David Wilcock Killed Himself — Why I Walked Out of That Worldview

I’m Daozi. This morning at four eleven AM I was still awake, just lying there, and I suddenly thought of someone I hadn’t thought about for many years. I went to look at her social feed, and she had posted that David Wilcock was dead. I was surprised — in my memory he wasn’t even that old. So I searched the news. It was suicide. At his own front door in Boulder County. He called nine one one and shot himself in front of the police.

I want to say up front: this video is not a eulogy. I’m going to tell some personal stories that might make some of you uncomfortable. So if you want to close this, close it now. This is not the kind of content you’re expecting.

I’m not a native English speaker. Everything I encountered about David Wilcock was translated into Chinese. I learned about him in the wave around 2-0-2-0. It’s now 2-0-2-6, so hearing this news, I felt like I had time-traveled back six years. That world feels very far from where I am now.

I read The Source Field Investigations. I studied everything he taught — Law of One, ascension, the secret space program, blue avians, Q. There were other keywords too, more sensitive ones, I won’t bring them up. But what surprised me is that I’m no longer interested in any of these topics. What I want to talk about today is the process by which I gradually became uninterested. I’m talking about a way of thinking, not about whether the information any specific person was transmitting was right or wrong. I fully believe they were sincere about what they believed they were transmitting. I don’t think there was anything wrong with that.

I should tell you my background. I’m a kaleidoscopic person. You might have noticed that this channel is about Eastern computational cosmology. I read Wittgenstein, studying how language shapes cognition. I trade — options. Before AI showed up, I systematically taught myself programming. Earlier than that, I was a YouTuber in the Chinese-language media space, doing awakening content. I also study politics. There was a stretch when I was studying human physiology and Chinese medicine. And then I became a Machiavellian.

David Wilcock’s information was, for me, just one of many interests. Maybe that’s exactly why I walked out of that worldview. But going through that process shaped me in ways I can’t measure. I think he was a meaningful person. I don’t think he was stupid. Because in Eastern language, when a person tries to approach the rules of the universe, there are so many nuances, so many small subtleties, that if even one isn’t seen through, the drawback is enormous. What you might call “cultivation” or “awakening” is a very demanding process. I won’t say it’s dangerous. I think it’s fine.

First, what did he actually teach

What Wilcock taught wasn’t one secret. It was a whole nested worldview.

At the bottom: he was the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce. He started accepting this identity in the late 1-9-9-0s. That’s the foundational authorization for everything else. Above that: the Source Field and ascension — the entire solar system is going through a collective DNA evolution, this is determined by cosmic cycles, the source is the Law of One channeled material from the 1-9-8-0s. Above that: the secret space program — the US military has been in contact with multiple alien species at underground bases, there are about 65 human bases in the galaxy, Roswell is just the tip of the iceberg, many UFOs are actually built by humans. Above that: the cosmic war between good and evil — the reptilians have occupied Antarctica preparing to invade, nine eleven was an alien-conspiracy cover-up, the leadership of Gaia (the streaming platform) was Luciferian, involved in pedophilia, human sacrifice, cannibalism — that’s straight from his 2-0-1-8 resignation letter from Gaia. Above that: Cabal versus Alliance — starting in 2-0-1-8 he openly embraced QAnon, stitching together “the Deep State being purged by the Alliance” with “the secret space program.” At the top: himself, as messenger, as quasi-divine prophet, receiving telepathic transmissions from extraterrestrials. In one COVID-era livestream watched by a million people, he said he held the secret to saving humanity. He kept things going for years on Superchat donations.

This sounds complicated. What it really is, is — he built an interpreter for the universe. He could place any phenomenon he observed into this framework and explain it. Everyone does this. It’s just that frameworks have different properties. Some frameworks are open. Some are closed. When a framework can explain everything, it becomes very hard to walk out of.

What it was like to live inside it

Some people call this kind of framework a “victim narrative.” I think that phrase belittles the human spiritual search. But part of it is also accurate.

