Emerald

I don't dismiss outright the existence of psychic phenomenon. It makes sense to me how someone could potentially read the energy of a person, place, object, or situation to make predictions about the most likely trajectory. It especially makes sense from the non-dual perspective, as everything is one thing and that one thing is also yourself and also creates all of existence. It would make sense to me to think that, if everything projects from your true nature, then those who are not blocked from this aspect of themselves may experience premonitions and visions. So, I don't write off Teal Swan's claim that she is psychic due to the fact that her work has been incredibly helpful to me at particular times in my life, and that I truly don't know what another person's experience is or if they truly are or are not experiencing psychic phenomena. But I do know that she reads situations and people incredibly well, even in lieu of psychic abilities. So, I don't dismiss her predictions of how things may go down in the near future. It makes sense to me how things could come to pass in the way that she predicted. Also, earlier in the thread, I mentioned the entirety of her prediction. I'm sure that it's on page one or two. I personally believe that Teal Swan still very much has an ego. She's very attached to her identity and her work, and takes it very personally when she feels attacked. This is very normal and human, but given my past experiences, I sincerely doubt that someone who has no ego would truly care about these things. Or (in what I consider a less likely scenario) she may have no ego and may be pretending to care about these slights to her character simply to be more relatable and to dis-spell doubts in her own credibility and to discount her critics. It would be very calculated and a very manipulative PR move, but it's a small possibility as well. This is why I don't trust her despite all the help she's given me. She has a serpentine kind of way about her and her energy is very off-putting. It's a big reason why many people have an aversion to her. So, if her intention is to be a cult leader, her prediction does feed right into that. This is why I would not inhabit the same city as her, despite the fact that she lives in Costa Rica. But I still can't help but notice that her prediction seems to be potentially coming to fruition. This doesn't necessarily mean she's psychic... she could just have knowledge of human patterns throughout history and make an educated guess from that. Either way, it makes sense to me how things could go down that road. So, I cannot dismiss the possibility in its entirety as just smoke and mirrors to gain a more loyal cult following. Though it may very well be.

I begrudgingly admit, it is. But I didn't hide her name to protect her from scrutiny or anything like that. If a person claims to have psychic abilities but does not, then they should have their credibility called into question. But I did it for two reason, one a bit selfish the other less so. The first reason (the more selfish one), is because I know that many people don't like her and see her as a con artist, and will write off my own credibility if I take what she says seriously in any way. I also don't want to associate myself with her too much due to the fact that I don't always feel comfortable about her myself, and given that I am also a YouTuber who speaks on the topic of spirituality I would not want to give endorsement to the validity of her psychic abilities if I don't actually know if she really has those abilities. The second reason is because I feel a little weird keeping this information to myself if it happens to actually be true. If I keep it to myself, and the issue does come to fruition in the way she described, then I would feel very negatively that I didn't tell anyone about it. So, it was just simpler to keep the teacher's identity low key to not color anyone's expectations of the prediction to give it in a more neutral manner.

I'll definitely let you know if we decide to go. I still hope that it doesn't come to that. But I definitely have thought of the scenario the U.S. immigrants would not be super welcome in other countries if such a situation happens. However, I also have a confidence that most Americans would not have the idea right away to move, let alone to move to anything but another first world nation. So, most would set their sights on Canada as a first case resort. It's easier to immigrate there too. You only need $17000 or have worked in the U.S. for at least one year over the course of the past ten years and have procured a job for when you move to Canada. Also, you must have no criminal record. So, it's a lot easier to qualify for permanent resident status there, and all we would need is to get full-time employment to be there long term and legally. The only reason why I wouldn't necessarily want to go there is because they may end up involved in a large scale conflict despite being a country known for non-involvement n war. Also, Americans would be breaking down the doors there if an emergency were to happen.

