Common Law and Sovereignty-Not The Answer!

Because of my occupation I have been around the sovereignty movement for most of 30 years.  Yes it’s that old and has been around a long time.   Just like the old time snake oil salesmen, I’ve seen the sovereignty concept pitched for use for just about everything.

As for the current common law/sovereignty movement, the underlying desire and hunger for change and something better which is systemic to the current conditions we find ourselves in today is the foundation being used for personal sovereignty being pitched as the way to gain fulfillment of those desires and hunger pangs.

The problem with that is it is purely based on a lack of knowledge and the failure to be open minded enough to not see all effecting factors.  There is no such thing as personal sovereignty!  Sovereignty is supreme power or authority over something and that something is usually control or the governing of a group of people.  Truthfully we don’t and can never have supreme authority or power over these bodies we inhabit at all.  The mere fact we can’t control the health or death of it should be sufficient to make that point obvious.

Back to a more direct point, let’s begin with an overly simplified investigation of what is “common law”.  Common law is what arose in the 12th and 13th centuries as civilizations, especially the civilizations on the British Isle, came out of the “dark ages”.  The justice system that existed prior to that was a chaotic system based on feudal law over ridden by the authority of the monarchy.  Under that system each feudal estate was under the control of the local landowner who set the laws for his estate but owed allegiance to and was subject to the taxation of the crown.

As an example of how the free man faced justice, If I was to steal an apple on one estate I might be made to do sufficient extra work until I paid for that apple with the amount of work determined by the head of the feudal estate.  On another estate for the theft of an apple I might be placed in some type of confinement for 10 years.

The system of justice was riddled with inequity.  To attempt to solve the problem the English system began evolving not because of the inequity for the common people but because those of titled nobility got tired of the burdensome actions of the monarchy.

This evolving was manifested through the creation of certain documents that specified that limited the power of the monarchy and established certain rights for the nobles which bled down to the common people.

What came out of the discontent of the nobles began, as far as the legal system was concerned, with basically three different courts being established within the English system.  Laws were drawn up and put into place by a two house parliamentary system.

It was the duty of the crown to enforce the laws while the courts decided how those laws were applied.

As the courts decided, or issued rulings, on how those laws were to be applied in various circumstances those rulings then became how they were used in applying the laws to future cases.   This then is truly what is “common law” and to be more specific the common law as we know it is really something called case based law.

[Remember I said this was an overly simplified view so don’t ding too hard with the comments!]

What most people today are thinking about when they refer to “common law” is more akin to the inalienable rights that Jefferson described in the Declaration of Independence.  They are trying to say that each of us at birth have certain rights that should be sacrosanct.  They see that even that “rights” are being abused and infringed upon by those abusers of power.  They desire to regain a semblance of being in control and they look for a way to protect those rights and make them inviolable.

They have reasoned that the people have a right to do whatever necessary to seek out the way to make them inviolable.  Someone then came along and said look I have the solution and its based upon the “common law”.  But the “common law” that they seem to think exists, doesn’t and never has.

The promoters of this approach then came up with something they are calling a common law jury. The create this system for creating and running these juries but when they try to give it legitimacy through historical precedent that they go astray.

Since there has never been anything even close to what they are trying to create or remotely conceived of in any document, for them to say the power rests in common law is a fallacy and deception.

They point to the U.S. grand jury system and use a single statement by a single judge as proof.  However, if you research the case the statement was made in regards to you find it was referring to a very limited definition of a single characteristic of the grand jury system.

The grand jury that exists in the U.S. Constitution was created to correct a flaw in the English case law or common law system.  In the English system at the time of the American Revolution the representative of the English crown had the sole authority to decide who and with what crime a person was charged with.  This of course led to abuse of power by the representatives of the crown, hence, the need to limit the power of the representatives of the government.

To correct that abuse of power problem the founders of this country established a panel of peers system to decide and determine when there was cause enough for a person to be charged and tried of a crime.  The way that system is implemented has evolved through the years influenced by our three branch and checks and balances system.

To begin the process a representative of the government (Federal prosecutor) has to convince a Federal district judge that there is sufficient reason to believe that it would be in the best interest of the welfare of the people to seat a grand jury.  The prosecutor has to prove that it is in the best interest of the people to further determine whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant charging a person with a crime.

Once a judge is satisfied he will authorize the calling of jurors to make up a grand jury.  A grand jury is composed of between 16 and 23 members and most times with 2-3 alternates.  To protect the “target” of a grand jury investigation and the identity of those  testifying in case there is no indictment the work and session of a grand jury are secret.