Back when I was in this information, I would walk outside and constantly feel cars were trying to hit me on purpose. I had astral projection experiences. I was trapped in this kind of thinking for four or five years. There was a person in my dreams. He existed in time, and he said he was waiting for me in the future. I spent years looking for this person in the real world. I always thought these things were real. To this day I still think there’s a connection between me and that person in my dream. It’s just that I now understand they exist on different layers.

In that period, I believed there was a complete script behind everything — morally clear, eventually self-fulfilling. Darkness versus light. Ascended versus left behind. As long as I picked the right side and waited, things would work out. But in reality those days were dark. Any disturbance from outside would get interpreted by me as part of the dark story attacking me. This is a waiting-type worldview. All agency was outsourced to a coming cosmic-scale reveal. In Wilcock’s last lectures he gave a clear timetable — by Memorial Day 2-0-2-5, there would be a global miracle, in three phases: exposure, disclosure, reunion. He died still waiting for that miracle to happen on schedule.

What pulled me out: Eastern computational cosmology

What was my turning point? It was the tools of Eastern computational cosmology. Two traditional Chinese divination systems specifically — BaZi, the Four Pillars of Destiny, and QiMen Dunjia.

BaZi takes the moment of birth and decomposes it into eight symbols arranged across four time-pillars — year, month, day, hour. QiMen Dunjia is an older system using time and spatial symbols for situational reading. These aren’t fortune-telling in the tabloid sense. They’re an interpreter.

I’ve spent decades working with these traditions, and I’ve built my own modern system on top of them — what I call the DaoTiming Four Pillar Blueprint, and DaoTiming Time Slice Decoding.

What these systems describe is the time of the universe — composed of symbols. By reading the symbols, we read the characteristics of future time, and we do things that either resist or align with those characteristics, in ways that benefit our trajectory. This method shaped my later structural worldview.

Inside this interpreter, a person who was kind-hearted ten years ago might become unkind once their structure has changed. A person who was rational becomes irrational once time has moved on. Which means — humans stop being a continuous moral entity, and become a product of interaction with environment, with time. People become discontinuous. We have to observe the environment and the person’s current behavior pattern, infer their phase, and then collaborate with them. This changed everything I thought about the world. About trust. About moral judgment of people.

This is also why I’ve hesitated to bring my story into the English-speaking world. Because in the West this gets read as cold. Meaning — when the structure is right, the event happens. When the structure is wrong, the result is bad. There’s no morality involved.

And then in Eastern symbols — since I’m using the word “symbol,” symbols are abstract. Take the symbol of the teng she, the coiling snake. It represents twisting, indirectness, intricate turning. It’s not necessarily good or bad. But in David Wilcock’s world, in the Western spiritual circle, the snake isn’t a symbol of life — it’s evil, because it bit a human’s heel in Genesis. To the East, the snake is just a symbol of the topological property of curving. Nothing more.

I think the timing for this conversation is good now. It’s 2-0-2-6, AI has arrived. Inside AI training, many concepts get abstracted into mathematical vectors. And I realized — the symbols of Eastern computational cosmology are exactly what the ancient people did before they had this kind of math. They used symbols to represent abstractions. So the symbol itself is neutral. It’s not worship. It represents a property.

The reason humans dislike snakes is, first, because snakes are dangerous. Second, because we’re not familiar with them, we’re far from them, it’s instinctive rejection. They’re cold-blooded, we’re mammals. Our relationship with other mammals is naturally closer than with snakes and reptiles.

What you actually see when you read someone’s chart

Let me show you what reading a person’s chart actually looks like in practice. Over three or four years of doing this, including building my own DaoTiming system, I’ve studied at least 500 people’s charts.

In large-sample data, you can see things that are more complex than typology.

Each person is a structure. Whether a person is “good” or “bad” — that’s about whether they are good to you.

Some people bring benefits to their family. They have a great relationship with their wife. But when they meet others outside, they extract from those others to fill the family. Some people look perfect in their public mask — they take care of their neighbors, they care a lot about their face. But once they go home, they hit their kids, they hit their partner, sometimes there’s domestic violence.

