Note: Minor language corrections were made on September 28 2022.
This article is some of the densest writing I have done in years. A month of spending much of my free time deep in thought preceded the writing of this article. On May 25, I received the central ideas needed to write this, and I finally decided that I must let go of the concerns which have held me back from writing for the public. Within 24 hours, several people I know died, all in a physically violent manner. It has added a dark tone to this undertaking. Every event which happens has both physical and spiritual causes. Perhaps, apart from the physical causes, these events reflect the immense energy and grave seriousness which both went into and are arising from this effort. It is not my place to say for sure. What I can say is that every event opens doors for other events to take place, and for lessons to potentially be learned. To grow somehow from every thing that I observe or experience- to add to my knowledge and worldview, to improve my character, and to make better decisions hence- is what I always seek to do, in response to anything.
Now, let us get on with it.
What is the most important thing in life? Fulfilling my duty.
What is my duty? Objectively, it is to improve the physical world. Subjectively, it is to advance consciousness. Together, the ultimate goal is to achieve equilibrium, both on the entirety of the Earth itself, as well as between the Earth and the rest of the universe.
How do I fulfill my duty? Well, that is the difficult question. I am trying to do what has never been done before on this planet, which is to get humanity to exist upon it in a state of both continual advancement and equilibrium (I would like to think these are one and the same, but we shall see).
Egoism and its Consequences
Egoism is the primary enemy here, for it has wreaked havoc upon this Earth for tens of thousands of years. Humanity has nearly always conducted its affairs egotistically, and this situation worsens over time. Humans are lazy, entitled, selfish, neurotic, opportunistic, irrational, cowardly, and short-sighted. Instead of trying to solve problems permanently, they seek to maximize financial profits. They think cutting off their own genitals is “brave and stunning,” and they assert that wearing a diaper on their face is “saving the world.” People think that because they exist, they deserve to have sex and reproduce without limitation of any sort. How many have no qualms about popping out one child after another, using this as a means to receive taxpayer-funded government welfare. And that's just getting us started...
People do not think of the long-term consequences their actions will have on themselves, on other people, and especially on the natural environment. How many masks worn to supposedly mitigate the spread of COVID-19 ended up littered on floors, on the sides of streets, and in landfills? Of course, I could go on about how no one ever condemned these articles as biohazards, even though they might contain the uber-deadly virus, but it is not my purpose here to dwell on that matter. My point is that people's true priority is appearances. They wear the mask to give the appearance of conforming, following the rules, and being a “good person”-- and that is in fact all they care about. People wring their hands about the poor children who are not allowed to receive the experimental genetic serum known as the COVID-19 vaccination, yet they cannot even be bothered to properly dispose of their masks as one would any biohazard.
I speak of COVID-19 only because it is something everyone can relate to. The reality is that this virus situation is just a distraction from what is truly important. That is another thing about humans: they will complain endlessly about problems, and maybe try to quash the immediate symptoms in some manner, but they do precious little to contemplate the ultimate causes and act upon long-term, thorough, and big picture solutions. They want a politician or a superhero to do that for them. Why? I don't know: probably because that would be most convenient for them personally. I know it sure doesn't help that religions have taught people they will go to Heaven just for believing in the god of that religion. “You don't actually have to do anything-- just say you believe, and make sure you look like a good person along the way!”
Religious teachings being incorrect doesn't mean that there are no gods, nor that the people discussed in religious texts did not exist. Siddhartha Gautama and the prophet Mohammad walked this Earth, but I am not in a position to say much about them. Jesus and Moses were real people, and so was “Viracocha,” a god described by the ancient Incas. These people did profess important teachings, but they were misinterpreted by the fearful, selfish, short-sighted men around them-- men who wanted to believe they could gain salvation solely by worshiping, with no need for understanding. Though this chain of events is important to how human history has unfolded, it is likewise not my purpose here to dwell on this matter. The point is that humans have led themselves astray again and again, and they always blame the unpleasant consequences on someone else. People pretend to be “good people” by donating money to the church and professing a belief in Jesus (or whoever else), but then they turn around and wonder aloud why God allows such horrible things to happen to us poor little humans. As if we are innocent! People have no idea how swayed they are by propaganda and by the opinions of the people around them. Democracy is a farce because it gives the appearance that the people choose their destiny, while in reality the outcome of elections is determined by whoever has the most influence over public opinion. People mimic the opinions handed to them by mass media. “Good people” are whomever they are told is good, and “bad people” are whomever they are told is bad. If you get caught saying certain “bad words,” you will be labeled as a “bad person.” As if words make the world go round! This is such a feminine and especially feminist attitude to take. Women and male feminists think proper attire and language usage are of highest importance, while it is actually copper, petroleum (unfortunately), steel, and the proper and efficient use of other physical tools and raw materials which sustain human life and activity.
I suspect that the greatest difficulty in getting people to see reason is context. Media stories take words and actions out of context all the time, because their goal is to fulfill a selfish agenda as opposed to transparently and thoroughly share the facts. One challenge with context is that, when you are asked questions, it can be hard to provide a full context for your answers. A big factor in this is impatience. People want answers now, now, now, and they want them to be quick and easy sound bites. The simple reality, however, is that no answer exists completely and independently of the context in which it is given. A context is always present, but this does not speak to how consciously thought-through and chosen the context is. A context comprised of nihilism, materialism, and hedonism is most common today. The “why” of people's words and actions has to do with self-gain, perhaps for no reason other than its own sake. That being said, this is not all context is limited to. Though nihilism, materialism, and hedonism may comprise the foundation of a context, context also pertains to what exactly a person is trying to do, how they're trying to do it, and their stated reasons for doing it, even if these aren't ultimately the true reasons.