I got all our passports renewed back in December and received them in January. I looked into several places in Central/South America. Costa Rica was the one that seemed the most stable and friendly. To immigrate there as a Rentista, I would have to have either a guaranteed $1000 a month coming in or $60,000 to put in the bank. Neither of which do we have. However, we do have a sizable nest egg put aside should we need to take an emergency vacation there and stay until we make further plans. And currently, the cost of living there is somewhat less than the cost of living here in Florida. So, our savings could probably sustain us for several months while we find out a way to make ends meet. The good thing is that both American and Hungarian citizens (my husband is a Hungarian citizen) can go there for up to a period of 90 days without a Visa. It's actually a very tourist friendly place. In fact, many Americans live there but just go out of the country for a few days every couple months to no exceed the 90 day rule. Though it is discouraged, some people have been doing this for decades. So, the plan is not to move right away but to lay low there and make plans at a safer location than here, if it comes down to it. I would hate to have to pull my daughter out of school. But if it becomes a matter of our personal safety, then we will do what we have to. Also, I took 3 years of Spanish in high school and pick up on languages easily if I'm exposed to them. My husband is also good with learning languages (he is fluent in English) and has immigrated to and worked in both Israel and America. He came here 16 years ago with only $30 in his pocket. He is a permanent resident in America now, but it took him a long time to get his green card, so he had to find ways to work in the interim between when his Visa expired and when he got his permanent resident status. So, I'm confident that we could both make it if we really needed to.

That is true. And I have been doing a tremendous amount of useless worrying. But I also want to remain vigilant so that I can make wise decisions regarding my family's safety. So, it can't hurt to have a plan and to know the signs of when it is wise to leave. Though it is true that I've been biting my nails about it. This would be relevant, if I believed that the world were coming to an end through complete nuclear warfare. In that case, I would just have to accept the situation and let go. But I don't really believe this... though of course there's always a chance. But this is something I have no control over, so I'm not even devoting any thought to it. I am not concerned so much about the total decimation of the human race, because if it happens it is meant to happen. What I fear is for war and devastation to show up at my doorstep and to cause much destruction here and abroad, but not a complete and total apocalypse. I want to be aware enough to protect my family if there is a means to do so. My fears are much more grounded in history, as there are constantly situations of upheaval and warfare peppered throughout human history. It would be silly to believe that my country is immune simply because the United States has not been afflicted too much in the recent past by attacks or extreme economic disasters, barring the 9/11 attack and the economic collapses of the early 2000s. This is why I am considering a move to a neutral country that is far away from potential conflicts and not just accepting the inevitable decimation of the human race. I don't believe that we're there yet.

This passage reminds me of a parable that I heard a while back. I don't remember it perfectly, so I may get it wrong. There were three men of God walking in the forest when they saw a tiger on the path. The first man said, "I am one with the tiger", and continued toward the tiger. The tiger ate him. The second man thought, the tiger got him because he had weak faith. He also continued toward the tiger. The tiger also ate him. The third man of God escaped the tiger, for it was he who was truly wise and recognized God in all things. or there is a Christian joke that resembles this parable. There was a ship wreck in the middle of the ocean. There was only one man who survived, who was floating on an old piece of wood. He prayed to Jesus, "Jesus, please come and save me!" Suddenly there appeared a large ship to save the man. They threw him a life-saver. The man refused. He said, "No thanks. I have faith that Jesus is coming to save me." The ship sailed on. The man prayed once again, "Jesus please come and save me!" Suddenly a helicopter appeared ahead dropping a safety ladder down to the man. The man refused once agains saying, "No thanks. I have faith that Jesus is coming to save me." The helicopter flew onward. He prayed once again. "Jesus, please come and save me." A man in a small lifeboat came rowing past, asking the man if he needed assistance. The man said, "No. I have faith that Jesus is coming to save me." The man in the boat rowed onward. Then the shipwrecked man died. It was there that he met Jesus. He was like, "Jesus... what gives? I had faith in you and prayed to you to save me. WHY DIDN"T YOU SAVE ME!!!!" Then Jesus replied, "I sent two boats and a helicopter, what more did you want?" It is fine to escape inwardly, if there are no other options. But if there is a train coming toward you, it is wise to move out of the way, if you can. Sometimes, practical wisdom is the most relevant in a particular situation. I'm not one to always defer to enlightenment-based insights as the only relevant answers to the issues of life. I find it to be a form of bypassing and avoidance, when it isn't coupled with actual enlightenment. I am not enlightened, so I do have concerns for my family, my personal safety, and the state of the world. I would imagine that enlightened people would avoid negative situations as they arise as well.

Thank you for the compliment-ish words. But yes, it's very difficult for me to let go of my intellectualizations. The only time I ever felt satisfied with what I knew and didn't experience the constant thirst to figure things out or seek new knowledge was during my experiences of ego-transcendence. It was only then that I already knew everything, simultaneously didn't care about knowing everything, and felt no urge to seek more knowledge or understanding. Otherwise, it's been a constant craving to feed my intellect.