That’s exactly what shows up in their chart — whether their wealth lives inside or outside, whether they care about face more than money, whether they’re good to women. Some men have many women, but they treat each one well. Some are pure scumbags — drain one woman, drain the next. Some women drain men the same way. But there are women who, the moment they marry, they spend their entire life devoted to that one person.

These are just properties. Each dimension is independent. A man who is good to his wife — in BaZi, the wife symbolizes wealth. That means “wife” and “wealth” are coupled in this abstraction. So if his wife is good to him, money tends to flow toward him. But on uncoupled dimensions — what we’d call mathematically orthogonal dimensions — you can’t tell from the same chart whether he’d defraud strangers.

So when I entered the Western world, I noticed this whole system had been turned into fortune-telling. I think that’s a very low-dimensional use of it. This thing is a cognitive tool.

On large trends — for example what we call the Kondratieff cycle, the long-wave economic super-cycle theorized by the Russian economist — the cosmos has consistency. But on the micro-level, who triggers the falling domino? In 2-0-0-8 it was CDS, credit default swaps. Right now everyone says private credit is dangerous, but the danger isn’t really the leverage — it’s the opacity. The next trigger could come from somewhere else entirely, like a Treasury crisis. Each trigger point is different. The structural problems they bring are different. You can’t judge any of this with “good” and “bad.”

And then I jumped out: the universe is not moral

After three or four years of this kind of thinking, I had drifted very far from the awakening circle. Not until this morning’s news did my thoughts fly back. And I started thinking — why was I so interested back then. And what about Wilcock’s death — what kind of riddle is that?

What I realized was: six years ago, my worldview, and the awakening circle’s worldview, were both based on the assumption that the universe is moral. That it follows a logic we can understand.

Law of One says the universe is filtering — whoever serves others more rises up. Q says evil will eventually be judged in a public hearing. Wilcock said miracles in 2-0-2-5. All these narratives need a final-settlement promise.

Where did I jump out?

In BaZi, the year, month, day, and hour use nested layers of symbols. Like Russian dolls. For example, 2-0-2-6 April 28, one fifty PM — the way to express it is two symbols for the year, two for the month, two for the day, two for the hour. The time precision is to the hour. It can go finer, to the minute and second, but we don’t study the minute and second. The Eastern view naturally only studies the macro. They consider the micro to be random. This is called xiang-thinking, image-thinking. Meaning — we study at a particular scale, and once we go below that scale, we stop. You’re free to call this primitive. That’s your call.

I had a friend who did intraday trading. He spent a lot of money — over a million dollars — researching 15-minute charts and daily charts. He concluded that within the daily candlestick, the patterns are basically random and heavily influenced by market makers — drawing lines and so on. He told me that to find regular signals, you have to go to the 52-month moving average. He spent many years and concluded — only the large trends have something inherent. The small trends are random.

But the point I’m making is this: the universe is structurally similar across multiple scales — but different in the details at every scale. That’s the realization the time-nested structure pushes you toward. As you study, you naturally arrive at the awareness that the universe is multi-scale isomorphic.

The grape arbor

Back to what I was saying. David Wilcock and the awakening circle — they all believe the narrative has a final-settlement promise. I don’t think this way. Because of one afternoon under a grape arbor.

At that time I was teaching myself programming. I had to study ten hours a day, build projects. There was no AI yet. I’m very grateful there was no AI. So I had to study from the underlying principles. And I noticed — when memory overflows, everything resets to zero, then it starts again. When an organization in history gets too rotten, the whole thing scatters and reorganizes. We like a blank canvas.

But before the scattering — those who were wronged — those structures that were misallocated — were any of them set right, one by one? Did things actually move toward a more ordered state, an entropy-decreasing state? The answer was: no.

So I sat there under the grape arbor, and I thought: if the universe is isomorphic, then history has proven so many times — there’s never going to be justice. Just, after everything collapses, the builders who can hold order will rebuild a frame, and shove everyone back into it. That’s just how all of this runs.

I had a sudden clarity. From that day on, I stopped chasing the idea that some super-computation would put everything back in its right place.

