Resurrection at a Time Convenient to Oneself – intentions

Resurrection at a Time Convenient to Oneself – intentions

In the series Citadel, the phrase was spoken: “I do not trust those resurrected at a time convenient to themselves.” Contextually, the subject may be interesting because one can observe within it a certain pattern advantageous to those who resurrected, theoretically resurrected, or theoretically died.

In many mythologies and religious systems, the motif of returning to life appears not as an immediate act, but after a specific period of transition, suspension, or concealment. In ancient cultures such a period often held symbolic meaning — connected with transformation, descent into the underworld, the rhythm of nature, and the cycle of death and rebirth. Thus, the statement about “distrust toward those resurrected at a time convenient to themselves” may be interpreted as a reflection upon who controls the moment of return, revelation, or regaining of influence, and for what purpose.

The motif of death and return to life after a specified period appears in many religions and mythologies, although two issues should be distinguished:
• actual ancient sources,
• later interpretations and popular simplifications.

The popular claim that “many gods resurrected exactly after three days” is partly the product of modern comparative interpretations. In many cases, sources speak rather about a cycle of death and rebirth, descent into the underworld, or a period of transition, without precisely indicating “three days” as in the case of Jesus Christ.

The most frequently cited examples:
• Osiris — Egyptian god of death and rebirth. He was killed and dismembered, then restored to existence by Isis. However, there is no unambiguous ancient source stating exactly three days.
• Dumuzid / Tammuz — deity connected with the cycle of vegetation. He descends into the underworld and returns seasonally. The motif of rebirth is strong, but there is no classic “3 days.”
• Adonis — associated with the cycle of death and renewal of nature. In some versions he spends part of the year in the underworld and part among the living.
• Dionysus — in part of the Orphic tradition he is killed and reborn. Later interpretations attempted to connect him with the motif of resurrection.
• Attis — the cult of Attis contained rituals of death and rebirth. During the Roman period mourning was observed and then followed by a celebration of renewed life; some later interpretations speak about symbolic three days.
• Baal — dies and returns, symbolizing cycles of drought and fertility.

It is worth noting that the number three held enormous symbolic significance in many cultures:
• fullness of process,
• transition,
• ending of an old state and beginning of a new one,
• rhythm of initiation,
• symbolic “time in-between.”

Therefore the motif of “three days” appears in rites of passage, mysteries, and stories of transformation even when it does not literally concern biological resurrection.

Historians of religion often emphasize that:
• archetypal similarities between religions do exist,
• but many popular internet comparisons exaggerate or oversimplify the analogies between them.

“Resurrection at a Convenient Time” – intentions

Authors: Sławomir Majda, Małgorzata Krata, Adam Żak. The identical recurring fragment, forming the core of the idea, is as follows:“of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment”.

Organized freeing oneself from burdens – links to texts, information about recordings, working with intentions, the bow technique >Link.

Technical issues concerning the idea and the construction of sentences when working with intentions.
Art. “800 intentions for cleansing” Link.“One-sentence scheme for intentions.”Link.
Film “The bow after performing intentions” Link.

The word “–not” added to some word while working with intentions means that it is worth expressing it also in its opposite, or even finding and saying aloud any synonyms that come to mind together with their opposites. For example — when saying: being poor, being sick, it is good to say it also with its opposite:–being poor, being sick, –not being poor, not being sick. This allows you to move a given pattern as broadly as possible, touching different aspects, including its opposite. It is also worth knowing that Souls often think or claim that they do not have such opposite patterns — for example, that they are not idolaters in a given case (in a given word). Another example: A woman’s Soul denies ever being a bad mother. Therefore, adding here the negating form — not being a bad mother — may allow her to understand the state she is in. Being a bad mother, –not being a bad mother–“—Oh, absolutely not, never in my life! These are certainly not my patterns. What I do is my private matter.” [—The Soul very often says or thinks this about itself.]

