definition is more of a synonym to the word "talent" and perhaps, "intuition."
However, in my opinion, Percival gives the best, truest, and yet deepest and pellucid metaphysical and paranormal definition of the word "genius."
"A genius is one who is gifted with extraordinary ability and with originality that does limit him to the old rules or paths, but makes him strike out for new fields. He does not depend on education or training for his powers, as do those who endowments are of a lesser degree. Genius is not mere talent or aptitude. Genius is the spontaneous action of the doer in the use of any of the three minds which it can use to express its feelings and desire and in expressing a high degree of excellence in one or more of the arts and sciences. The expression of genius shows the feeling and understanding which the human has and which he exhibits without the experience and study usually required."
Continuing, Percival states:
"The ordinary man has the memories of the present life and loses them after death when the breath-form is broken up. He has sense-learning, but little sense-knowledge. If, however, enough sense-knowledge is acquired, it is transferred to the aia itself and comes back in another life, not as detailed memories but as sense-knowledge. The ordinary man is not in touch with his past, but it is there just the same, in his psychic and in his mental atmospheres. He is cut off from it, because the old breath-form is gone. He does not get far enough to acquire sense-knowledge, which the body-mind gets from what is learned. If enough sense-knowledge is acquired, the aia itself bears a record of it. If in a new life this record in the aia is transferred to the breath-form, the human is a genius. He has not the detailed memories any more than the ordinary man has, but he has the sum of them in the knowledge which his former thinking brought him. This puts him in touch with the endowments in his psychic and mental atmospheres and he appears to be a genius. The difference between a genius and an ordinary person is that a genius is a human who had developed sense-knowledge to the degree where the aia bore the record and, in the life where he is a genius, puts him in touch with his endowments in the mental atmosphere and with his feeling in the psychic atmospheres; whereas the ordinary person has not the record on the aia to put him in immediate touch with any endowment he may have."
NOTE: "Aia" (eye-uh) is the name here given to a unit that has successively progressed through each and every degree in being conscious as its function in a University of Laws, in a perfect, sexless and immortal body; which has graduated from nature, and is on the intelligent-side as a point or line distinguishing it from the nature-side.
Alder's definition of genius is pretty much the same as Percival and both agree on the past life influence of genius:
"As a rule human beings are unable to remember anything about any past lives they must have had. Of course there are exceptions, and many people have collected a great deal of evidence of such memories, which evidence is extremely interesting. In fact, I think we would find it impossible to deny that some people, at least, have lived before. When we consider that we are unable to remember a great deal of our present life, especially things which have affected our characters deeply, until they are laid bare by a psycho-analyst, it is not surprising if we do not remember past lives. But we are told that the experiences gained in such lives is retained by us in those qualities which we describe as 'having a conscience', an 'instinct,' or a 'knack.'
Continuing, Alder states:
"According to this, then, a child prodigy (genius) is the result of continuous effort in past lives along some particular line. It might reasonably follow that imbecility is the result of a continuous refusal to use the brain and make effort; that to be a dwarf or cripple is Karma of one who in previous lives neglected his body; and that an epileptic is probably discharging the debt of continuous immorality in a past life. In the light of this reasoning we could feel that there is no injustice or inequality in life, because the egos are choosing their own ways of learning life's lessons, which can only be learnt through experience and suffering. Believing this, then, we could blame our parents for nothing since we are the masters of our own fate, and reap exactly as we have sown in the past - the effect of the cause - Karma!"
So clearly, it is only the paranormal and metaphysical view of genius that gives us a clear understanding why geniuses exists, what they are, and why they are. The views supra also prevent God from being a respecter of persons as they elucidate that God does not show favor on certain individuals while simultaneously not showing favor on other individuals.
Life never made so much sense to me until I became bold and inquisitive enough to look outside of the box (that someone else created for me and in which I voluntarily stayed in for reasons of false comfort, safety, convenience, and security). I'm talking about the box of religion, the box of controlled and conditioned thinking, and the box of the social norm. While we may say box in the singular, I have come to discover that there are many boxes; boxes in the plural that are built by others (the Ruler's social engineers) that we are put in (usually by loved ones or those who claim to care about us and protect us, e.g. religious leaders, politicians/government, etc.) for purpose of comfort, safety, convenience, and security, which are truly all illusions from the position and perspective of being in the box or boxes.
I might also add that the box could also be called the Matrix. The Matrix is an illusionary world created for us by another or others whom I call the Rulers who at present and for millennia have been controlling and directing the lives, fates, and destinies of the collective people (masses) by conditioning them to think, act and behave, and thus to live a certain way that is relative to the interests of the Rulers. The two greatest things the Rulers constructed to control man (humanity) was GOVERNMENT (STATE) and RELIGION (CHURCH). They are not separate! They are one. Every religious movement is a little political and every political movement is a little religious as taught to me by my dear friend, Jordan Maxwell, religio-politico occult philosopher in Tarzana, California.
