Tag Archives: self-honesty

Self is to self-forgive – backtrack to the beginning

When I learned about self-forgiveness a curious thing happened. I moved myself from confusion to clarity. Up until the moment I was involved in conventional spiritual pursuits, Eastern and Western, I had accepted a state of perturbation as part of the spiritual path. Several concepts in classical approaches to Eastern religion escaped my understanding and were merely items of study. I recall pondering “oneness”, what does that really mean to exist in oneness – I mean what if someone is a mass murderer should I still find a way to identify with him or her?

These unanswered questions left me feeling uneasy. The way I tried to resolve this situation was to believe that my capability for comprehension was  just not up to scratch yet, and perhaps I just had to try harder and one day I would get there, after all it was known that any spiritual practice takes years to get somewhere – wherever that is.

When I started to practise self-forgiveness, which was not introduced to me in isolation but in the context of our allowances and acceptances, in other words our unwillingness to acknowledge our ‘full membership in humanity’ – I experienced my first release. A sense of lightness of being, like a weight that was released although I never knew I carried it. It was as if I had dealt with a math problem for all those years but never quite had the foundation to actually solve the equation. With self-forgiveness in Self-honesty, the principle what is best for all, and the understanding that oneness is the absence of any delineation between myself and the other – that is in emotion, feeling, thought and speech – the equation was making sense. My confusion waned instantly.

The beginning of writing self-forgiveness was not easy. My sense of moving forward was to take a machete to hand to cut through the jungle that is my mind. The more I cut the more I cleared away and became clear. The first lessons of the Desteni-I-process where extremely instrumental for me to do so. I recall that one of the first structured self-forgiveness lessons I completed had the thought – to be forgiven:

“If only I was a butterfly – then I could just fly around all day”

I recall pondering: hmm, so what’s wrong with that? It was only later in the process that I realised that there was nothing ‘wrong’ with this statement but to wish to be someone or somewhere else was an escape mechanism from my responsibility of my ‘full membership in humanity’, and acceptance of polarisation.

Writing these words I find it enjoyable to backtrack to the first moments of my self-forgiveness practice – and yes, it is my practice, I have made it my own. I have applied myself when the resistances and excuses lurked: “oh, it’s too late today”, “I have so much other stuff to do”, “I don’t have anything to forgive” – yet, every time I pushed through I was grateful afterwards for having given my Self a bit more vision. Real vision – not what I see with my eyes – the picture reality we believe to be real – but what I see in what I have become and how I have programmed my Self to exist.

This joy extends to seeing with real vision how I have changed through the practise of self-forgiveness and the releases I have experienced. I recall being on the forum and posting that I was forgiving my Self to be in conflict with my name. Similar to the deeper issues pertaining to the statement on the butterfly above, I attributed my name to not having had any choices in how I exist on this planet. I was born in a place, into a family, into circumstances, into an age, and so forth – without my volition or my say, and the label for all that was my name. I was angry, ashamed and in denial about it. When I practised self-forgiveness on this particular thought construct, I experienced a deep release, I felt it all over my body.

It was moments like these that kept me going. There seemed to be a repertoire of “ancient” emotions that I did not share with others, nor did I want to look at them myself. They remained buried inside of me and I did what I had to, to keep the lid on. These were suddenly allowed to come to the surface because I wanted them there. I was eager to test and test, this and that – that belief and that emotion that I had carried around with me for so long. In the beginning I even felt that it took courage to go inside of me and pull up these programmed items. I enjoyed the moment where I “jumped” and then they were there, in front of me, black on white – or white on black (as with the Desteni forum).

Understanding the practice of self-forgiveness took more than just me reading how to do it, it taught me to understand oneness in physical reality. When I first started to practise forgiving my Self I had many questions on how to go about it, or I felt confident that I grasped a particular aspect when I actually did not. The oneness that I am talking about is the support and the assistance I receive from others. For each baby step I took there was an assisting, typing hand. I was building my practice step by step with support. This lived understanding, that I was not able to do it on my own, opened my Self up to equality. When I saw others starting to apply self-forgiveness and gaining more clarity over time – I was enjoying myself.

This was not a teacher-student scenario because those who were assisting me where also assisted by others – we were in this together and from that perspective I received assistance. It was not about knowledge, it was rendering our egos visible to each other and that is in fact an ongoing process. The only difference between now and then is that I can now drive this process on my own, I can sit down and write and open up a point. Yet there are always times and moments when I deal with a particular point where a Destonian perspective is needed where those around me can see what I cannot see. Likewise, when a Destonian exposes a point to me or the group, I can learn to see something about my acceptances that I was not aware of before. This is not a matter of ability it is a characteristic of walking as equals in oneness.