I have considered that I have not provided a sufficient context for my words; at least, not recently. This is not for lack of trying, but rather for not achieving a point of completeness and refinement as much as possible. I expect the process of continual refinement, thoroughness, and advancement to be infinite. Even so, I do not think I have done the best job of providing complete context since I met Brian nearly two years ago (by the way, in this article, I'm just going to call him Brian). This is not to say that I have not provided context at all. However, it has taken time to absorb all the new information to a point where I can provide a big picture in clear terms and in an organized manner. For the last month especially, I have been immersed in the task of deciding how to proceed on this matter (indeed, many texts and e-mails have gone unanswered). During this time, I have come upon two major developments: the first development is equilibrium as the highest ideal in all aspects of life; while the second is connecting with my roots. Since my roots go back to a time prior to my interest in equilibrium, I will discuss my roots first.
Before I start, I want to mention that I have posted relatively few of my own words the last 1.5 years, so there is a lot to say. I will try to be comprehensive without being excessively thorough.
Connecting with My Roots
In 2015, at the age of 19, I wrote a book called What is a Real Life? Rather than discuss the specifics of the book, I will try to stay on point and focus on what is most relevant to the present article. I initially made the book free, but starting in either 2017 or 2018, I made it available for a payment of $5-- no free options. Shortly after I met Brian in the Summer of 2020, I meant to make the book free again, but I never got around to it until April 2022. Currently, the Kindle version still costs $5, but the pdf is free. I am quite sure it was just one day after I made the book free that I received an e-mail about it, from a man named Tyler. I read the e-mail around the same time that I began planning to make the Equilibrium Archive from the contents of the Brian Harner Archive, and by extension, thinking about equilibrium in general. This went on for about two weeks. Then I somewhat-waffled for a week; finally, the week of May 23, I decided to read my own book.
Normally I cannot stand to read my old work. In fact, for the last five years I've had a general anxiety in the background about publicly sharing misleading, incomplete information. It's not that I deliberately ever do so: I just give what I have at the time, and I have been concerned about it leading people astray. Indeed, if you look through the main archive of my posts, you will see that the frequency of my posts drops off after mid-2017, with the exception of the entire year of 2020. A significant change in my worldview took place in 2017, for it became apparent to me that humanity has been devolving over time. This made it difficult to contend with my old work, because I was previously of the mindset that humanity was evolving over time. Long story short, I became disenchanted with some things I had previously said, and consequently edited or deleted many articles, videos, and my book. The consequence of shifting from the viewpoint of human evolution to that of human devolution caused me to stop promoting my old work, for the most part, in any way. After making several edits to What is a Real Life?, I mostly stopped thinking about it.
First, I would like to say this. People tend to look at personal change as, “You were bad, now you're good.” But I know that for me, I wouldn't be where I am now, if I wasn't where I was then. Even though I know my past self was inferior to my current self in most ways, I don't like to bemoan the way I was in the past. Part of the reason is that I developed righteous intention at a fairly early age (16), and I know I did my best with the means, experiences, environment and character qualities I had at the time. As such, to excessively bash my past would be like screeching about how a child is inferior to an adult. Yes, we know this is true, at least for most aspects of life -- you don't have to go on a tirade about it. To be clear, by the way, adults are definitely not superior to children in all aspects of life. I would never underestimate a child who is genuinely interested in doing serious work. Supposedly, Amish boys are expected to be capable of building a house by the time they are 13 years old. I myself have seen children walk marathons and hand forge blacksmithing tools. There's a reason why the Chinese and various African countries have recruited young people (teenagers and even children) in their recent civil wars: kids are fierce, and when they take something seriously they will keep at it and not become rusty, crusty, and jaded in the way that adults often do.
Recently, I have been trying to contend with how to re-integrate the worthwhile parts of my book into my life while staying true to the fact that humans have devolved, not evolved, over time. My belief in human evolution as a teenager led me to be naïve and make decisions which I would not make today. However, I had strong enough values and ideas with me that I was able to learn from my experiences, form a more accurate worldview, continuously refine my path in life, and grow into a more capable person. The reason this matters is that I sense I need all of my best from throughout my life- not just what I have been, done, and learned in the last two years- in order to fulfill my duty. Indeed, since I began kimwrate.com 7.5 years ago, there have been plenty of variations in my personal choices and in the way I see the world. However, there are a few key principles which I have stood by the entire time, perhaps with only slight or brief oscillations. The principles I have stood by in the last 7.5 years include a higher power, purity, soul/real self, consciousness, and completeness. Looking back, I can see these threads throughout the last 7.5 years of my life, including in my book.
Though I speak of refinement itself in the following passages, I cannot say that this article is terribly refined. I was more concerned with being exhaustive and including all the points I wanted to make, which there are a lot of. But, hey, refinement tends to occur in stages-- not all at once. So, let us enjoy this stage of the process-- and if we don't enjoy it, maybe we shall still find value in it. That is what matters anyway.
A Higher Power
I've not been an atheist since the age of 15. From the ages of 16-23, it would have been appropriate to call me agnostic, if I understand the term correctly. I believed in the existence of a higher power, and even that I could communicate with it, though I was not sure that it was a definite deity or other entity. In my teens, I was content to have reverence for and a relationship with the universe. I refined my thought in my early 20s. Everything exists in relationship to everything else: this collective entity, which includes everything as well as the relationships between everything, I have referred to as “the void.” To be specific, if all the relationships between every entity in existence met at a single point, this point would be a singularity, which is everything and nothing simultaneously. I call this point, the void.
It is possible to connect directly to the void and receive information from it. Even when not deliberately communicating directly with the void, the void is always present. The void is the provider of synchronicity/perfect timing. I have long “believed” (might as well be “known”) that whatever is presented to me is for my growth. “My growth” is the refinement and advancement of my character and my consciousness, my ability as a responsible maker (you'll see what I mean), and by extension my ability to help others in that pursuit.
The caveat about connecting directly to the void is that you do not have much say in when this happens, nor how. You can choose only whether to welcome the experience or resist it. Other than that, the experience is most likely for those on a righteous path-- that is, those most apt to use the information given them in order to serve a selfless purpose. What Brian refers to as his realization process was an experience of direct connection to the void potent enough to kill a man-- or, at least, his ego.
The void is either a provider or a container of order, inspiration, right timing, and even life itself. What is the opposite of the void? The answer is, the abyss. Both “abyss” and “void,” in the general usage of these words, are synonymous with, “empty space.” Though they may be similar in nature, in this context they are opposite in character. Whereas life thrives in the void, it dies in the abyss.