A math PhD in a Singapore lab

Later I met a math PhD who worked at a lab in Singapore. He had a theory. I’m not in math, so I couldn’t follow most of it. But the simplified version was close to what I’d already arrived at — the universe is generative. Like AI generation. Under a generally coherent surface there are extra fingers, half-letters, things that don’t quite line up. He said the universe doesn’t have infinite self-consistent computational power — meaning, the randomness at the micro level is just because compute runs out.

And it’s exactly because of randomness that life has the unpredictable beauty it does. We tend to think the randomness of fate is cruel. But if the world were fully mechanical, it would never be as rich as we are. Because the foundation of our richness is — in the next second, we don’t know what will happen. And I thought, wow, this worldview is wonderful.

So the awakening circle’s narrative is built on the assumption that cosmic compute is unlimited, and inside that assumption everything should be self-consistent. That’s a faith. And as I gradually accepted that the universe is imperfect — or unfair — that faith just naturally evaporated.

I think the universe is chaotic. Not evil. Not good. Just chaotic. Like Lego pieces scattered on the floor. We pick some up and build a house we can call orderly, and the leftover pieces don’t fit into anything. Chaos isn’t evil and isn’t good. It’s just chaos. But order is born from inside it. And chaos is the ground of order — because if everyone has order, where do you find loose parts to build new things?

I jumped from a moral script into a mechanical description

I suddenly realized I had jumped from a moral script into a mechanical description.

The first asks you to believe, wait, fall in line. The second asks you to see clearly, calculate, choose your timing. To accept that fate is impermanent. To accept that even with the most thorough preparation, your life can still end at any second.

There’s no “because-therefore” promise — no human promise of “because you did good, you’ll get good.” But there is a mechanical promise — on Earth, if you drop an apple, it falls. What’s left is the study of regularity.

The first outsources agency. You only need to wait. The second pulls agency back. You can do anything you want, you just have to calculate the cost. I lost the warmth of a universe that stood on my side. The gain — I’m no longer locked in by any version of any script.

Building a mind structure

Then I started to deconstruct narratives, and to build my own mind-structure.

I still think a transcendent reason is the foundation that lets a human feel meaning in this world. To put it simply — if I believe in God, it’s precisely because God is not redeemable in this world. I don’t think God deceived me. I think God is the load-bearing column of my mind-structure. The condition of a transcendent narrative is that it cannot exist in this world. If you saw God in this world, your faith would collapse.

If meaning could be cashed in, what would happen?

A redeemable thing, the moment you receive it, disappears. You’re hungry. You want to eat. You ate — the meaning-structure of hunger closes. You wanted a job. You got it — that wanting ends. All redeemable desires are self-dissolving. Their purpose is to be eliminated.

But meaning is not desire. Meaning is what makes you willing to keep living. It cannot self-dissolve — because the moment it dissolves, you have no reason to continue. So meaning, structurally, must never be reached. It must always be ahead of you. You must always be on the way.

Non-redeemability isn’t a flaw. It’s the working mechanism of meaning. If meaning could be cashed in, meaning would become a commodity. If salvation could be cashed in, there would be a market for salvation. It would become a consumer product. You buy one today, another tomorrow, never enough. This is the modern spirituality industry.

The second thing — people get paralyzed. If meaning is redeemable, all meaning has an endpoint. After the endpoint, what? Nothing. A person who genuinely believed ascension would happen on Memorial Day 2-0-2-5 — if it actually happened, the day after, he’d wake up to a void deeper than the one before ascension. Because what he lost wasn’t a goal. It was the very possibility of having a goal.

The reason Wilcock kept pushing back the “miracle date” — from 2-0-1-2 to 2-0-1-7 to 2-0-2-5 — wasn’t that he was lying. It’s that, somewhere underneath, he knew: if it actually came true, he himself would collapse. The script can never finish. The moment the script finishes, the actor dies.

His suicide is not the end of his narrative. It’s the completion of his narrative. He believed that those who reveal the truth get assassinated. So he completed that belief. His body died, but the narrative he cared about did not. That’s why I’m not mourning him. He’s not pitiful.