The box (Matrix) described above is what singer Lauryn Hill is singing about in her powerful song "I Get Out!" She's talking about getting free, getting out of the Box set up for us by other people (the Rulers).
 You are in fact a Christian, Muslim, or Jew (if you are) because of the Rulers. You didn't create these religions. Others who were also conditioned by the Rulers, e.g. your parents and/or guardians, gave them to you. You didn't even write the Torah, New Testament, or Qur'an that you believe in. Someone else did and you were given what was written and was conditioned to memorize it/them to heart by mere repetition.
The average person has not created one single iota of any facet of the religion they embrace.
The average religious person has not created (written) one single personal philosophy for him or herself. Most don't even believe they are qualified or even authorized to do such. But what can you expect from a people who on average collectively think about 90% of the same things or thoughts they thought about yesterday and in previous days, weeks, months and years, today or at present, due to successful social conditioning?
The 1999 Movie version of George Orwell's classic book "Animal Farm," cleverly showed how social engineering via mind control takes place, using animals in the lead and to convey the message in Aesopian fashion. Our modern day conditioning takes place in such institutions as religion (church, synagogue, mosque), school (academia), society, military, and the family and/or household (what's left of it).
We are shown how the conditioning takes place and/or what the results of the conditioning are in certain Hollywood films such as "Brazil," "THX1138," "1984," "Equilibrium," "Animal Farm," "Gattica," "Network, and Stanley Kubrick's classic, "A Clockwork Orange" to name a few.
Certain books, e.g. "Brave New World," "Mein Kempf," and "The Leipzig Connection" also give us a clear view of how the mind control (conditioning) is worked on the collective people.
Even though the 1970's movie "The Stepford Wives" only dealt with suburban White males (husbands) robotizing their wives for serve self-serving interests, in a way, the Rulers via government have robotized and are robotizing many people for a similar purpose - to do (labor) and not ask any questions, which clearly benefits the interests of the Rulers.
In conclusion, the Box hides us from experience and therefore lessons, the thing we are on Earth for.
True security, safety, comfort, and convenience (in life) come from risking all of these things (in their false sense from the position and perspective of the Box) in the pursuit of self-discovery and evolution.
Therefore, RISK must be involved in life. There can be no complete and successful living in this life without risk or taking risks, REASONABLE risks, that is.
Risk ties into the proverbial "leap of faith." This leap is into the unknown realm of magical possibilities and mystical adventure. The "meaning in life" comes from taking necessary risks. Life has no meaning until you give it meaning. Life is a notebook of blank pages that you must add the words to in order to live and tell your own personal story. It's YOUR life and therefore YOUR story. It does not have to be similar to anyone else's. It's yours alone to create, just like your reality, fate, destiny, and even your after-life (Heaven).
Risk challenges your false notions of security, comfort, convenience, and safety, all of which can serve as blocks to you experiencing your journey and adventure in this life.
Now why did I end here talking about the Box and taking risks in life? It's because I know what blocks you from taking the necessary steps that lead you into the realm of magical possibility and mystical adventure as well as what it also takes (risk, courage, facing your fears, obeying your heart, etc.) to lead you into the realm of magical possibility and mystical adventure which opens you up on all levels of your existence, and which greatly helps to release your genius (which is really a tapping into your genius that is recorded in your psychic and mental atmospheres).
If we are conscious individuals, then we have what it takes to be or tap into our "genius" which would clearly make life better and smoother for us.
And there's plenty of help today too! Many tools exists today, such as hypnotherapy, past-life astrology, past-life regression, trans-crystal therapy, and even dream interpretation.
However, the keys to unlocking the great mysteries of life and existence are found in dark places and today, these dark places have titles names such as "New Age," "Metaphysics" (or Metaphysical Studies), "Speculation," "Magic" (and/or Magical Studies), "Astrology," "Eastern philosophy," "Egyptology (Kemetology)," "Occult studies," "Wicca (or witchcraft)," "Gnostic studies," "Paranormal Studies," "Theosophy," "Mythology" and the not so dark titles or names such as "Inspiration," "Self-help," "Mind potential," and "Self-improvement."
Regardless of the names or titles, you'll have to develop a balanced mind that serves as a mental Silver or umbilical cord that allows you to safely and freely venture into unknown realms of study (especially if what you have been working with thus far, mainly traditional religion, has not helped or advanced you).
Look, if you are a conventional and traditional religious-minded person and your life is obscure, unsatisfactory, unfulfilling, mediocre, lackluster, dull, meaningless, routine and mechanical, plagued by diseases that you can't shake or cure, and whatever else, you cannot solve or fix a problem with the same mind (belief, programming, conditioning, etc.) that created it. It may be time for something new.