Where the void inspires genius, the abyss inspires neuroticism. The abyss is what it sounds like: an eternal darkness with no order, no connection, no meaning, no purpose, no precision, no consciousness, no soul, no life, no hope. When we find ourselves being neurotic, nihilistic, “etc,” we have at least one foot planted in the abyss.
Whereas the void is perhaps the outermost and possibly also a provider of life, there are also direct, concrete providers of life. In 2020, when I was 24, I learned from Brian that everything in the universe has a maker- even the makers themselves. This means there are billions of species in the universe which are exponentially more intelligent than humans. God is the being or entity at the top of that chain of makers, and we cannot know much about him since he exists outside of this universe and has the role of sustaining this universe's existence. The place of each being in this hierarchy is to live in reverence to his own direct maker. Brian also has spoken of the void, though I do not believe he has provided a distinct definition of it. He uses the term “the void” in quotes, and refers to it as a source of information which gets revealed to an individual human internally.
So, what is the view to take here? I would like to reach for an equilibrium of sorts (equilibrium is not the same thing as “compromise,” by the way) between my ideas and what I have learned from Brian. To achieve such an equilibrium, it should be proper to regard all maker species- since all of them are above humans- as the creators of consciousness. First, imagine the vast expanse of all known human consciousness: every single thought humans have ever had, every sensory perception, every idea, every nighttime dream, every observation our species has ever made, and every experience we have ever had. All of that is made possible by consciousness, and that consciousness was created by species more intelligent than ours. I cannot say how consciousness began, nor what fine attunements those who directly created humanity imposed upon our consciousness, but it makes sense that every maker species in the hierarchy of the universe has its own role in the creation of consciousness, since each one placed consciousness in whatever intelligent species that they themselves directly created. This means that human consciousness is like a family heirloom handed down through the ages, with the roots ultimately beginning at the same time that this universe was created. It is interesting that someone more intelligent than us would decide to give us consciousness and the purpose which comes with it. As such, it makes sense to have reverence for our makers as the ones who endowed us with intelligence and life and created our environment and its physical laws, along with every single living thing in that environment. Perhaps it would be accurate to refer to these makers as the “supraconsciousness” of the planet-- or even a step higher than supraconsciousness, whatever that would be.
Reverence for our makers is shown through the fulfillment of duty, which is to both improve the physical world and advance consciousness. Through these pursuits, humanity may one day become a maker species as well. To start, rather than create intelligent life, our role as “makers” is simply to sustain a functional environment for ourselves to live in. I will discuss the advancement of consciousness in further depth in the section on Consciousness.
As for the relationship between maker species and the void: they are part of the void; and, simultaneously, our connection to them still is what it is-- we are their creations. Both maker and creation belonging to the void does not put the two on equal footing. The void might be bigger than all maker species and even God himself, but it's not my place to know for sure. Maybe my soul will find out in the equivalent of a few thousand Earth years, or longer. A few million might be more realistic. Alas, I know not where my soul's journey will take me after this lifetime.
Generally speaking, purity refers to uniformity. A substance is pure if it consists only of itself, and is free of foreign material. Likewise, purity can also refer to how true a thing is to its original or intended form. This quality also is known as “integrity.”
Remaining in integrity is synonymous with not “selling out.” This is a way of thinking about purity which could resonate more with people in modern times. Do not sell out your soul; nor, by extension, those who made it. Consider the following:
The original intention for all life on Earth comes from a higher power, i.e. those who made it. Everything was made with a specific purpose in mind. A specific purpose must be achieved by a specific form. To this end, everything was and is made to a certain standard of precision. In order for a lifeform or anything else in the universe to be what it is, all aspects of its physical form and other qualities must exist within certain design parameters. What literally matters, then, is not who we are but what we are. In what we are lies the original intention and purpose for which we were made. Furthermore, the creator of anything, whether it is a maker species creating life on Earth, or a human creating tools, generally has in mind a perfect representation of the thing they are trying to create. It is impossible to achieve absolute perfection except in the highest dimension of the universe, which is certainly not where humans exist. That being said, there are limits to the level of precision possible in each dimension of the universe, as well as on our own planet (which exists in the 3rd dimension, which is what we know as “physical reality”), and even by our own species. So, we can aim to get as close as possible to the highest level of precision possible for our species; and this, when it aims at achieving the mathematical golden ratio (1.618), we may call perfection. Indeed, precision and perfection are both mathematically defined. Precision is synonymous with specificity. To be precise is to get as close as possible to a defined measurement. “As close as possible” is also mathematically defined in many, if not all cases. What is defined is how far off a measurement can be from the defined perfect metric, before the thing being measured no longer can function as what it is meant to be. When an aspect of what is being measured is too far off from the perfect metric to function, this condition is known in engineering and building trades as being “out of tolerance.”
Without precision and purity, nothing would have any meaning. Objects in physical reality would blend together to become amorphous, undefinable blobs. Thoughts in the mind would turn to gibberish; or, at best, something like static on television. Nothing would have a quantifiable existence. Such is the epitome of a hellscape-- of an abyss.
For many things in life, it takes refinement to attain purity. For two combustion fuel substances, alcohol and crude oil, a different product is obtained from each stage of refinement. Each stage requires the separation of what is not desired from what is desired in order to yield a product which is useful. The presence of impurities can render the product unfit for its intended use. Note that each stage does indeed produce a useful product. The product yielded by each stage is denser than the last.
Refinement is true not just of physical substances, but also of our own understanding and personal journey. Each time that I revisit a subject or practice a skill, my understanding and ability become more refined. With each step of refinement, I let go of what I don't need (e.g. answered questions, misinterpretations, mistakes, inaccuracy, sloppiness), and am left with a higher concentration of what is necessary and true. This means that my skills and knowledge become more precise, useful, and therefore valuable over time-- as long as impurities do not make their way in (for a substantial length of time, anyway).
