Satya(the practice of truthfulness), my impressions after 6 years of practice.

Facebook archive. First published on 2019-11-18.

I will begin with the fact that over roughly six years, speaking the truth completely turned out to be very difficult. There were several cases in which I did violate satya: I lied so as not to offend a person

I lied to avoid critical consequences

I lied so that the situation would not escalate; in fact this was related both to offending a person and to critical consequences.

I could not come up with a solution that would help me avoid lying and protect me from the consequences. But then the skill came. The idea is fairly simple, and perhaps this too is a lie, but outwardly the principle of satya is observed clearly. I am talking about light manipulation. Suppose it is necessary to hide some information, but one cannot lie directly; if You speak and make the decision about what You will say, then You will have to lie, but if You give the initiative to the interlocutor, then he will act as he is accustomed to and will lie to himself instead of You. I will give an example from the realm of extremes:

The second logical but very strong observation is that we do not need the truth; we have lost the habit of it. And we have lost the habit so much that sometimes it reaches absurdity. What matters to us is how exactly something is said, not what exactly is said. If you calmly tell a stranger that his back is on fire. He will not pay attention until it becomes hot. But if you shout: “My God, your back is on fire!” — then even those whose backs are not on fire will start turning around, and some will even start screaming and asking to be put out, although the information had nothing to do with them.

The discoveries are simple, and manipulations of this kind have been used for a very long time, especially in the media and politics. But now I understand where the legs of these manipulations grow from.

The third observation I would call philosophical. It is deeper and hides behind our egoism, which is why it is invisible. It is lying to oneself. We do not live in the real world; we live in a little box of bone connected to the 5D media system of our sense organs. Reality is inaccessible to us, and besides, why would we need to understand that we are in a little box all our life? Therefore we tune our 5D media system so that it always broadcasts subjective reality to us.

And for this we do not need facts; as in the case of the burning back, the special effects of the media system are important to us. The brain receives one third of its information from the sense organs, and it builds the other two thirds itself. Agree, it would be strange if these two thirds did not contain a subjective assessment, a patina of worldview, and conclusions based on our, often meager, experience. But since this is our inner lie, it does not bother us and does not seem false. When I was writing these lines I had to invent the word truther, a kind of antagonism to the word liar.

How surprised I was when I learned that such a word exists. But after all, I invented it, and in my system of truths this word did not exist, because for a long stretch of time I had no need of it. I suppose it is this way with everything we do not need: what is not needed does not exist. The virtuality of our world should be sought not in quantum effects, but in psychological ones.

If one thinks about the virtuality of what is happening, and about oneself as the creator of this virtuality, it becomes uncomfortable. After all, all the events that happen have been lived by us only once, and the reaction to these events was most likely not correct. One can enter Groundhog Day and each time make it completely new, merely by adjusting the settings of one's worldview. But if one turns to memory and tries to understand what formed our worldview, and tries to change it there, in the past.

And to conduct a simulation of events with a changed worldview from the past, the personality begins to fall apart. Personality is the sum of lived experience and worldview, and if worldview is some random characteristic dependent on subjective experience, then experience loses its relevance entirely, because it is always subjective and is strung onto worldview. But with the weakening of personality, our consciousness does not disappear anywhere.

Peace and goodness to You.