1st Scenario Panic Get Depressed Try to do other things that I want while resisting awareness of my near looming death Try to accept it and let go 2nd Scenario Try to process through feelings of panic quickly in order to get into a better and more clear-headed emotional state. Observe the environment for clues as to whereI am, what time of day, and other surroundings that may be helpful. Observe the perpetrator's behaviors carefully to determine their motivations, level of skill at kidnapping/killing, intelligence level, and presence of empathy. Make a plan of escape based upon the information that I glean if possible... especially if the perpetrators are unintelligent or make sloppy mistakes or have emotional weaknesses that can be played upon. Think about why they are doing this in the first place. Is it difficult for them? If there are signs of empathy and this behavior is not the norm for this person and they're having moral misgivings about it, try to subtly make myself seem more human to them by complying, being non-resistant, and making myself relatable. If there are no signs of empathy, lay low and try to blend if there are other hostages. Focus on taking care of other hostages, if there are others, to empower myself and break out of victim's mentality. Act compliant and submissive and never let on that there is a plan to escape. Determine whether or not they're trying to kill me. Are they feeding me? Are they revealing themselves without a mask? Are they keeping me there for companionship? Sex slavery/human trafficking? Ransom? Serial killer stuff? If it's anything but the last one, they're most likely going to keep me alive for a little while. If the person seems like they are about to kill me, try to escape right away even if circumstances are unfavorable. If there is no escape possible, accept my fate and try to let go. This was a fun hypothetical scenario to think about.

"Only the President can direct the use of nuclear weapons by U.S. armed forces, including the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it.[1][2][3]" - quote from Wikipedia Unfortunately, there is no such process that prevents the president from launching nuclear weapons at his caprice. He just has to get General Matthis to agree. And Matthis was selected by Trump and is very war friendly and even stated that he doesn't rule out war with China. Though, the military officers that actually do the launching have to confirm as well. So, I don't want to alarm you, but we are far less protected than you believe. The president has a lot of power to launch nuclear weapons, even if it's a terrible idea that the House and Senate doesn't want him to, as they have no power to block it other than to plea to Trump, Matthis, or the two code-holding officers. Trust me, it's not my intention to be hyperbolic. But we're swimming in some potentially dangerous waters.

I am incredibly worried, given the nature of the lack of diplomacy displayed by the current U.S. administration, about the potential for North Korea to launch long-range missiles at us as the technology still exists for long-range attacks even if North Korea is currently in the 1950s tech-wise. I see it as a possibility that they could easily call upon more technologically savy and militaristic friend countries (like China) or coerce neighboring countries into providing them with better weapons by threatening to attack them. In North Korea, it is believed that Kim Jung Un is literally a God and he's been raised to believe this of himself. So, he may simply choose to terrorize the U.S. due to some perceived slight or threat to his power. It is a good bit paranoia on my part that he may target sea-side cities, but attacking areas along the border of a nation can be a military tactic that makes sense if the intention is to terrorize and show strength, perhaps even more-so than attacking a handful of large cities that are in disparate areas in the nation. But it's also paranoia. I don't trust any of this stuff going on, and I hope to have the wisdom to know when it's best to stay and when it's time to go.

Now that it comes to this, it's hard for me to draw the line and leave. But I have to keep it in my mind that now is probably the right time to do so, while the getting is still good. I have to mull it over and discuss it with my husband tonight. Also, Tillerson was criticizing China's support of North Korea, so it seems like the spiritual teacher's predictions are becoming more and more likely to come to fruition. I also live on the Eastern coast about a five minute drive from the beach. So, I have this apprehension that my town, despite the fact that it's a relatively small town, could be a very opportune place for a nuclear strike. It is the oldest city in the nation too. I would feel much better if I lived in a place that didn't feel so close to the sea and felt a little bit more anonymous. Best of luck.

Thank you! I'm glad that you like it.

I might do some kind of video about relationships in the future relative to projection and seeing the person without the projection factor. It's very important. For a few years (years 2 through 4 of our relationship), my husband and I were doing really bad because I was projecting my own baggage onto him and it was aggravating a lot of his baggage. Then, he would get really angry at me which would cause me to project more and him to get aggravated more. It was a really vicious cycle and I was almost considering divorce. But then, I found some really great psychological/spiritual resources that helped me recognize the illusions that kept me feeling disempowered and I realized that I was just projecting onto him that he was the cause of that feeling of disempowerment. Since then, we've been doing much better and he's been working on himself as well, but it's still very much a work in progress. But it's surprising how big a difference illusion and projection can make in a relationship between two people. Experience has shown me, that it's the biggest barrier to a loving relationship between people (friends, family, romantic partners, etc.) that there could ever be.