The third thing — freedom disappears. This one is the most hidden.

Non-redeemable meaning means you are constantly choosing whether to keep believing. Every day you decide again. That continuous choosing is the material form of freedom. But if meaning can be cashed in, the choice becomes one-time. Once you “got it,” you’re locked into that state, you can’t choose again. A redeemable heaven is the largest prison. Because there’s no possibility of choosing inside it.

Imagine you’re lying in heaven. The next day you find out heaven still has class hierarchy. You shatter completely. Either you keep finding cracks in perfection and magnify them — to keep your dynamics going — or you have nothing.

This is why so much of the spiritual circle’s litigation around David Wilcock isn’t from outside the circle, isn’t from government. It’s between people inside the circle. A group of people who believed in ascension, in the light alliance, in cosmic justice — fight each other most viciously. Why? Because they lived in an “already-knowing-the-answer” state. They all believed ascension was about to happen, the Cabal was about to fall, the universe was on their side. That “already-cashed-in” internal state is exactly what forces them to manufacture cracks in each other — to maintain their identity as “still fighting.”

So if you believe in something unfalsifiable, I’ll say — that’s fine. I won’t say it’s wrong. I just need you to confirm that you understand: how that belief changes your behavior, and whether you think it makes your life better, and easier to cooperate with the world.

The person in my dream waiting for me in time

Now something more interesting. I mentioned earlier — during the period I was deep in conspiracy thinking, there was a person in my dream who said he was waiting for me in the future. I spent years looking for him in the real world. Until one day, I was talking to an AI, and it said — that might be your inner anima.

Anima is Jung’s concept. Inside every man’s psychic structure there’s an inner female pole. Inside every woman’s there’s an inner male pole. When this internal pole isn’t conscious, it auto-projects outward. It finds an external carrier — a specific person, a symbol, a dream figure — and hangs itself on that. Then the person believes they love that external carrier. But what they actually love is the projected piece of themselves.

The signature of this kind of projection is — it’s accompanied by an intense sense of destiny. That’s the one. We were meant. I’ve been waiting for them since I was born. That intensity doesn’t come from the external object. It comes from the wholeness of the part of you that got projected. You aren’t looking for a person. You’re looking for a piece of yourself.

The reason it’s so hard to put down — as long as the external carrier is still there, you’re constantly finding it as a projection. You almost never realize the symbol is supposed to anchor inward, not outward. You need a lot of knowledge, or you need to happen to know Jung’s theory, before you can see this possibility at all.

So that moment, it was like enlightenment. My whole intellectual journey had been preparing me for that moment. And only after that moment did I realize — the thinking-mode was the problem.

Why my exploration was a setup

In QiMen Dunjia, or in BaZi, every symbol has a corresponding object. For instance the symbol Bing Fire might map onto a heater, a desk lamp, or even something like rabbit ears, by the visual shape of the Chinese character. So a symbol can be located in the physical objects in your room. Usually if we judge that a symbol is bad for your structure, we ask you to move that object — to change the energy of your space.

This kind of thinking is exactly what makes inexperienced young Eastern people who get into Eastern divination go off the deep end. They can’t manage the boundary between symbolic imagination and physical reality. Whether or not you believe in this technique, I think it has its uses. But the boundary is critical. You cannot let it run your life one hundred percent. You need eighty percent grounded reality judgment, and twenty percent of this so-called divination. The Silicon Valley people, you know — they’re actually very practical, but sometimes they use things like this. The point is, you keep the ratio right.

This is like — if you have stocks, you sell an option to hedge. If you have property bonds, you buy CDS to hedge. To control risk, control volatility. It’s exactly through learning to trade that I learned the discipline of hedging.

In the West a lot of people think Machiavelli is infamous. In the East no one thinks this. Eastern political philosophy — Sun Tzu, Han Fei, Shang Yang — never moralized strategic realism the way Western Christianity did. Machiavelli, in Eastern eyes, is a pragmatist, not an evil man. I actually wrote a book called On the Greatness and Divinity of Machiavelli — it’s on Amazon if you’re curious.