Note that refinement is not limited to direct removal; sometimes one substance must be added in order to remove another. When it comes to skills and knowledge, it also takes entirely new perspectives and information to keep advancing our personal abilities. Still, what we already do have, we want to refine. Ideally, we will eventually be able to form a concise picture of our understanding, in which we convey a large amount of accurate and significant information in a simple and organized manner.
The same is true of intentions. Depending on where we are starting from, it can take a very different objective from those we have currently in order to move our lives forward. Once we've generally honed in on something substantial, it helps to refine the intention continually over time until it is pure, free of any ulterior motives and undue influence. As a teenager, the most selfless intent I had thought of was to devote my life to working for the highest interest I could conceive of, and I decided that this is what I wanted to do. To be pure in such an intent is of the utmost importance. Purity of intent means that egotistical motives are absent.
To be pure of heart is to accept that control is futile (this includes controlling your own feelings), and to be open to the present moment. No emotions are forced, nor are feelings suppressed. Purity of heart makes transcendence possible, since it enables openness to a more accurate and complete viewpoint, lacking in unnecessary paranoia which only holds oneself back. The opposite of purity of heart is jadedness, which is an insistence on remaining at a relatively low level of being. Any unhealthy activity, no matter how mild, is an expression of jadedness and therefore a sign of a closed heart. As I said in Existential Loss, “The pure heart does hope too hard for help and answers from others. Its priority is to simply be true and ideally not ask for much more.”
To be pure of mind is to stay on point, remain attentive to the present, and disallow the equivalent of petty gossip from taking over the thought process. Purity is needed in order to achieve higher levels of thought-- to comprehend the complex and the vast. It is harder to do that effectively, accurately, consistently, and for righteous purposes when the mind is tainted and out of integrity. When the mind strays into petty territory, remain pure by redirecting the thought process to understanding and decision.
To be pure of body is to consume only that which is necessary for physical survival and thriving. The easiest decision I have made in this regard is, no drugs whatsoever, legal nor illegal. Most, if not all drugs present obstacles to all the other types of purity. Drugs are quite good at affecting the emotions and leading the mind astray from the most important matters in life, which require a large amount of attention and effort to contemplate and act upon effectively. Caffeine is a particularly insidious culprit, appearing to make a man more energetic and productive, while simultaneously robbing him of his spiritual faculties. I am focused on my duty, and have a healthy enough body that drugs are useless to me. When I am in pain, I live with it. Sometimes pain is psychosomatically caused: as I said in my book, the mind sometimes imposes pain upon the body in order to divert attention from its own pain. When this is the case, acknowledging psychological pain can relieve some or all of the physical pain. When this is not the case, I can try deep breathing or moving in ways that mitigate the pain, but otherwise I simply live with the pain. As for dietary choices regarding physical purity, I feel like I have talked about this a zillion times in the past, mainly pre-2018. Not much has changed from the principle of eating whole foods that are as untainted and unprocessed as possible. The main change I have made in recent years is going from being vegan to being an omnivore. This resulted from my conversations with Brian, who explained that it's a better choice for self-sufficiency and environmental sustainability. See A Regenerative Food System and E-mail from Brian #18 for more.
Regarding the body, there also is sexual purity. This means abstaining from sexual acts outside of a committed relationship. Why does this matter? Because becoming romantically involved with another person ties you more closely to them, to the point where they significantly affect your major decisions. Your wills, desires, goals become more unified. You're less likely to do or say anything the other person would not value nor approve of. Staying (relatively!!!) pure sexually has freed me from the grasp of another person, not merely physically but also mentally and spiritually. There is no one who would sway my path, influence my thoughts, nor suppress my actions due to my attempts to maintain intimate relations with them. I likewise am not held back by the practical considerations of a spouse/domestic partner. Especially in Hell, a romantic relationship would probably not be worthwhile unless the other person shared the same conviction that I do (good luck with that).
An environment in equilibrium necessarily has a quality of purity. The components of the environment must be relatively pure in order to continue both existing healthily and contributing to the environment's equilibrium. Birds internally contaminated with DDT produce eggs with thin shells, which cannot support their incubating offspring, and therefore prevent the birds from reproducing. Invasive species (such as the hemlock woolly agelid in America, which kills hemlock trees via parasitism) defy the original, intended pattern of the environment they are invading, and cause damage. Some toxins, like benzene and C8, cause genetic defects and diseases in the species affected by them. Other toxins biomagnify, starting by contaminating the smallest of animals (or even plants) and increasing in concentration with each step of the food chain. Contaminated air can cause both acute and chronic breathing difficulties and respiratory diseases in those who breathe it in. Contaminated water will poison every animal which drinks from it. Indeed, is purified water not a staple of human civilization? Don't tell me you don't value some kind of purity.
Why value purity? The opposite of purity brings disorder, chaos, disorientation, confusion, pain, and suffering, just to get a list started. This sounds similar to the abyss, as described in the section on A Higher Power.
Purity should be tempered only temporarily in and only by righteousness, which generally seeks to secure purity for the long run. What righteous demands is based upon duty, which I shall address further in the section on Consciousness. Point is, sometimes one form of an ideal must be sacrificed in order to secure its long-term existence. Care must be taken to ensure the sacrifice is not misdirected.
Before discussing consciousness, I will speak of a way of being which is conducive to ultimately attaining purity. I am aware that it is common for people to regard purity with spite. Generally, purity is hated by those who don't have it and either know or don't believe they can achieve it. What does it take to change that attitude? There may be only one effective way, at least at this stage of the game: I call it “Real self.”
I will be honest that this is probably the least refined and most verbose part of this article, as I have not thought about this explicitly (though I have thought of related matters) since I wrote my book. However, this does not mean it is lacking in potence.
The ideas of “Realness” and “Real self” as referenced in my book are the most interesting aspect of the book, at least to me at the present time. I have decided that I believe, or ought to believe, or hope to believe in the existence of a Real Self which is genuinely interested in matters important to the sustenance of healthy life. Beneath all the egoism and the noise of talk, there is a real self which has genuine interests, is robust and selfless, and has no need for admiration, undue attention, unnecessary possessions, nor comforting delusions. I cannot prove this is true for every human, but my morale knows not where else to turn.