The resulting Self that is me today has left behind emotions and feelings that I believed to be me. The more I see myself change, the more I see my responsibility and the more I lose interest in myself only – the more I can share. Most of all the more I practise, the more I see how I could not be without the group – a group unlike any other – a group that changes everything for me and for all, equally.

Note: by “practise” I mean ‘practically applied’ through writing and speaking.

For more information on Self-forgiveness check out http://www.eqafe.com

For the Desteniiprocess. http://www.desteniiprocess.com

The main site and entry to the forums http://www.desteni.org


1 Comment

Filed under self-forgiveness

A threesome: Equal Money is the only solution!

In this post I am discussing three viewpoints of the Equal Money System in relation to anarchism, resource-based economy and gold standard.

Equal Money System is not Anarchism.
The word “anarchism” is an umbrella term which groups political and religious thought (such as Christian anarchism) in a number of traditions. These are underpinned by the basic idea that societal structuring of individual and collective human relations can function in the absence of a centralised authority.

In the last two hundred years, the various movements of social or collective anarchism have, in their essence, dealt with the distribution of labour and the role of property. This does not compare to an Equal Money System because the main focus here is neither material nor economical. Both of those aspects are merely necessary within the practical concerns of life. Equal Money’s main focus is on living beings with the central idea to uphold, support and assist all that is living, in equal ways through taking measures in the physical world that are born from self-responsibility.  Thus, how aspects such as labour, ownership, and property are dealt with from the social and collective stance is determined through the application of the principle of equality, to achieve the common goal in establishing what is best for all.

Historically, individual anarchism has strongly supported ego-based human relations (see Max Stirner). Here, individuals are encouraged to will themselves through their ego to form and cultivate a union in the interaction with others while freely following one’s desires. Supporters of this approach are convinced that conflicts and suffering can be tackled and resolved if this union is maintained. From the perspective of an Equal Money System, the human ego is not a viable path to be trusted in creating a better world that includes everyone. The reason being that the human ego operates on the basis of thoughts and the mind in general. Desteni research clearly shows that the mind works in ways that keeps people separated from each other through mechanisms of deception and abuse. This is done through feelings and emotions which trigger manipulation and sabotage of Self and others, always promoting only one thing: the perceived benefit through self-interest.

When tracing various developments of anarchistic thought and action, it becomes evident that these movements have acted through opposing established systems. As part of a reactive manner, the movements have utilised abuse, such as violent acts against those who do not support their ideas, and other ‘anti’ stance  activities such as general strikes.  In an Equal Money System, abuse, of which violence is one form, is eradicated through the elimination of ego-based interactions between people, animals and the environment. Abuse has no place in the principle of equality and the achievement of a society in which everyone acts in the best interest of all. This is accomplished through new forms of education and a life-coaching process that Destonians have taken on in self-responsibility to purify themselves from the ego-based mind. The DesteniIProcess forms the basis of this process through the practice of self-forgiveness.

Some traditions of social anarchism will form their ideas incorporating concepts of mutuality, reciprocity, and voluntary action, yet the basic notion of “earning a living” still holds true even in the face of proposed currency reforms. In an Equal Money system, money is not regarded to be on equal footing with life, it is purely seen as an organisational tool which cannot be used or abused to equate a person’s ability and capacity to perform work with their living requirements.  Thus, an Equal Money System spells the end of poverty because everyone is equal taken care of on the basis that they are a living being.

The Equal Money System is not a resource-based economy.

The concept of a resource-based economy is a recent development which looks at possibilities of getting around the use of money through declaring all resources of the planet as common heritage for all. Proponents of this approach are found in the Zeitgeist movement. Supporters state that besides money, credit, barter and any other system of debt or servitude would not exist in a resource-based economy. On the level of human relations this is achieved, according to Zeitgeist supporters, through more meaningful ways of relating to other people. From the Zeitgeist perspective this will emerge from the fact that the individual will no longer have to worry about keeping a job which greatly reduces mental and physical stress.

Several questions are prompted from this context. How will humans suddenly start to relate to and with each other in more meaningful ways when human nature has a track record that lays down centuries of abuse and self-interest, regardless of which economic system governs human relations? Without rigorous self-investigation and practise of self-honesty, how will those who form the government in a resource-based economy remain free from corruption? How will it be ensured that resources as common heritage stay common and are fairly distributed?