From my experiences, I found the reasons for the barriers to self-love to be unawareness due to unconscious purposeful ignorance via constant self-deceptive self-talk. I already knew that I was lying to myself deep down, but I had convinced myself that I was not and ignored all signs of self-deception. I was able to keep up this charade of self-deception because of the fear and emotional discomfort that I would have to face simply by facing the truth of myself. So, the primary task is to either let go of fear completely or cultivate the courage to be brutally honest with yourself even when it paints you in a negative light or undermines your world view. Meditation and spirituality can help with this. But the task is to be open, aware, and accepting regardless of what you find out about yourself.

My husband is 12 years older than I am, and it was exciting for a few months to be the younger woman (then 20) fawned after by an older man (then 32). It was a really fun and spicy dynamic in the initial stages of attraction because there was a slight taboo and a feeling that I was desired in a way that men my own age would tend to take for granted as the norm. Then things cooled down, as they always do, and he was just him and I was just me. Seven years later, the age difference scarcely comes up and we both tend to forget about it. We have always related to each other really well in many respects, and both have similar tastes, work ethic, goals, and moral compasses. So, age doesn't matter too much. So, I recommend not to specifically look for an age difference due to the spiciness, because this always fades. But don't ignore a potential compatible partner due to an age difference either.

It always does escalate quickly on the hamster wheel. You're welcome.

It can be obvious or subtle depending on how much a person is capable of deceiving themselves. When I was really in the weeds with this feeling of baseline inferiority, I had a lot of positive self-talk where I would constantly be comparing myself to others like an unspoken competition. I'd think "I'm the best at _______ thing." "I'm the hardest working person that I know." I would basically choose an arbitrary domain that I was really good at compared to most people (intelligence, hard work, discipline, achievement, creativity, acceptance, the veneer of humility, etc.) Then I would elevate those traits up to status of "the most important traits one can possess." So, there was always a huge process of self-deception whereby I would convince myself of my own superiority to safeguard against deep feelings of inferiority through these comparisons and judgments, while also being able to tell myself that I was not judgmental and saw everyone else was my equal. So, if you catch yourself subtle competing, up-talking yourself, secretly/openly judging others, or pursuing things that only bring status and not joy, these can be some huge signs. Or if you feel horrible when you don't match up within these subtle competitions and feel as though you're worth less based upon the loss of some perceived edge over others. Back then, if I was anything but number one at my arbitrarily chosen domains of superiority, I felt deeply inferior to everyone else. So, my case may have been an extreme example, but this is how it feels to have inferiority/superiority issues. A lot of mine also had to do with fearing being perceived as weak and incompetent.

Yes, that's true, it is an assumption. But it doesn't mean that it is a false assumption for 'why' (assuming that God even traffics in why) God wants to experience the illusion of separation and the illusion that it is a mortal human being. So, yes, we are always "it," but when we go trying to discover that we are "it" and indeed not this separate human being, it's a possibility that this nullifies (our/God's) original potential plan to experience the illusion of truly believing it is this individual. But this is highly speculative of course because it assumes that God even has reasons, as reason is a limited tool from the limited human lens. So, when I said "You only have 80 years to be this particular human being...", I already took into consideration that this is an illusion and that what we are is "it." But I was looking at the potential reason for the illusion.

To recognize that everything is perfect and whole and that nothing can ever be wrong by realizing that there is no separation between the self and the rest of reality and that you are a perfect part of that wholeness. Cultivating unconditional love is necessary to love the self. You can't love yourself without loving everything, and you can't love everything if you don't love yourself. But don't think of this as something to do. Unconditional love is the natural state. The only thing you can do is to undo the blockages and barriers from unconditional love.