1. of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, trust, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from God Himself, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this,

2. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from all genders of humans, Souls, beings, entities, constructs, animals, plants, extraterrestrials and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this,

4. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, all kinds, meanings, species, genders and forms of existence of, among others, active and inactive deities, goddesses, divine mothers, divine fathers, divine sons, divine daughters, divine families, Goa’ulds, associates of God, gods, demigods, Asuras, Saints, gurus, masters, teachers, Messiahs, angels, including astral among others Archangels, cherubim, seraphim, astrals, rulers, administrators, owners and creators of astral worlds and soul trees, prophets, and environments acting independently or through intermediaries and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this,

5. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, physical and astral snakes, worms, predators, viruses, pests, fungi, mold, insects, microorganisms, bacteria, microorganisms and macroorganisms, reptiles, parasites, symbionts, inhabitants of our and others’ energetics, as well as from, among others, all spirits, demons, strzygas, possessing entities, mythical creatures, mythical beings and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this,

6. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, our and others’ all kinds of miracle workers, healers, folk healers, bioenergy therapists, doctors of body and Soul, of miraculous divine healings, from owners, administrators, fanatics and structures of various initiatory practices, among others religious, parareligious and such as Reiki, from witches, magicians, shamans, visionaries, oracles, from signs in heaven and on earth, from sorceresses, sorcerers, from magic, from elements, yogis, tantrics, and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this,

7. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, all those establishing criteria of purity, guilt, merit and readiness, including the enlightened, those enlightening, whitening and correspondingly blackening themselves and others, among others humans, Souls, beings, parts of our and others’ Soul and being, from those striving for nirvana, for salvation, liberation, redemption, achieving them, from admirers and creators of all astral compressions, all heavens, hells, paradises, purgatories, astral worlds and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this,

8. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, all atheists, agnostics, heretics, followers of Baháʼí, tribal religions, polytheism, animism, totemism, Taoism, Shintō, Sikhism, Jainism, ahimsa, Ayyavazhi, followers of Wicca, followers of Buddhism, druidism, voodoo, Theravāda, Mahāyāna, Chan, Zen, Sŏn, Amidism, Pure Land School, Tendai, Shingon, Tibetan Buddhism, Nyingma, Kagyu, Sakya, Jonang, Gelug, Bon and not only, as well as from their priests, creators, followers, promoters and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

9. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, Jesus, the Apostles, the Church Fathers, All Saints, the Our Father, the Holy Spirit, as well as, among others, followers, creators, priests and administrators of all Christian sects, among others Old Catholicism, the Utrecht Churches, national churches, Mariavitism, Catholicism, Eastern Catholicism, Greek Catholicism, the Roman Catholic Church, sedevacantism, conclavism, Palmarianism, Lefebvrists, Anglicanism, Orthodoxy, from Byzantine churches, Orthodox churches, Old Believers, Popovtsy, Bezpopovtsy, Skoptsy, Old Calendarists, Oriental churches, Copts, Syriacs, Assyrian churches, Adventists, Millerism, Anabaptism, followers of Arianism, Baptism, Moravian Brethren, Plymouth Brethren, Hussitism, Calvinism, Congregationalism, Presbyterianism, Quakers, Lutheranism, Mennonitism, Methodism, Pentecostalism, Salvationism, Unitarianism, Waldensians, Amish, Restorationism, the Bábí movement, Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Association of Free Bible Students, Holy Missionary Movements, followers of Unitarianism, Mormons, Churches of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Community of Christ, Afro-Christianity such as Aladura, Harrism, Kimbanguism, Lumba and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

10. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, followers, creators, priests and administrators of, among others, cosmologies, ascetic practices, concepts of purity and defilement, enslavement, including, among others, Jainism, Digambaras, Sthanakavasis, Śvetāmbaras, Gnostics, followers of Manichaeism, Mandaeism, from all branches and sects, among others, Vaishnavism, Krishnaism, Shaivism, Lingayats, Shaktism, Mazdaism, Persian religions, Mazdakism, Mithraism and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this 11. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from followers, creators, priests and administrators of the world of Islam, among others Alawites, Alevis, Kharijites, Sunnis, Shiites, Imamis, Ismailis, Zaydis, followers of Sufism, Ahmadiyya, Black Islam, Moors, the Nation of Islam, Druzism, Ahl-e-Haqq, Zikris, scripturalism, Quranism, Yazidism and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

12. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, promoters, creators, priests and followers of all sects and factions of Judaism, among others Falashas called Black Jews, Messianic Judaism including Hasidic, Conservative, Orthodox, Progressive, Reconstructionist Judaism, Karaimism, Mosaicism, Samaritanism and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

13. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, creators, organizers, administrators and followers of so-called new religious, spiritual and parareligious movements, charismatic such as, among others, Bábism, Baháʼí, Cheondoism, Cao Dai, Shakers, Cargo Cults, Falun Gong, Modekngei, New Age, Realism, Rastafari, Scientology, Quan Yin Method, Wicca, “I Am,” Asatru, Hellenism, Slavic Native Faith, International Intelligent Yoga, Transcendental Meditation, Divine Light Mission, International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Neo-Sannyas (Osho), Radha Soami, Sathya Sai Baba, Swaminarayan Faith, Harrism, Confucianism, Santería, Sikhism, Shinto, Taoism, Zoroastrianism and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

14. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from promoters, creators, priests, administrators and followers of all, among others, beliefs, religions, sects and factions, as well as inhabitants of supercontinents, continents and prehistoric, primal and mythical lands such as, among others, Pangaea, Gondwana, Atlantis, Lemuria, Mu, Gobi, native religions of Africa, Australia, Oceania, Asia, Europe, the Americas and other places on Earth and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

14. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, all kinds of tyrants, despots, sociopaths, executioners, terrorists, blackmailers, judges, lawyers, prosecutors, accusers, masters, rulers, superiors, supervisors, employers, co-workers, clients, payers, manipulators, hypnotists, kings, princes, courts, advisors, messengers, notaries, secretaries, structures of state, religious and administrative authority, as well as from all creators and promoters of various destructive inventions and practices, including such as implanted substances, viruses, parasites, bio-robots, artifacts, as well as games and plays such as Jumanji, the Infinity Stones, the Rings of Power, Game of Thrones and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

15. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from all kinds of civilizations, among others carbon-based, silicon-based, crystalline, energetic, material, as well as, among others, all planets, constellations, cosmos, stars, moons, comets, asteroids, galaxies, cosmic dust, black holes, suns, celestial bodies, from their movements, positions, influences, among others gravitational, energetic, radioactive and symbolic, as well as all, among others, their owners, administrators, creators, tenants, users and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

16. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from all kinds, sizes and meanings of our and others’, among others, amulets, talismans, garments, artifacts, gadgets, objects and instruments, plasma, musical, magical and non-magical, from rings, seals, wands, elixirs, herbs, smokes, incenses, songs, mantras, sacred texts, plants, animals, divination methods, rituals, superstitions, from Holy Communion, from offerings made to someone or something, devotional items, images, figures, sculptures, paintings, states of intoxication, sacraments, drugs, sweets, addictions, alcohols, spiritual and physical ecstasies, shamanism, mysticism, all utopias, escape from reality or submission to promises of fulfillment, salvation, power or perfection and not only, as well as, among others, all kinds of their creators, promoters, owners, users, beneficiaries and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

17. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from all kinds, sizes and meanings of, among others, all forms and causes of enslavements, confinements, entanglements such as, among others, nets, ropes, chains, leashes, collars, cells, prisons, cages, hooks, stocks, restraints, pyramids, protomolecules, structures operating openly or covertly, temporarily or permanently, locally or systemically, their equivalents, substitutes and not only, as well as all, among others, their enthusiasts, creators, promoters, beneficiaries, victims, guards, witnesses and followers and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

18. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from all kinds and sizes of, among others, rituals, cults, nominations, anointments, permissions, guidelines, agreements, oaths, promises, contracts, orders, prohibitions, bonds, missions, vows, pacts, acts, arrangements, treaties, other forms of formal or symbolic binding of will, functioning through granting binding power to a given word, gesture or act, through sanctioning obedience and disobedience, regulating access, status and responsibility, reinforcing dependencies through promise, threat, reward or punishment, as well as normalizing subordination as law, duty, mission or destiny and not only, as well as all, among others, their creators, promoters, beneficiaries, priests, guards, victims, witnesses and followers and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

19. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from our own and others’, including licensed, among others, guards, verifiers, collectors, mediators, bailiffs, intermediaries, witnesses, creators, founders, security personnel, representatives of opposition, censors, promoters, beneficiaries, victims of our and others’ actions, intentions, manifestations and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

20. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, all kinds, sizes, meanings, genders, races, species of, among others, parents, caregivers, dependents, teachers, spouses, lovers, children, siblings, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles, cousins, entire lineages, families, communities, social strata, grandfathers, grandmothers, relatives and non-relatives, from persons of the same or different gender, as well as from our and others’, among others, elements of physical and energetic structure, organs, tissues, cells, atoms, converters, systems and assemblies, biological, physical, chemical, energetic, clock-based, digital, their mechanisms of operation, feedback loops and boundary states, all programs controlling them at all levels, spaces, planes, elements and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

21. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, beliefs, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from all kinds, meanings, ranks, levels, genders of, among others, associations, brotherhoods, communities, communes, schools, unions, organizations, collective structures, including, among others, administrative, military, civil, secular, medical, financial, religious, messianic, spiritual, economic, public, political, criminal, intelligence, sexual, drug-related, alcoholic, state, global, cosmic, multidimensional, spacetime and not only, and not experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

22. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, weather, nature, elements, the time of day and night, the season, date, calendars, astrology, astronomy, numerology, meteorology, ambient temperature, pressure, frequencies, cycles, colors, sounds, rhythms, vibrations, humidity, the height of the Sun in the sky, from the factor of time and not only, and experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

23. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, our and others’ codings, from thought-forms, blockages, burdens, patterns, points of view, ways of understanding, from entanglements, crosses and karmic knots, from karmic figures, relationships, schemes, from conspiracies of silence, from planetary cycles, from the wheel of karma, from the wheel of fortune, from flat and spatial geometric figures, from anomalies, from mirror reflections, from fate, chance, accumulation, from lotteries, statistics, feedback loops, from luck, bad luck, curses, spells, letters, words, signs, symbols, digits, numbers, alphabets, mandalas, tattoos, from confirmation effects, from repositories of burdens and patterns, from determinants, ornaments, chips, injuries, disabilities, diseases, from emptiness, vacuum, nothingness in the mind and life, as well as from their producers, promoters, victims, beneficiaries and not only, and experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

24. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this through the normalization of the role of the human and the Soul as an object of worship, in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity, intentions and correspondingly their absence from, among others, our own and, through us, others’ all idolatrous figures, acts, intentions, designs, patterns, habits, as well as from those who pray to us as to gods, to deities, to beings not of this world, to masters, Saints, to the enlightened, to astral beings; as well as from those treating us, or others, as intermediaries to God, intermediaries to all deities, goddesses; as well as from those worshipping us, praising us, adoring us; as well as from those who pray for us to deities, goddesses, extraterrestrials in our name, in our matters, for our good, and correspondingly from those who curse us in prayers, cast curses and spells, who want to take revenge in all ways and not only, and experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

25. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from all, among others, varieties, associations, groups, circles, ideological, ritual and operational currents, among others demonic, satanic, Luciferian, war-related, military, magical, black-magical, tantric, black-tantric, white-astral, flame groups, the Left-Hand Path, as well as from, among others, battle shock, from pogroms, turmoil, from black suns, necromancers, beings of gloom, beings of darkness, forces of evil, demons, rulers of hells, guardian devils, Cainites, Satan, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Kali, strzygas, beings and Souls that have fallen, horned, rebellious, deceitful, aggressive beings, filled with pride, egoism and not only, and experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

26. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from all kinds, sizes, races, meanings and genders of conditions connected with sexuality, drive, role and behavior, including, among others, sex addicts, lesbians, gays, transvestites, rapists, sadomasochists, celibates, eunuchs, brothel madams, pimps, prostitutes, deviants, perverts, pedophiles, zoophiles, coprophiles, coprophages, incestuous persons, pansexuals, hormonal cycles, from inbreeding and not only, and experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

27. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this because of, among others, our and others’ actions connected with the End of the World, in the period of 2012, with other Ends of the World, with the search for God and ultimate meaning, with Apocalypses, Armageddons, with the ends of civilizations, epochs, orders, with our and God’s actions in the area of the cosmic egg and during subsequent Aeons, with creating or blocking extraordinary actions, as well as through cyclical resetting of meanings, responsibility and identity in the face of an expected or postponing end, new beginning or rebirths and not only, and experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

28. and of our own and, through us, caused in others, for all reasons and by all means, building a pattern of controlled disappearance and return, in which presence and absence become tools of influence upon others, while the moment of reappearance becomes subordinated to one’s own benefit, advantage, or emotional effect; accordingly inscribing within the psyche a pattern of “symbolic death,” in which the former identity is abandoned or concealed in order to return in a new form, with a new narrative, new role, or new authority, organizing around oneself the belief that disappearance increases the value of return, and that absence may build tension, longing, myth, or emotional submission; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of selective self-revelation to the world, in which becoming visible turns into a strategy of managing influence rather than a natural manifestation of presence, and building within relationships a dynamic in which others remain in a state of waiting, uncertainty, or suspension while the returning person retains control over the moment of contact, explanation, or “revelation”; accordingly reinforcing the mechanism of withdrawing from responsibility, conflict, or consequences, and then returning only when conditions become safer, more advantageous, or more favorable for regaining position, and being reborn after crisis in a way that does not lead to integration of experience, but rather to the creation of a new version of oneself cut off from previous consequences; accordingly reinforcing the belief that suffering, downfall, or the “death of the old self” automatically grants authority, uniqueness, or moral superiority over others, thereby building myths about one’s own transformation in which the very act of return becomes more important than the truth about what occurred during the time of absence; accordingly organizing collective imagination around the archetype of the returning savior, renewer, or being transcending death, which may lead both to hope and to susceptibility to idealization and idolatry, and reinforcing the mechanism in which communities more easily accept those who return after a period of absence if their return fits within a familiar ritual, symbol, or expected cultural pattern, developing the need to give suffering a narrative structure ending in triumph, so that chaos, loss, and death may psychologically be transformed into a myth of meaning and rebirth; accordingly building a pattern of spiritual or social authority based upon the experience of “crossing the boundary,” after which the returning person begins functioning as someone transformed, chosen, or possessing special access to truth, causing within the psyche the inscription of fascination with beings who “return,” because symbolically they represent victory over disintegration, transience, and fear of the end; accordingly surrendering to God the need to control the moment of one’s own and others’ revelation, return, transformation, and regaining of influence, with the intention of seeing where “resurrection” or expansion becomes an authentic process of transformation, and where it instead becomes a mechanism of building advantage, hypnotic myth, or re-entry into reality at the most convenient moment and not only, all this in dependence and correspondingly in independence from, among others, the will, guidelines, opinions, actions, commands, resolutions, suggestions, inspirations, graces, generosity and correspondingly their absence from, among others, our Soul, our entire being and not only, as well as from being healthy or physically ill, energetically stable or unstable or mentally-psychically ill, curably ill, or chronically, or incurably ill, as well as from being disabled persons, persons with injuries, persons ailing, directly ill or having symptoms or karmic effects, inbred effects, among others, of various diseases, ailments, infirmities, from genetic, epigenetic, environmental burdens and not only, and experiencing that which is our own and, through us, caused in others, all effects of this

Opublikowano: 13/05/2026
Autor: Sławomir Majda
Kateogrie: Religions, priests, sects, idolatry, vows.

Comments