The resource-based economy, as proposed by Zeitgeist supporters, is strongly hinged on cutting-edge technologies produced in new and innovative ways. The idea is that through modern technology the environment can be better protected, the cities re-designed for improved living, and more effective transportation systems and industry plants can be build. However, technology is advocated without looking at the root of the current ways we apply and implement technology and what that means in the face of a new type of economy. It is unlikely that newly designed cities will get rid of abuse, that by living in these cities we suddenly know how to decide and act from the starting point of what is best for everyone.

Changing the way we interact in the world is not a material procedure, the process for a better world does not start with creating a better exterior but rather starts with us, and who we are as people, what we have allowed and accepted to exist in the world – it has to start with the realisation that we are all responsible, and that only if we take responsibility we can make changes. This is why the Equal Money System begins with the human and the process needed to transform human nature so that we can implement a system that supports everyone equally. All exterior and operational aspects are emergent from this process of transformation which is based on understanding how to decide and act from the starting point of what is best for all.

Why the gold standard will not work.
When humanity used gold as a standard for exchange of goods and services, as early as 600 B. C., the economic difference between people existed just the same as it does today. Poverty and fear of survival have underpinned our societies with or without gold standard. The change to gold standard from fiat currency does not change the fact that we put a price on life. It will not end abuse, nor will it stop corruption. Again, this is yet another approach where we look at the problem in separation of ourselves. The collective problem that we are faced with is not one that can be solved by making minor changes to the system we have created, which is what the return to a gold standard implies. To create a world where everyone is taken care of equally which is what Destonians are here to bring about, we must understand that the change begins with us, individually and collectively.

For additional information on the topic of Equal Money and much more, visit our store: http://store.desteni.org

Leave a comment

Filed under Equal Money

Creating my life through the DesteniIProcess

I have been asking myself if the agreement with Gabriel might have been a pre-programmed situation. The reason for asking myself this question has been twofold. First, we seem to be quite compatible in a basic way of being. Don’t get me wrong I can see that this agreement is taking me apart which is beyond what I was experiencing in my process when I was on my own. I can see that the perceived peaceful inner state I was experiencing then is now in chaos most of the time which means that it was not real, and this is requiring me to look at my issues in much more depth than before.

Second, the timing could not have been better to start an agreement. I had finished my studies and both Gabriel and I had to move from our old flats. In my case I had to move countries because of the enormous cost of living in the UK. It all fit just a tad too well for me not to be skeptical about it. Yet, in the beginning when he and I first met and an agreement was on the table, I dealt with much anxiety of fear of loss of my independence. I had not reckoned with an agreement any time soon and was quite satisfied with my ‘single’ status.

The other day, I mentioned the pre-programmed aspect to Gabriel, who said to me that it is a matter of ceasing one’s opportunity as these open up. After reflecting on this for some time now, I see what he means and found that “ceasing one’s opportunity” comes into play as part of the DesteniIprocess where we learn to make decisions on the basis of a non-energetic state.

I will explain this on a pertinent real-life example. In May of this year, when I was going through the last stages of examination regarding my studies, I was presented with a highly probable opportunity for a job, which entailed becoming part of a research team in a small town in France. At the time, when this opportunity presented itself I was having to cope with things on multiple fronts. I did not want to make a decision out of a situation where I had no clarity in terms of what I wanted to do after my studies once these had been entirely completed, meaning all the last examinations had been done and dusted, and I was free to review my situation. However, the deadline of applying for this job meant I had to furnish the research team with an immediate response. Granted that there were other issues with this job but this was the biggest one. Thus my answer to this opportunity was “no, thank you”.

Some of my colleagues did not understand how I could have let such an opportunity slip through my fingers. Given the economic situation and the overall factor of how interesting this post would have been, from the outside it certainly looked like I was being foolish to let it go. Had this been years ago, before I started the DesteniIprocess, I would have been probably too fearful to say ‘No’ even if I really wanted to. I would have been afraid of how difficult it would be to find a suitable job and would have convinced myself to take it because of my inferior position towards the point of being without work.

This is not to say that I am fearless when it comes to not having a job and making money, or that I do not long for security. What it says is that my starting point for making a decision has changed and that, in this instance, I did not operate from my typical pre-programmed way of acting in the world that I know has influenced my previous decisions on jobs and matters of having to do with being secure in the system.

If we look at the trajectory that follows, having not ceased this job opportunity, I was able to cease the agreement opportunity because I was still in the UK at the time when Gabriel came to participate in a business meeting. This enabled us to meet up and connect in physical space, which later prompted the agreement. Ceasing an opportunity from the starting point of self rather than from the starting point of pre-programmed reaction, then let me create my life where I was able to choose an agreement with another, and begin to investigate myself in relation to intimacy and shared living with other Destonians. Hence it was through the DesteniIprocess that I was able to change my life situation.