Just to clarify, my post was not specifically about Leo. I can only speculate with regard to any individual that is not me. But my post was more about people who try to self-actualize and how it's often used as a coping mechanism, and how hard work can actually be a coping mechanism. This means that, relative to the original post, Leo is not exempt from these issues just because he's really thorough with his self-actualization endeavors. Also, it doesn't matter if the goal is to create an empire, rise to political power, or follow your life purpose, it can be motivated by many unconscious shadow reasons. But it is also possible and even probable that he (and other self actualizers) have some degree of genuine motivation laced in with the shadow reasons. It's why it's difficult to tell whether or not your motivations are genuine because it's very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Well, if I look from the non-dual perspective that all is one, then relationship has to be a relationship between the one and itself at the ultimate level. So, relationships between two people are illusory, just as (presumably) all happenings within existence are illusory including the illusion of self. But perhaps the illusion exists for a reason (if the one even traffics in reason, at all). So, the potential reasons for relationship that come up in my limited human mind are 1. The one wants to know what it is like to relate to another despite it being the only one, as the one must know everything by its very nature (assuming that God is omniscient as religions have told us), and how could the one know everything if it doesn't know duality and relationship. 2. The one wants to know what it is like to know conditional love due to the fact that its nature is unconditional love. 3. The one wants to know what it is like to know imperfection due to the fact that it's nature is perfection. So, relationship gives the one the experience of separateness, otherness, imperfection, conditional love, differences, conflict, pain in opposition to the state of unconditional love and infinite well-being that is the state of entropy that our attachments keep us from falling toward. So, relationship often creates and solidifies the emotional attachment needed to stay out of the state of unconditional love and Truth that is the original state, so that the one may stay in a state of illusion to know more how it is like to be other than what it is. Full enlightenment might potentially nullify the reasons that the one wanted to experience the human perspective in the first place. Maybe enlightenment is ultimately foolish, despite that it is more expansive and is qualitatively better from the human emotional standpoint. You only have maybe 80 years to be this particular human with all its imperfections, while you have an eternity to be the one. Why do you have to be the one now and nullify all the beautiful illusions and the beautiful terrible suffering that stems from it? That is, other than the fact that you are indeed God and can do whatever the heck you want to regardless of whether or not it seems to make no sense. It's not as though there are any rules to the game that you didn't yourself create. But from the dualistic standpoint, relationship is two or more different people, places, things, or ideas that share something in common or have some form of dependence on one another. So, we could say that practically, this is what human relationships are as well. Human beings naturally and instinctually tend to create relationships with the exception of some understanding, idea, or goal that prevents a person from engaging in them. Even enlightened human beings create relationships, which is not necessary for the purpose of "getting love" as enlightenment is the realization that all is one and all is love. There is no sense of filling some place that lacks "love". Real love by its very nature is impersonal, unconditional, and non-directional. So, it has nothing to do with the emotions felt in a relationship on the dualistic level. But on the non-dual level, it is the very substance of the one and of all of existence. And the relationship is another creation of this one that is love. So, relationship as most people know it is not love, but all is love. So, relationship is also love. With this in mind, it seems that most enlightened people tend to still create relationships romantic and otherwise. Perhaps, because enlightenment is a state of non-resistance there is no reason to resist the natural urges to form bonds with others or natural urges in general. It doesn't matter in the end as it's all an illusion, but that's no reason to forego these instincts or resist them... but simply to be detached from them and see them for what they truly are. In the same way that there's no reason to forego practical things such as work. "Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water." And at that ultimate level, relationship is truly an expression of love just as everything else is an expression of love. But it's not int he particularity of the relationshipees or in the emotions shared by the two. But it is the very substance of all things involved in the existence. It's the very dance that reality does to create the illusion of relationship that the reality and love can be found. To be continued...

Well, I can't speak to you personally about Leo, because I don't really know him. Though I do suspect that he isn't immune from energetic issues simply because of his degree of hard work. It's often the hardest working people who have the most issues with energetic affectation as it's very often an unconscious attempt to feel more significant than others and outrun the reaper. But if you notice an affectation/agitation in someone's energy, it's simply because there is a part of them that they're not conscious that there's an issue with. Spirituality has a lot to do with becoming more aware for this reason and reintegrating those parts by letting go of the mindsets that cause agitation. From personal experience, I can tell you that the shadow side of self-actualization is that it's most often pursued due to a feeling of lack and inferiority. That's how I got into it. It's a way that a person who feels chronically inferior can come to feel superior through building the self up and adding social value to one's self. So, if a person has experienced traumatic blows to their self-esteem, they will have a hard time letting go of the crutches that often come laced with personal development endeavors due to the fact that they're very very VERY effective crutches.. temporarily. The self-actualization will be a surface level solution to a much deeper internal problem. So, self-actualization can be both a curse and a cure depending on how it's used, and it's nearly impossible to tell whether or not you're using in properly unless you've cultivated the ability for deep self-honesty. But there is a pattern that can be noticed in those that use personal development to put a temporary band-aid on deep wounds. I call it the personal development perpetual hamster wheel. This is the unhealthy pattern. 1. There is first a feeling of baseline inferiority and lack of self love. 2. Then there is an attempt to overcome said baseline feeling of inferiority and lack of self love through adding value to oneself through personal development endeavors. A person may start a business, go to the gym, do pickup, read books, pursue success in school, pursue creative success, ladder climb in a job, run for political office, pursue enlightenment/spirituality, etc. 3. After many hours, days, weeks, or years of work a line is crossed where feeling of success comes about followed by a brief high where the person feels superior through superior performance. 4. A day or so passes, and the person is back to the feeling of baseline inferiority and in need of another achievement or conquest. 5. Repeat until you die