Normally, what I have defined here as “real self,” I would simply refer to as “my soul.” However, the terms “realness” and “real self” put on a different spin from what I normally think of as my soul. At the very least, the thought process is worth following, so that is what I shall do here.
I can see a lot of room for expansion on what I said about realness 7 years ago, and I am still not necessarily that refined on this matter, so this section might be a bit wordy and long. By the way, realness is what Tyler asked me about in his e-mail, so I had better do a good job.
Before I get too far, I should note that the term “realness” was sparsely used in my book, so I had to decide whether to continue utilizing it or scrap it. For now, I shall define “realness” simply as those qualities which belong to the “real self.” It's possible the term “realness” is totally superfluous, and could just be replaced with “real self,” but I am going to use it here.
The origins of my use of these terms go back to nine years ago, the spring of 2013, when I was 16 years old. I felt like I was a fake, even though I did not deliberately lie. I ached to find the “real self” which I hoped lived within me. After allowing myself to feel sorrow without judgment one day, I finally had a sense of feeling “real.” Since that moment, I have known whole-heartedly that everything is for my growth, even in those moments where I temporarily feel overwhelmed by the high likelihood of failure. Following this experience, I sought to live for that which is real, not that which is false and ultimately unimportant.
I have a better understanding now of what I went through at that time than I did then. In fact, the knowledge I have since gained has brought my past experiences into clearer view. The basic point I made in my book is that I thought the state of the world led me to misery, but once I realized it was my own fault for being excessively dismissive of possibility, things turned around for me. Likewise, I had developed the view that humans are mere biological machines, lacking in agency or soul, and I was sure that my conviction in this “fact” brought me misery. Opening myself to reconsideration of this idea also contributed to the turnaround.
Looking back on this situation from my current standpoint, I can see that I actually was correct to a large extent-- I just missed a few details of the puzzle. If humanity was an enlightened species, and had created Heaven on Earth rather than Hell, there is no way I ever would have become depressed nor developed the idea that humans do not have agency. My perception that humans might as well be robots with biological bodies, running pre-programmed scripts and never thinking an original thought, was fairly accurate. What I got wrong is that I thought this was an absolute fact: I did not consider that the human lack of agency is merely a circumstance which our species has wrought upon itself. I likewise was fairly accurate in sensing that there is a kind of mental illness which encapsulates the globe and is nearly impossible to cure at this juncture. To be frank about it, I would be surprised and even alarmed if I went my whole life without ever having thoughts about wanting to escape this planet. Anyone who has never harbored such a wanting at least once is probably either rich, constantly drugged (yes, even on “normal” substances like caffeine), relatively young, or just fortunate. The point here is that it would be foolish to not expect the prevailing environment to affect the way that any being thinks, feels, and functions. It's not like I never become sorrowful nor demoralized: that would be quite hard to pull off-- at least, without drugs.
I know some buffoons out there (or rather close to me, unfortunately) will feign horror that I could even speak of ever having the slightest thought about wanting to escape Earth. They will hoot, “Oh, Kimberly, that's so horrible, you shouldn't ever feel that way! Wah!” These are the same loafers who will boast that they will die before the mounting problems faced by this planet become much worse, so why should they do anything about them? Then, with no trace of self-awareness at all, they wonder why other people have thoughts of escaping the planet. Could it be due to belonging to a species which is so indifferent to the needs of its progeny and its environment that it is essentially psychopathic?
Indeed, it is foolish to tell me, Kim Wrate, that such-and-such thought or a feeling should never be had. This website is called Living a Real Life: that means I am not here to lie, to accept lies, to deny facts, nor to be swayed by emotional platitudes. I've always struggled to imagine why people who feel such a need to resist me even bother talking to me. I've usually assumed it has to do with rusty crusty old adults wanting to dominate what they see as a bright but misled girl, just in order to prove a point and get me to shut up and be “peaceable” to them (i.e. simultaneously dull and emotionally susceptible). However, what I would like to think now, in light of the consideration that everyone has a “real self” deep down, is that the idiots flock to me because I resonate with some part of their soul which they have failed to connect with on their own, and they would like to enjoy more of it, but their degraded consciousness does not allow them to. I am not necessarily asserting that I am correct, but this explanation does bring me some peace.
Carrying on, there are multiple factors in the term “realness”. Though I do not care for much for the dichotomy of “light” and “dark,” it may be fair to say that there is a “light side” and a “dark side” to realness. The light side is what I said about the “real self,” with its genuine interest in the important and lack of need for frivolities. It is not just about being the opposite of depression, which is, the desire to live. Realness is also about being genuine: honest, honestly on track, and honestly interested. At 16 I lacked all of these things. Regarding the lack of honesty, I felt that most of the words which came out of my mouth were merely attempts to cater to other people, and did not resonate with my soul. I was not deliberately lying nor acting: it just felt too difficult to be any other way, as if I was subject to a dominant social or other type of invisible force. The lack of being “honestly on track” means that, though I was thinking about the big picture of life on Earth, my thoughts did not lead to solutions of any kind, but instead to ideas which I now know would only end in destruction. I was basically correct in thinking that, “There needs to be a revolution the whole world over.” I looked at all kinds of localized problems, such as famine and human rights violations, and concluded that there was no way to solve these problems one by one: some kind of fundamental, global change would have to take place. I still agree with this now, and I would classify this realization at the age of 16 as the start of a kind of personal awakening. However, as I said, I was not at all on track to solutions. If I was, I would have found a way to begin acting on them. Instead, I just wanted to die. Hence the lack of being “honestly interested.” Hopelessness and learned helplessness, the lack of any possible solution in sight, leads to a lack of desire to engage with surface-level reality. Indeed, since meeting Brian, finding practical solutions to the Earth's problems, and changing careers from computer science to machining in order to develop the skills needed to implement those practical solutions, physical reality is far more engaging to me now than ever before. I am dedicated to learning as much about physical reality as possible for the purpose of improving the physical environment to a point of equilibrium (and perhaps beyond, whatever may lie beyond equilibrium).