Since I started the DesteniIprocess I have understood that every breath is accumulative in the process of creating my life and that these decisions are really composed of minute moment-to-moment maneuvers in the world. Only if I understand who I am here in every moment can I become self-directive and stand as a self, as one and equal to all that is here.


Filed under agreement, self-forgiveness

From “system” equality to Destonian equality, or how I learned to understand the meaning of equality

Before I became a Destonian, I was unable to understand the true sense of equality. Even though it was clear to me that all people should be equal and that differences related to gender, sexual orientation and race – among others – are a non-issue when it comes to equality. There is no doubt that these are big issues in the world that are founded on prejudice causing injustice and inequality; and furthermore there is no doubt that these so-called issues can only be tackled when we collectively come to the realisation that we are equals no matter of gender, sexual orientation and race, or what else we use to excuse our self-interest and superiority. This was my view then, which entailed that equality is a legal right that is practised in accordance to the law where everyone is guaranteed the same rights without exception.

This type of understanding of equality is convenient, of course. It primarily looks at equality as categorical, rather than fundamental, to-be-applied-as-necessary qualifier. By doing so it implies that the basic system we live by, our society, is in its manifold operational and functioning appearance a valid system to begin with. From this perspective the essence of equality supports the perpetuation of the system’s dynamics, which in actuality are there to keep us separated from each other by reinforcing the categorical distinction of irrelevant differences that are invented by the mind.

A practical example of this perspective I recently saw when I was packing up documents in the process of getting ready to move to another country. I came across my last employment contract which I had not yet put in its appropriate place so all the addenda one usually receives in conjunction with a contract was still there and had not been weeded out yet, as I usually strip away all bureaucratic fillers to keep only the most important part of the document. Hence, together with my contract I retrieved a paper that explained that my employer, an institution, was an ‘equal opportunity employer’. In several paragraphs it was outlined how various aspects, such as age, gender and disability, were guaranteed not to influence my participation in a career with the institution.

I remember reading these types of flyers before, at other occasions when I entered employment or some contractual relationship in the employment business. Generally I would acknowledge such a flyer as a ‘good’ thing that the institution or company is at least trying to do their best. At times I even considered myself lucky to work for an equal opportunity employer, I felt that this approach was politically correct. Today of course I know that this is deception because all equality in relation to something else that is already from the starting point unequal can never be made equal by applying equality on limited terms.

The fact that I had this contract with the institution makes this clear. I come from a middle class family; I have education; I am fed and have shelter. In other words, I have all my basic needs met. Anyone who does not have those prerequisites for this ‘opportunity’ can never have this job, and no employer would give them a job on the basis of being an ‘equal opportunity employer’. The equality mentioned in this context is a patch to a system, a system that is intrinsically flawed and needs constant upgrades and repairs. This makes the use of equality a form of bargaining chip, rather than what it is – a principle.

When I became a Destonian I realised that as long as we apply equality to fix an existing problem caused by the system, we are working from delusion because we do not recognise that the problem is there because the system is build on inequality and hierarchy. It is fact that the cultural and economic world systems are established on inequality through competitive practices, and losers can never be equals in these systems. Losers and winners are not self-determined ways of existing that we choose for ourselves, even a loser-in-the-self-making in a wealthy country is not comparable to a loser who is born to be starving for the rest of his life. From this perspective we can see that attention given to perceived differences such as gender, sexual orientation and race are little patches that cover up the distinct mechanism of inequality which underpins every cultural and economic system on the planet.

Continuing to apply equality-as-patch will just continue the convoluted bureaucratic systems that we have always experienced throughout recorded history, and which have become increasingly inscrutable where individuals as well as businesses make their way through the system by deploying abusive practices. For me the conclusion was simple at this point, equality has to be created as foundation to the system we live by – meaning the only solution is to work on the roots of the system which means we have to revise the entire system to one that is build on equality from the starting point. With such a system, perceived differences such as gender, age, sexual orientation, disability and race will no longer need any attention because there is no need to “fix something that is not broken”.

So, for me to be a Destonian is, among other things, the recognition that we need equality as a starting point that covers all the bases of one cultural and economic world system – starting with Equal Money.