As someone who has a bachelor of fine arts degree, a bachelor degree in art education, and an art history minor, I've studied and thought a lot on what conveys meaning and value to art objects versus non-art objects... or what separates "good" art from "bad" art. And I've come upon the conclusion that the emperor truly has no clothes. I've seen people go up to things like a short piece of rope in a museum, that it's quite clear that the artist didn't work tremendously on or have any talent to do so, and spend minutes there investigating it. Entire papers and books could be written about the piece of rope on display as art. I've seen those same people scoff at "lower" forms of art, such as anime or art from popular culture or highly skilled but mainstream friendly artists. It lead me to question, "Does art have a correlation with talent?" and "Does art have a correlation with uniqueness or novelty?" and "Does calling something art mean that it's a good thing... or is art more of a neutral label?" The fact of the matter is that a thing becomes high art, as soon as a reputable museum owner deems it as such or if some other important figure within the art world deems it as such. And it is seen as a lower and more trite form of art, if it's too mainstream or seen as trite or too "popcorn". Keep in mind, that I loved this all. I really enjoyed looking at a rope and analyzing it. I'm not kidding. I really loved the open-endedness of it all. One of my art pieces in college consisted of me cutting off all my hair in front of the art class and another was just me stealing a political sign, that someone spray painted a picture of Pac Man on, that I then claimed as found art. So, needless to say, I felt no threat that a piece of rope stuck put on display, and my art was non-art. Once I came to grips with the meaninglessness of the art label, art became much more magical, because I realized that meaning and patterns could be found in every micro-decision the artist made. And that the possibilities for even bad art to be a tool for self-exploration. So, to read a piece of art, was to read the human behind it. Before, I could care less about looking at art. I only liked to create it and I always wanted it to be excellent. But this introduced the human element and all art became juicy then. But it made me realize, more than anything else, that "art" as a contemporary concept was just an arbitrary assignment of value based upon the whims of the upper elites of the art-world and the institution of the museum/market place. And even though my professors were some of the most open-minded individuals that I had ever met, there still had to be enough dogma to the institution to keep it funded and keep it afloat. So, there was also a deeper realization of why there was so much hullaballoo around defining art and assigning value to it in the first place. Since the invention of photography, visual art has been having a big existential crisis. It rarely ever serves a function. So, how can something that has no function still have meaning? And if it isn't meaningful, why create it in the first place? In modern society, few adult human beings allow themselves to do things that don't make rational sense or don't have a meaning or function. We learn, as late elementary school aged children, that things that are rationally pointless and serve no practical function should not be pursued. Since creating is simply a human instinct (probably biologically related to the need for communication and concrete conceptualization and the desire for play), we need to create some functional meaning around it in order for adult human beings to do it without being seen as childish or crazy and for art institutions to stay afloat as being relevant. Since, we have other "more efficient" ways to communicate such as photography, and we have all of our utilitarian needs met in modern society relative to visual objects, we need to cobble together some other meaning to still make it okay and valid for us to continue making things that now have no functional value. So, an entire institution with colleges, museums, collectors, and artists are all riding on their ability to make people see the emperor's non-existent clothes. There is no difference between an art object and a non-art object, except for in the minds of people.

You don't have free will because YOU don't exist as an entity. What you are is God. God has free will, so you have free will as God. But you don't have free will as Neo (or whatever your name is) , because Neo is not really what you are. Neo is a label put over a collection of processes and perceptions that are created and perceived by your awareness... which is the awareness of God. So, it isn't exactly a paradox, but it seems like one if you believe yourself to be a separate self and don't know you're God.

I have a basic foundational knowledge of the chakras and how prana is said to move through the chakras and the various nadis. But my knowledge is more academic than experiential. I do occasionally do chakra meditation. I have crystals and incense around my house. I also got Reiki done once. But this is the extent of my experiences with pranic healing. What I can say is that the little I have done of it seemed to be effective.