I use his realism, plus Wittgenstein’s logic of language, plus Stoic minimalism and inward stillness — as the harness on the spiritual / symbolic / generative side. Because the symbolic side is generative, like AI generation, its scale will balloon outward without limit. So you need a harness. You need a constraint. The real question is: which philosophical theories, which ontologies, are you using to scaffold your mind-structure?

Do I still believe in aliens

Final piece — do I still believe in aliens.

I believe there are aliens on Earth. But I also don’t want to meet them. It’s like dolphins live in the ocean and you live on land. That’s the situation.

Most people confuse “believing they exist” with “wanting to interact.” Acknowledging existence does not mean wanting to know more, wanting to meet, wanting to be saved. The range of human activity has limits.

I have a metaphor. Suppose a silicon-based alien visits Earth. He wants a drink. I bring out cleaning solution from the bathroom and give it to him. He drinks it and says — wonderful, tastes like a margarita. Meanwhile I’m holding an actual margarita.

The basis of interaction is shared need. The basis of war is fighting over the same thing. If its form is completely unlike yours, there is no need for it to interact with you at all. Like the ants outside — they care about the underground space in the garden. That’s a space you’ll never live in.

The core sickness of the disclosure circle is right here — it takes a scale that’s outside the radius of your agency, and forces it into the decision weight of your daily life. Whether you have coffee in the morning shouldn’t have anything to do with whether reptilians are in Antarctica. But once you accept that narrative, every daily thing gets quietly rewritten as a small move in a cosmic war. Every choice gets given a weight it can’t carry. When I was deep in this, I thought every car wanted to kill me. Because I was reading every reckless other-driver as systematic persecution against me.

I figured out something later. A narrative that can explain everything — that fact alone is dangerous. Not because of whether it’s true. Because believing it is bad for you. It turns your suffering into something infinite, something that can’t end on its own.

What BaZi tells me is something else. This stretch your energy is bad. You’ll attract things that hurt you. After this stretch, it’ll be okay. The same experience, packaged in a finite shape. Suffering isn’t a cosmic war. Suffering is this current cycle. Cycles pass.

Is the Chinese cosmological method actually true? Not necessarily. It can’t be called science. But statistically there are patterns. Just don’t treat it as truth. Treat the two interpreters as functions. One puts you in endless suffering. The other gives you back agency. It’s like a trading method, an indicator — you can try it, see if it works. It has falsifiable space.

As for the time-operations Wilcock talked about — borrowing 20 years from someone in one timeline and shipping them to Mars to serve, secret-program time-locks — does any of it exist? My answer is, possibly, but it doesn’t matter. And the fact that it doesn’t matter is itself the marker of health.

Separate “does it exist” from “does it matter.” A person who walks steadily — when they see something extraordinary, the response is, oh. When they see something ordinary, the response is also, oh. The two “oh”s weigh the same. This isn’t numbness. This is the weight of information being correctly assigned according to the actual causal distance from your life.

Wilcock’s state was the inverse. His distant information had close emotional weight. His close information — debt, depression, lawsuits — could only be metabolized through distant narratives, all the work of the evil cabal. The system inverted. The person can’t hold up under that.

The 3 seconds I saw the future

One interesting thing. In 2-0-2-1, I once saw three seconds into the future. My roommate had just come into my room. In my mind I saw him fall down the stairs. He was about to go down. I called out to him. He said, what? I said, nothing. He turned around and went down. Halfway down, his foot slipped, and he fell off the stairs.

This is very personal. You can choose to believe it or not believe it. Either way — after that, I thought: if the future hasn’t happened yet, how could I have seen it? I couldn’t figure it out. So from my own experience, I might lean toward believing some of what Wilcock said about time operations. But I’m not afraid. Even if I know the universe isn’t quite as solid as it seems.

I think I came to Earth voluntarily. The universe has many versions — like a fork in code. I’m not interested in already-computed versions, in scripts that already exist. I’m interested in creating new versions of Earth.