1 Comment

Filed under Equal Money

How Destonian actions are no longer limited by human nature – a call on the scientific community to investigate the effects of self-honesty

From the perspective of a self-willed, responsibility-taking individual in process, all actions are performed in equality regardless of the nature of these actions. In other words, Destonians do not simply execute an action but are standing as equal to the action itself. Inevitably, this entails all dimensions of an action including the actual content that is being dealt with in physical space. An example to make this clear would be someone serving food and drinks to someone else. In our current system this is often done for money, as it is the case in restaurants, on airplanes and trains, or other public venues that sell food and drink. Under these circumstances, the server is more or less a machine, who has no say in the food and drink that he or she passes on to the next individual.

By contrast, in an equal money system such scenario would not take place because people will not earn money through the actions they perform. In an EMS, money will merely be an organisational tool and earning one’s living will be a thing of the past because we will have shifted from “performing for living” to “life as living”. Hence the person serving the food takes responsibility for whatever she is ‘dishing’ out. Responsibility alone is a key factor in an Equal Money System, because when we are no longer paid to perform actions, we can no longer point fingers to someone else, and relinquish our participation in the consequences of the actions we have performed.

In the current money system this is a mute point. Most actions we perform we execute because we function, and are trained to be, cogs in the turning wheel of hierarchical structures that run throughout the various areas of our society.  Therefore we have laws and rules that outline behaviour and keep us in check. These structures, together with their rules, replace our autonomy as acting bodies in space, and are the breeding ground for abuse. On a basic level the abuse begins with the exploitation of having to perform actions for money where the individual has no say whether the action to be taken is in its consequence best for all.

This orientation towards collective human-to-human interactions meanders and penetrates all spheres of our lives. It already starts in childhood, when children observe how their parents ‘take responsibility’ for them because as a society we have the accepted belief that a young human cannot be responsible for his or her own behaviour because of the developing intellectual and cognitive capacities. Anyone can readily observe these types of behaviour in daily street life when, for example, a child moves into the close proximity of another human, one of the parents will happily apologise for the child as he or she feels responsible for the child’s behaviour.

Of course this aspect of human existence has never been challenged, or is never considered otherwise – it is just a fact of life, or else it’s human nature.

At Desteni, we do not accept the limitation of human behaviour because we understand that limitations are created by belief. Learning to distinguish between belief and what is here, what is available to us as physical beings, is achieved through applied common sense. Thus, in common sense we know that we cannot fly in the air but we also know that all interactions with other humans are open to change depending on the starting point that guides these interactions. In other words, we do not just accept this undefined notion of “human nature”, because most humans have bought into a certain manner of speaking or acting. We understand that what this says about us is that humans are intrinsically interconnected and that we function as a collective.

The myth of human nature is predominately perpetuated through scientific inquiry where studies reiterate that we are limited to the common denominator, in terms of how the majority of humans act and interact when investigated scientifically, rather than making the common denominator a starting point for change.

However, even in science there are plenty of examples that human nature is changeable but this is not taken into consideration by the scientific community because if it were we would need to investigate further who we truly are, and we may, just may end up in the place where Desteni is going – a place where the human can become self-honest through self-forgiveness and no longer exist in separation from others.

If the scientific community was thoroughly scientific and not biased to maintain the status quo, they would be willing to investigate what happens when self-forgiveness is applied to human behaviour. The community could even look at Destonians as a group to conduct study, together with those who have not yet applied self-forgiveness as a control group.

One such perspective could be given through “information transfer”. We are all aware of distortions that occur when passing bits of information onto other people. I even recall a way of playing as a child. As a group of children we would form a long line in space and the child on one end would whisper a sentence or two into the ear of the child that stood next to her. That child would then turn around and continue whispering what she understood to the next child, and so forth. The child at the other end would eventually get the information and state it out loud, together with the child who had originally stated the sentences in the beginning. The result of this was always big time laughter because the distortion that occurred when transferring the information made the outcome funny.

It’s a simple example to show how we are not trustworthy, not even with a few sentences. Once we apply self-forgiveness this changes in the process of becoming a self-willed individual. So if science was truly working for the good of all, then why would the scientific community not tackle these limitations and come to see with Destonians that a new world can be created by changing ourselves to act and interact from a starting point that is best for all on every level of existence. The only answer that science can give us here is that in truth science is not interested in creating a better world for all but that scientific inquiry is just another paradigm of the system, working in deception and abuse.

For details on the DesteniIprocess, click here: http://desteni.org/dip/

For more information, click here: http://equalmoney.org/

We are in the process of creating a comprehensive publication on Equal Money where many of your burning questions are answered- we will notify those interested when our book is completed – if you wish to sign up you can do so by clicking on the link below:



Filed under self-forgiveness