That doesn’t mean that the “target” of a grand jury isn’t made aware of the presence of a grand jury investigating something about them as all grand juries issues a letter, called a target letter, to those that the grand jury will be focusing upon.  Those targeted by the grand jury are given the opportunity if they so choose to appear before the grand and give testimony but the government cannot compel them to testify.

A grand jury does not have unlimited time to make up their minds whether to indict or not.   A Federal grand jury is limited to 18 months plus one 6 month extension to reach agreement on an indictment or fail to indict.  To reach indictment only requires that 12 members of the 16-23 members of the grand jury reach agreement for an indictment.

The biggest problem with the grand jury system is a tendency for the grand jurors to believe that even if there really isn’t enough evidence to prove the crime that the next phrase will correct any mistakes they may make.  [Hence, the old remark that a Federal prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich for murder.]  Once a “target” is indicted they are then arrested, processed and then goes through the long period until he gets his day in court to face the determination of whether they are found to be innocent or guilty.

However, the fallacy in the notion that the grand jury’s findings are cushioned by the system is that simply having to endure the arrest and trial process usually winds up destroying the person even if they turn out to be not guilty.

What the common law/sovereignty movement is trying to do today is create some kind of pseudo-grand jury.  However, there is no grounds of legitimacy or legality for the existence of such a jury.  The minimum that would be needed for such a jury to have any power would be societal acceptance, which is sorely lacking. Without a basis to draw the power for simply existence from then the actions of the so-called common law jury becomes nothing more than kangaroo justice and vigilantism.

The more they try to “indict” people on grounds not truly supported by legal evidence but instead upon human emotion, the more they will be seen as a lunatic fringe element as bad if not worse than the ones they claim to be against.   You cannot end tyranny by using the tactics of a tyrant yourself.

They try to convince others and justify themselves by speaking to those longings, desires and characteristics which are inherit traits in all people to want to be free.   They try to justify that because there have been those who have been prone to abuse of power that the only way to correct the situation is to “take justice into your own hands”.

All this will do over time is lead to violence in some form or the other by either members of the movement itself or by the government in “protection” of those being targeted by the common law juries.

Those basic human traits at the heart of all of this can, in most cases, be defined as rights.   These would of course include the right to exist and be, the right to do as one pleases as long as what you do doesn’t infringe upon another individuals right to do as they please, and the right to do whatever one wants to make themselves happy as long as you do not infringe upon others’ right to find happiness as well.  These are the most common of those human traits to which we should be entitled to simply because we exist as a human.  These are also the inalienable rights that I spoke of earlier that Jefferson saw as so important, so fundamental, that he addressed those same rights in the Declaration of Independence.

I agree with the desire that change needs to come but disagree with the how it should come to pass.  The United States was created to be the bellwether for this planet to show how a nation can be a leader in the area of personal liberties.  However, a few men from the very beginning have tried their very greatest to usurp that power and distort it to their own use creating a delay in the achievement of our nation’s highest and best purpose.

Change will come when the people themselves have become weary of being the downtrodden.   No person can be forced to succumb to the will of another without his own willingness to allow it.

Are there times when there is a price to pay for taking such a stand? Absolutely!   Is it too high a price to pay?  Never!

The only thing that keeps one from standing strong against tyranny is fear.   Fear mostly of death and dying.  If one can overcome that fear then the battle is won.

If tomorrow morning when the sun arose 200 million Americans said, “no more will we allow our liberties to be trampled”, those who are attempting to subject us to their will could not ever create enough force to be successful.

All it will take for lasting permanent change is a leader to appear that will guide this nation toward a new beginning, a new life, a new dawn where the rights of the individual not the rights of the masses is the primary focus of this country.   A leader that will be the captain that will steer this country into an era of economic growth and prosperity.  A leader with vision and integrity.

Such people do exist!  We had such a leader to some degree in John Kennedy but he was too much too soon without the support that he needed to make him unstoppable.  Now is the time, we only need to find the person.  LET THE SEARCH BEGIN!


Just Some Thoughts About Channeling & The Future


It is funny how things Divinely come to pass, I have been down due to health problems for about a month. During that month there has been much hubbub about channeling and its relative merits, at least within the small sphere of contact that I have.

I have to wonder if my current health related issues weren’t divinely caused to hinder me from doing much in the way of contact with my own advisors, guides and teachers as it has given me an opportunity to interpret from a different perspective. One that perhaps is a little less tainted by my own participation within channeling.