The combination of honesty, being honestly on track, and honestly interested yields healthy attitudes. In particular, the real self acknowledges that effort is more important than success, because an individual human cannot control physical reality, and therefore cannot control outcomes. What matters is making a best effort to work towards the best cause you can conceive of. It is important to continually review and renew your efforts, as well as what they are directed towards. Taking a lot of action is admirable, but a “best effort” should also include a best effort at ensuring that the effort really is indeed the best it can be. Can you make a best effort at understanding that? Lolz.
The “dark side” of realness pertains to going to the edge, acknowledging all fear, and refusing to deny any fact. “The edge” refers to the edge of my awareness, understanding, feelings, and daring. I described in two different passages in Introduction to the Void what I mean by, “to reach the void, you must go to the edge”:
Some people have jumped off the edge of suffering and gone into the void, to emerge again anew. This is why they perceive that suffering leads to wisdom. They saw that they went to the land of suffering, and from there they found the place of renewal. From there, they experienced a major upgrade in intelligence. Suffering served as the diving board into wisdom. It opened up a path to reaching wisdom.
This is a perfectly valid path to wisdom. When you suffer, you can be led to the edge of what you know- of your current reality- and then prodded to dive into the newness of the unknown.
But, this is not the only path. The void does not require that you walk through the land of suffering to reach it. In fact, there is no land of suffering laid out for you to find. It is actually the land of pain that lies next to the void. People only see the land of suffering if they choose to see it.
These things are scary because they push you to the edge and force you to look into the void—the void of uncertainty, the void of the ephemeral nature of your very existence. But what really lies in that void, because it lies in all things, is the massive expanse of universal intelligence. It’s scary because it is vast and powerful beyond human comprehension. It could dangle you by the back of your spaghetti-sauced T-shirt. It could complete your calculus homework in an instant. It could make you cry for your mother (spoiler: it has).
When you meet with this void where intelligence lies, you are forced to question your present ideas about your existence. When you go to the edge, you are on the brink of realizing that some of your current beliefs and ways are wrong, and it is time to change. This is scary because you have rested your very reality on these ways, and you believe that if you give them up, you will die. Of course, each time you say Yes and you choose to trust in the endless void that lies on your path, it takes you to a new path- a better one- and you now can live more than you have ever lived before.
Additionally, there is a poem at the end of this article which describes the experience of going to the edge.
I said in What is a Real Life, ”To experience being real, your life must feel tangible to you.” Now, I would add that this is the opposite of being in the abyss, beyond any grasp. Indeed, I would say that life feels REAL in the VOID, and FAKE in the ABYSS. To be real, and get as close as you can to the void in any given moment (since it is too stressful to connect directly to the void all the time; and note you might not ever connect directly to the void), you must go to the edge of your present awareness, understanding, feelings, and ideas. It is stressful, indeed, but it is a way of being very much alive, and closing in on your potential to contribute to life.
The result of integrating both the light side and the dark side of realness is two approaches I have taken to life: 1) to use my dreams as inspiration for working towards what is important in physical reality; and 2) to focus on what lasts.
I will start with the first approach. For the last few years I have had as an ideal to “make real the void.” It would be more proper and specific to say, “To physically realize the spirit of my dreams.” However, I like to say, “make real the void,” because it is concise, and the void is impersonal, not subject to the personal whims of dreams. To get to the point, the idea is to bring the essence of my highest dreams into physical form. Some of what I dream of cannot necessarily become real in the physical world; or at least, it will not anytime soon. But I can live in a manner which honors the spirit of my dream, while simultaneously conforming to the present state of physical reality where I must. I dream of what inspires me, and use that to work towards what matters. Make real the essence of the dream, realized in the physical world, within certain defined parameters. I honor that untarnished dream, using the means available to me.
I apologize if the previous paragraph is not the clearest in the world. I am not sure I have previously attempted to describe its contents. “To physically realize the spirit of my dreams,” is such a tender and frail thing, which exists on the edge of my ability to articulate it.
The second approach, as I mentioned, is to focus on what lasts. I said the same in my book, but I think what I have to say on this matter now will either be superior to what I said then, or will at least expand upon it substantially. Your efforts in life are best focused upon those things which will outlive you, and especially that which will last much longer than your own lifespan. The longer that anything exists, the more valuable it is. Why? Non-coincidentally, that which exists the longest in this universe also has the most potential to serve the widest-reaching purpose. The beings who brought this planet and its lifeforms (including us) into physical existence sure live longer than us, and they also serve a much wider-reaching purpose than any of us can, as evidenced by the fact that they made an entire planet which quadrillions of lifeforms live on (by the way, I know “quadrillion” is not the biggest number out there, but it has seemed to me superfluous in this article to go beyond that number. The actual reality is that there a quadrillion ants alone on this planet; and, likewise, trillions of bacteria in every human body. The number of bacteria on this planet must be in some number of digits which I've not taken the time to realistically consider.)
Indeed, the things which outlive any individual human, also are far bigger than any individual human. Your maker lives longer than you. So does the environment which sustains you. Your own species will hopefully live longer than you do. The universe will (presumably) last for eons after your physical human body is gone, and consciousness itself will last for at least as long as the universe does (I'd presume longer, but I am not in a position to say for sure). Even the things you build can outlast you, depending on what they are and how you go about building and maintaining them. Likewise, all of these things which outlive you can and will have a wider reach and larger effect on life than you individually ever will. Thus, it logically follows that the “real self” takes a genuine interest in that which outlives itself, as well as everything it takes to sustain and advance that which outlives itself, which is a whole lot of knowledge and skills. What is built should be both long lasting and built for the sake of equilibrium. To summarize simply, I would like to say that to contribute to equilibrium is to be real.
In closing, the most concise definition of “realness” I've conceived of is this: To experience life as the conscious being that you are.
I hope I have done a decent job describing the concepts of “real self” and “realness.” Again, I apologize if this has not been terribly refined, but perhaps it will become so in time.
Consciousness is the part of us which allows us to experience. Without it, a being still might be able to act (as in doing things/taking action), but it would not be aware of itself acting. Consciousness enables us to describe what it is like to take certain actions, and to associate those descriptions with thoughts, feelings, and sensations. We can perceive only the experience of consciousness, and not the entity of consciousness itself.