Time isn’t linear. It’s more like a blockchain. You have your chain, your version of the universe-event-image. It has its version. If we share some consensus, we merge those event-images. So I think the universe is private. The Mandela Effect — different people having different memories of the past, like the Nike logo’s exact shape — to me it’s just clear evidence we came from different universes that got merged into the present, and we’ll go to different places.

This is just my own way of looking at it. You don’t have to agree.

In my picture, the universe isn’t self-consistent. There are bugs. There are holes. Scientists seem to have found a lot. At the micro level, observation changes the quantum state. At the macro level, we share underlying laws — like gravity. Even gravity is changing.

I think the universe is interesting. Not horrifying. Not a prison. I’m not here to escape. I’m here to accumulate experience.

Here’s a metaphor. Earth has gravity. Gravity restricts us. If we wanted total freedom, we’d remove gravity, and we’d all drift off into space, and how would we form an ecosystem? We’d be like the moon — no carbon-based life like us. So Earth’s gravity isn’t a prison. It’s a counterweight. Like Eastern philosophy says — balance is enough. Eastern people don’t pursue absolute freedom. They pursue the path upward, the possibility of upward motion.

This world naturally forms a pyramid structure, no matter how many times it’s torn down — close to a normal distribution. The bell curve is like a cake mold. Whether we, as atoms, move from the long tail toward the peak in the middle, or use our consciousness to move from the peak out to the tail to become observers, edge people — or to deeply participate — that’s our agency. So I respect the laws of this world.

The soul net

I think when I die, I’ll naturally leave here.

About the soul net some people talk about — to me it’s like highways. Some have toll booths, some don’t. In Eastern philosophy there isn’t this kind of horror narrative. Everything is natural. When you grow to the state where the net can’t hold you, you naturally go to where you correspond.

If you look at the universe through structure, the only thing you can do is shape the structure itself. All human-imposed rules — a king, a manipulator — when I read history, I find: if a king’s policies don’t align with the interests of the majority of his society, the people will overthrow him. The whole universe runs on a tian dao, a way of heaven. So I don’t believe any control group can sit above the laws of the universe. If they can, that’s impressive.

What I see is — those who think they’re the chess players are themselves pieces in the universe. We’re all small. Even an alien ten times smarter than me.

What I understand divinity to be is the laws of physics themselves. The laws of physics sit above the rules made by humans. Cybernetics sits below the rules made by humans. So assigning divinity to the laws of physics — that’s the necessary condition for me to walk through this whole framework. Not to escape it. Not to leave it. Just to walk through it. I went in, I came out. When you have no handle, no one can grab hold of you. Because the cognition you use isn’t the same as theirs. Spinoza said something similar once.

A joke

A small joke. I saw a video about reptilian aliens with twenty legs. Then Chinese people used AI to imagine: cut the reptilian in half, garlic-steamed it, deep-fried it, all-you-can-eat. In Chinese movies, when an alien comes to Earth, it gets cut open and pickled in liquor by a Chinese farmer. Because Chinese people eat everything, except the table.

In the symbolic associations: Western imagination, seeing an alien form, jumps to horror — endless, bottomless infiltration. Chinese imagination, under the framework of Eastern philosophy, sees everything as a node in a chain. Endless — only change is endless. Even short-term being-controlled cannot be infinite. That’s why Chinese people wrote the I Ching. Realism converts absurdity and horror into eating and drinking in everyday life. It dissolves fear.

A symbol is a pointer to consciousness. Consciousness itself is a state. It can be programmed. It can be stored. It can be released. It can be rewritten. The difference is — you have to be aware that you are an eternal life. You’re just visiting Earth for one trip. It will all be fine. You can believe any narrative — as long as you understand what action-pattern that belief leads to, what risk-structure. As long as you have awareness, you can do it.

Alright, I’m daozi. You can subscribe to my YouTube channel. I’ll be sharing more cases of the DaoTiming Four Pillar Blueprint and DaoTiming Time Slice Decoding on this channel later. But I don’t know what specifically Western viewers are interested in. I need your suggestions. If you’re curious — for the DaoTiming Four Pillar Blueprint, visit daotiming.com. For DaoTiming Time Slice Decoding, visit daotiming.app.