As far as I am concerned, I really don’t have any idea how others are able to so consistently be able to raise their consciousness to make proper contact as I find that physical discomfort or illness prevents me from being able to firmly contact my collective. Without that firm connection then the viability of resonance of the material received is not sufficient for me to be comfortable with it and I would never consider sharing such messages.

I have to wonder how those that do channeling on a preset basis is always able to be so perfect in their daily makeup that they can make consistent contact. It would seem to me that if I was going to do that kind of channeling it would have to be on a “as I am able to connect and bring through the message” basis and not so much on a defined period.

Without considering the issue of establishing connection, the question has now come into play as to how much can these channelings be relied upon generally. Of course that is dependent upon each individual’s ability to use discretion and discernment about the messages to begin with. It would also seem to the most casual observer that everyone should be able to recognize that they are being distorted by the wishes and desires of Terran humanity.

I know that we as a race have been programmed and educated into the belief that certain conditions are outside of our control, therefore, we have to look to some outside savior or messiah to deliver us from our bondage. That message has been taught and reinforced by our educational, entertainment, governmental and religious systems much to the detriment to the overall growth of Terran humanity.

That message, so wrongfully forced upon us, cannot be further from the truth. We have the ability to deliver our ownselves from the slavery into which we have been tricked and the reality is that there is no other way for our deliverance to come to pass. It will be through our own efforts that we create the environment where governments and those that would be our controllers realize that we are in control and not they.

It is up to us to deliver our ownselves from our oppressors and we have the ability to do it without violence through legal civil disobedience. We hold the key to that success! We control the purse strings of the very structures that are trying to dominate us; without our permission and agreement to take from us the fruits of our labors then they will have to face their imminent failure and defeat.

I know the system here in the U.S. but I am also sure that there are similar methods that can be used around the world to bring these criminals to justice. Speaking of justice, if we are to rise above the level of those who would be our oppressors we must be prepared to temper justice with mercy.

Showing love toward another who is but simply another consciousness based entity within the greater Universe does not mean that we have to accept their actions. Unconditional Love directs that I must acknowledge that they are sentient beings with the right to pursue growth in the manner in which they are attracted to do so. They have their place within the overall scheme of Creation and that must be respected. However, that Unconditional Love based upon them being another of Creation’s entities does not mean we have to accept their actions that violate the same rights of others. To follow our path toward the Light without obstruction means that we must do what we have to do to remove such impedients to that growth.

Unconditional Forgiveness simply means that I must not seek vengeance or revenge in seeking justice but simply that the punishment should be sufficient to indicate the wrongness of their acts within the harmony of the Universal All. Judgement shall not be rendered by us upon them as to the appropriateness of their being part of Creation but simply to place wrongness upon the acts they committed. For their efforts to enslave, suppress, and oppress the people of the planet Terra they must be relegated to banishment to a place where they can “live” out their lives but in a manner in which they will be able to reflect upon the many violations of free-will that they committed. It is not for us to violate their free-will, it is just and right for us to dictate that they must pursue their path in a place other than among us.

Returning to the initial subject matter, channeling is no more reliable or unreliable as we create it to be. If it is our desire and focus to look outside of our ownselves for deliverance then that is what we will find that the messages will contain. So the reality is that the contents of the messages received are simply dictated by our own mental focuses bringing evidence to the truth of “as you believe, so shall it be” and “whatever you create, you will experience”. If we believe we need a savior/messiah and give mental energy to that belief so shall we create it.

If we begin to look to ourselves for the strength to overcome then the messages will contain that which will bolster and build that strength. It is our place to bring about the conditions on this planet conducive to allow contact with civilizations far more advanced than us. Does that mean we will not be extended help and assistance? No, but it does say that before we will receive that offer we must prove our own worthiness for that assistance.

With that help will come a great responsibility to use that which will be shared with great circumflection and caution so that it is not misused and abused. We must rise up as a body to the level that the numbers of those who might once more commit the follies of those who came before us, Lemuria, Atlantis, Mu, i.e, are insufficient to establish any level of potential for such ever occurring by those of us here now.

If we as an example of humans within this great and glorious Universe cannot rise to that level then may we be left to our own devices; for I care not to bring harm or risk of harm to anyone or anything else within that great loving vibrant Universe.

A Conversation Between Two Spiritual Teachers


The following is some give and take conversation between myself and Zingdad (fellow spiritual teacher located in South Africa) about the subject of truth. I post it here as part of my blog simply as I think there might be some who could gain something from the discussion such as it turned out to be. This discourse was via email and occurred during the period of August 2-4, 2012.