To develop consciously is to become more aware. This means acknowledgement and recognition of facts, and it leads to more congruent decisions. It doesn't sound like much, but indeed it is. The internal “big picture” of life I have developed has grown immensely in the last few years. My mental model of the world becomes more accurate and more complete the more that I learn.
For many questions I had and problems I noticed as a younger woman, I have found solutions. In large part, this is thanks to meeting Brian in 2020. Whereas my journey up to that point focused on consciousness, his journey centered around improving and becoming self-sufficient in the physical world. Even though I did not have the life experiences to consider the information he shared from a practical standpoint, I had developed the consciousness to see his vision and recognize the value in his message.
One thing I would like to do, starting with this very article, is to form a kind of marriage between my roots and what I have learned from Brian in the last two years. In the last 1.5 years, I have posted rather few words of my own. Even then, most of those words have been “update” type posts or summaries of Brian's words. If I am not mistaken, this article is my first time writing out my own message at length in a long time. I've been concerned that saying too many of my own words will “muddy the waters,” cause confusion, and both dilute and distract from what is important. After reading part of my book again, however, I decided that I ought to let go. The concerns I have had are rather reasonable. However, it is unbecoming of me to be so closed and rigid because of these concerns. That is pretty much the opposite of how I envisioned myself being when I wrote my book. I have wondered how I can openly achieve this vision of “realness” and robustness while heeding the fact that we live in Hell (by our own choice), and humanity has devolved over time. I have considered that the answer is consciousness. It is simpler to focus upon consciousness than it is to directly attack problems which exist “out there.” Indeed, I made the same point in my book. I've never lost touch with this idea, but I know there have been many times in the last two years where I allowed myself to become overwhelmed by external, objective problems as opposed to focusing on the consciousness side of things.
”Focusing on the consciousness side of things” is kind of a complex subject, but only because it's not that common, especially in the context of trying to improve the physical world. I do think it is part of my duty to articulate it as much as possible, for the sake of advancing consciousness.
These days, there is a mainstream idea that humanity ought to utilize supercomputers for the purpose of advancing consciousness, and even try to build conscious computers (i.e. “strong” artificial intelligence) and unite with computers in a sort of technological singularity. Computer nerds and other fools believe this is how our species will “evolve.” I parted ways with this idea in 2016, after a few months of sincere interest in it. The reason the idea is foolish is that it declares humans must become something other than human in order to evolve. It is basically an admission of how terrible our species is, though it fails to acknowledge that this terrible-ness is our own choice and our own fault. The idea of “evolving” via a technological singularity will only drag us even further away from perfection, because it will desecrate our bodies, which were created by beings more intelligent than ourselves. This idea of letting computers do all of our thinking for us, becoming part computer, or even outright replacing ourselves with computers is an assertion that not only did our makers not do a good enough job of making us, but we can do even better than they did! It's not just that this level of hubris would deny the existence of a higher power: it would also drag down our consciousness, even while we presume that we're advancing consciousness.
There will probably just be pointless bickering on this subject until we define what it means to advance consciousness. The meaning of “improving the physical world” also needs to be defined. Especially for the latter, this is why I have recently spent so much time thinking about equilibrium, and would like to set it as the highest priority in matters regarding the physical world, as well as the most important in general. I will talk more about improving the physical world when I write about equilibrium. As for “Advancing consciousness,” this is obviously more abstract, and starts with a few basic questions about what our jurisdiction is. Are we trying to advance the absolute potential of human consciousness, or merely achieve the potential endowed to human consciousness by those who made it? Likewise, are we trying to advance consciousness for the entire universe, or just for our own planet and species?
Though I am not 100% certain on this matter, I would presume that we can achieve only the potential which our makers made possible for us, much like a computer is limited to what its hardware is built for and what its software is programmed to do. Then you might argue that we are like machines and our makers like builders. Well, we are tools, and we are their tools.
As for whom we advance consciousness for, it would be simple to say that we can do so only for ourselves, but I would like to elaborate here. Keep in mind God's purpose, which is to figure out who he is. He created the universe for this purpose, because via the universe he can run trillions and quadrillions of simulations, all of which provide him with data. Now, we don't want to jump billions of tiers in the hierarchy and proclaim that we are directly helping God, when we are supposed to focus directly only on our own maker. However, (1) I've considered this as a last resort and (2) we can feed experiential data to our maker, just as he feeds data to his own maker, and so on and so forth, all the way up the chain to God. So we can indirectly help God, though we're just one of quadrillions of beings who do so; on top of that, we are amongst the dumbest beings who do so, hehe! But it doesn't mean we can't do anything noteworthy or intriguing. Indeed, it would be intriguing if humanity was to turn around now, so late in the game, and finally get its act together! Based on what Brian has told me, this would be a relatively rare occurrence the universe. It's more common for a species' outcome to match the general trajectory it followed all along-- either transcendence or self-destruction.
I mentioned wanting to form a marriage between my roots- my focus on the subjective- and what I have learned from Brian, which is largely objective, physical world information.
On our journeys, I primarily followed the subjective side, he the objective side. He's the one who actually figured out the physically implemented solutions, but my path still endowed me with receptiveness to the divine Energy paradigm. So that's how a multidisciplinary tradesman and some girl from a white-collar background came together for common cause and understanding. I should note this is not a mere intersection of objective and subjective, but a union-- hence my immersion in learning the metalworking disciplines (mainly machining) in the last year. Both objective and subjective – physical and consciousness – must be mastered to achieve complete success.
I'll share a few relevant quotes from What is a Real Life?:
“Objective reality and subjective reality can create nearly the same results if followed to their logical ends. You can improve the world by going to work on the world itself or by going to work on yourself. Wherever you place the perceptual emphasis, though, you are merely placing emphasis: you cannot exclude the other side. You cannot improve yourself much if you live in an outer Hell, nor can you do much to help the world if your internal life is in shambles. Maybe you can achieve something of substance, but as long as one of these lags far behind the other, your ability to improve either one will be limited.”