And you don't have to break ties with your present religion or faith in order to pursue this "alternative" and really, "forbidden or prohibited" knowledge. If you're a Christian, Jew, or Muslim, all I'm saying is be an OPEN-MINDED Christian, Jew, or Muslim. No one religion has all the answers, at least not for everybody on the planet.
There is no requirement of allegiance to anything in order to pursue knowledge. I'm simply saying - PURSUE KNOWLEDGE and GET UNDERSTANDING as well. Nothing should ever stop you from getting knowledge and as much knowledge as you possibly can. NOTHING!
If the old traditional way (conventional handed-down religion) works for you, then keep doing your thing (and I'm happy for you); but if you're at a crisis or standstill, then it's time to do something new or different. This is actually plain intelligence and common sense here.
While I'm not religious at all and I'm not a Christian, however, I read, understand, and apply the Bible from a totally metaphysical and paranormal perspective and get profound results for MYSELF. While a Christian may accept the Bible as historical, I accept it as biological and spiritual. In other words, the things that took place in the Bible all happen or occur within the human body and within human existence on the biological, spiritual, psychological, mental, and emotional levels.
So to me, Christ, is not a man, but a construct, software, a paradigm, or a mindset ("let this mind be in you which also was in Christ Jesus"). The goal is not to be Christian, but Christ-like. Christians are in severe crisis today because they are more focused on being Christian rather than Christ-like. I could say the same thing of Buddhists. They are more concerned with being Buddhist rather than becoming a Buddha (Enlightened One).
A Christian will never fulfill Jesus' saying: "Greater works than I do shall ye do," as long as he or she remains a Christian. A Christian cannot do greater works than Jesus. Jesus himself was not a Christian and no single proof of evidence or authority can prove that he was. He was a Christ (which is predicated upon consciousness, e.g. Christ consciousness). It's totally irrelevant if Jesus (of the Bible) never existed as an actual historical person or figure (though much proof exists to support such claim), because the relevance is on his ascribed teachings and works, which you have yet to see any modern-day Christian, do or perform. You will never see "greater works" compared to that of Jesus from a Christian. Never! Christian is man-made and man in his lower state can never lead anything into such a higher state such as Christ.
Christian is a term that developed in Antioch and by mortal man, whereas Christ originated in the Cosmos. It's totally cosmic! It's not from the Earth. The cosmic story had to be personified into human form in the physical person of Jesus of Nazareth in order for wayward man to learn of his/her cosmic identity, powers, birthright, and true origin.
But look at people (man) today! Hell struck on a man of 2,000 years ago while they are catching serious hell today, enslaved by wicked men (Rulers) every which way but loose and don't have a clue that they are enslaved in the first place and if they do, they don't have a clue as how to truly break free.
Jesus caught hell from the government of his day, but today, his followers do not catch the same hell from their government that Jesus himself did from his, according to the Bible. And why? Answer: Simply because Christians (so-called modern-day followers of Jesus) adhere wholeheartedly to their government no matter how corrupt it is. They accept their government, as wicked as it is. They are a part of it! They support it. They participate in its schemes (e.g. political elections). They finance it via taxation, including fraudulent taxation e.g. federal income taxes.
The same applies to Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and every other religion here in the U.S.
Religion itself can never change the world simply because religion has failed to change its followers. Religion does not impact the world or society to the degree that the world or society impacts religion. Are not followers a reflection of its religion, and is not religion a reflection of its nation?
The United States is a Christian nation. Is its present day actions, especially pertaining to what's going on in Iraq at present, reflective of the spirit, nature, and teachings of Jesus? Of course, not! Clearly, point made!
Why must devils do their dirt in the good name of Jesus (or Moses or Muhammad)? Why must President Bush identify himself as a Christian when his actions are not Christ-like? Clearly, his allegiance is more so to his nation's politics than Christ, so why not drop the claiming of Christ while doing wickedness?
Why do evil men claim Jesus and Christianity to do their dirt? Africans were enslaved and dehumanized by White people (Europeans) and Arabs in the name of Jesus Christ and Allah. White (European) women were burned at the stake by White males who professed to be Christian and who believed in Jesus Christ. The Great Crusades (all of them) were fought in the name of God (Jesus and Allah).
Most Christians today have inherited Christianity from their parents and their ancestors who were clearly (in most cases) conquered by Europeans who were claiming Jesus (and salvation) all the while brutally conquering. So, if you weren't a Christian (or Jew or Muslim) today, what would you be?
Or did you CHOOSE to be a Christian (or even a Jew, Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist)? If you did choose to be a Christian, what other religions did you deeply study so as to make a comparison in which a choice could be made? After all, the word "choose" relates to the word "choice" which means: "a selection of two or more things." In order to have chosen (selected) Christianity, there had to have been another religion alongside it in order for a choice to exist.
Thank you for reading!
This article is compliments of Dherbs.com |