“Your only enemies are the parts of yourself that hold you back. You must face only your own complacency and delusion.”
“It seems that at the highest levels of consciousness, subjective and objective understanding converge into one higher form of understanding.”
Brian also taught me about something which may be both a substance which encapsulates and a bridge between the objective and the subjective (at least, as we humans know the objective and the subjective on Earth in our own experience). That “substance” is the ethereal plane, which is synonymous with both frequency and vibration. Living in conscious awareness and use of the ethereal plane, for the purpose of achieving equilibrium (and beyond), is one of the goals of my and Brian's work. it is also unavoidably part of the means of reaching that goal. It can't not be, since it is both in and around every thing on the planet, including you.
I will be honest that I saved this part for last, this article is over 10,000 words now, and this subject might need another 10,000 words of its own to get right. That's not to say nothing has been written on this subject, but I think the combination of timeliness and best interest dictates that I go into depth on this subject at another time. Until then, I will direct you to Chapter 7 and Chapter 5 of Brian's book, which discusses ethereal plane technology, and a section of What is a Real Life? titled, “Immersion.”
At heart, completeness calls for the need to account for everything in reality. The goal, with completeness, is to find and implement solutions which can improve every aspect of life (at least, all the “real” ones!). In completeness we seek to address ultimate causes, not merely mask symptoms. The goal is completeness in every aspect of life, to form one complete picture.
A higher power, purity, “realness,” and consciousness all are required for the attainment of completeness and are essential to completeness in itself. Regarding a higher power, the way I have defined the void (everything and the relationships between everything) is synonymous with completeness.
These principles exist together. For what is real is what is in consciousness, and purity of intent is required to reach the real self, just as the real self is best as sustaining purity of intent. Consciousness, at its most conscious, knows that it both is and is born from a higher power. Deliberate intent, born from consciousness, is needed to form and stand by pure intentions. And of course, the real self is the most conscious. It is a real, conscious, pure self, in reverence to a higher power, whom can comprehend and realize completeness.
An incomplete context is the root illness of all misery on Earth. The cure is completeness. This means that we must take everything into account in our worldview, and consider the effects of everything on everything else. The failure to do this is a major factor in how we have fallen so far out of equilibrium with our planetary environment.
Everything is the great humbler. Contemplating the effects of everything on everything else can quickly dissolve dysfunctional, fixated, “tunnel vision” thought processes. Such contemplation brings into view how allowing ourselves to be led by emotion is useless. What does guilt achieve, for instance? It is tempting to feel guilt at how much wrong has been done, and is still being done. However, guilt is not great at inspiring effective, long-term, sustainable solutions. Instead, guilt is more likely to cause rash, desperate decisions. Do you think Earth was created as a result of its makers feeling guilt? I cannot say for sure, but I doubt it. Instead of guilt, purpose and facts can fuel action.
“The effects of everything on everything else” is quite similar to what I have said of the void. Indeed, everything exists in relationship to everything else. The ability to consider these relationships and act accordingly, is what I generally like to think of as intelligence.
Completeness leads directly to the other development I have thought about extensively in the last month, which is equilibrium. This article is over 11,000 words long, so rather than write about equilibrium here, I will give it its own space. I am concerned about this making the present article “anti-climactic” when it still has so much potential energy. But I think it is time to move on. I cannot say for certain how I will go about this, nor when I will get it done. Part of the complexity in writing about equilibrium is that it actually started with me planning out the Equilibrium Archive, which was strictly going to include physical world problems and solutions. But, it turned into much more, to the point where I considered that equilibrium may in fact be the highest ideal in all aspects of life, and is the principle I have been looking for all along. I am looking forward to sharing my thoughts, though believe it or not, that subject will probably be even more complex than what I've written here. It's worth it, though!
Again, I am trying to achieve what has never been done before by humanity on Earth, which is to establish planetary equilibrium. Because taking right actions starts with right consciousness, it is necessary to lay a solid, accurate, precise, and complete spiritual foundation which our species can rely upon. The key is that a solid spiritual foundation should and will enable a person to take a proactive stance in life, rather than a merely defensive one. It generally is more desirable to be on the offensive than the defensive side.
In addition to the propaganda and dominant social norms which degrade purity, I think one reason why humans easily spite purity is that it is primarily a thing to defend, not to create. Purity ultimately is endowed upon us and our planet by a higher power, and we choose whether to defend it or violate it and let it go. Something which can only be defended and not improved upon once it has been created is fragile. Glass is a fine example: once a glass product has been created to completion, whether it is a glass drinking cup or a glass window, it can only be defended from damage-- there is no improving upon the glass form. Glass which is not defended will get scratched, cracked, and broken. Purity is the same way, and humanity is largely content to shatter that glass.
I would not ever say that we should just forget about purity. But I would like to think that equilibrium will provide a more compelling ideal to aim for, and purity will naturally be defended in the process.
So, in case you are wondering why I recently have spent so much time on seemingly philosophical matters when I could be talking about and producing the technical solutions to physical equilibrium, there is your answer. In order to solve our problems completely, I must implement a complete solution. “Holistic health” starts with healing both consciousness and the physical environment. I know I have to do both, or else I will achieve neither. That's what completeness and equilibrium are all about.
When I discussed the dark side of realness, I said that the experience could be well summarized with a poem. I wrote this after going running on May 27 2022. Though running is a rather individualistic activity, it encourages me to acknowledge and accept everything that I face, both within and “out there” in the world. Indeed, a failure to make this acknowledgement slows my pace, even though this is more comfortable mentally.
The run is a time when all conflict shines
hidden in the recesses of your mind
just beneath the nose of your awareness.
For the mind does impose pain upon the body
in order to escape its own.
The only way out
to live in the open of all fear and uncertainty,
all sorrow and loss,
All it desires is acknowledgement
Not to be covered with vapid platitudes
Not to be blocked out with substances
Nor tuned out by falsehood.
Face down the fears,
though the problems they represent have not been resolved.
Acknowledge every uncertainty, though it may take great effort to do so.
It will leave you tender, raw, in sorrow and pain,
But you will come undone,
and in spite of all- because of all- run onward.