I came across Zingdad through a repost someone did of a message that he had put up on the internet. I was prompted to contact him and try to get his interpretation of whether we might through the misuse of the label “truth” be perhaps bringing confusion to some who would be seeking after Light.

8/2/12 – Bill “Brother Asa” Taylor

Would like thoughts about the overuse of word Truth-Truth meaning that which is found to be As Is across all realities not subject to each individual’s interpretation. Perception that which an individual finds to be in that moment of now subject to mutation–”my truth”

8/2/12 – Zingdad


Thanks for making contact and thank you for the question.

This is a HUGE subject not easily answered in a few sentences. I have addressed it in my book, The Ascension Papers, where there is a whole very long chapter called “What is Truth”.

You make an interesting contention. You talk about “Truth meaning that which is found to be As Is across all realities not subject to each individual\’s interpretation.“

Can you point me in the direction of such a truth? Can you express a thought or an idea that is always the same, always true, never subject to doubt or disbelief in all realities? A thought or idea that is not in any way, shape or form subject to interpretation?

If you have found such a thing then I’d very much like to hear it!

The single greatest truth that I have ever been able to find is “The One IS” I believe this is always true from all perspective. Yet there are many that find themselves able to doubt the simple fact of the existence of the true, infinite and eternal Source of All. So even that, the most basic truth of all does not pass the test.

Would you like to propose one such a truth that can’t be debated or doubted?

So then here is my contention: All is One and The One is infinite. Infinite means no boundaries. This means that pretty much anything anyone might call “the truth” is just their temporary experience based upon the perspective they currently hold. So there doesn’t seem to be much that is objective truth other than “The One IS”. Beyond that there is only subjective truth. A good way to express that is “my truth”. This is what, right now, seems absolutely true to me. But, if we are intellectually honest we must be willing to admit that that which is “my truth” can change. It must be able to change or else we are going to cause ourselves spiritual damage as our experiences and inputs change and we refuse to grow our truth-sets with them.

Moreover, I contend that the search for “the truth” outside of ourselves is a fools errand. There is no truth outside of ourselves. We ourselves are sparks of the divine who are answering the question “who am I really?” If that is not an exerciser in finding your truth within yourself then I don’t know what is!

I thank you for the question. I hope my thoughts are of interest and value to you. I look forward to reading your response!

With love,


8/2/12 – Bill “Brother Asa” Taylor


Thanks for your reply and let’s see if we can perhaps have a meaningful dialog about this issue. If I have it correct your contention then is that there can be nothing in all of Creation that is immutable simply because everything can be either denied, doubted, debated or questioned by a consciousness somewhere within Creation.

Interesting premise! Let’s then begin with something primal–I am other than the body. First, from a 3D physical perspective the observable it that this correct I am not the body. Quantum physics has now agreed that what we are is consciousness and that consciousness has been through experiments shown to be non-local. If then I am not the body but instead am consciousness then would not every person who sought out whether they were the body or not find the same answer? If then that is true at this juncture of existence then it will be the same regardless of what parallel universe or level of existence one would find themselves in as it takes consciousness to bring form to a bodily housing.

That can be debated, doubted, denied, or questioned but the fact will ever remain that you are not the body and instead you are consciousness. Such is an immutable fact or truth that will found to be so in the end. During the search for that truth you will encounter many perspectives surrounding the accumulation of knowledge until one reaches the point through observation there is no other alternative but for it to be as found to be. That is truth and will remain to be so throughout all of Creation as the foundation upon which Creation is formed is consciousness.

By the way thoughts and ideas are not the basis upon which truth is formed. Truth is formed based upon laws that operate underlying all that one perceives to be within Creation. The primary law is that all of Creation is mental or consciousness, if your will. The reason why I choose the subject to start this discussion with is that you are not your body and since I noted you were teach/learning about ascension that is one of the elementals upon which the process of ascension is based. Since all of Creation is consciousness or mental then you cannot be the body simply because you are Creation and Creation is consciousness.

You can debate, doubt, argue, question as much as you like but the statement that you are Creation is always a truth. In the end everyone will arrive at the same point that they KNOW they are Creation and Creation are they. It is the achievement of the knowing at the depth that cannot be defined that will constitute it to be a real truth.

The contention here is that Terran humanity uses the term truth not so much as it should be used but more in a generality of “close counts”. However, if one is to function in harmony with THE ALL then perhaps “close counts” isn’t good enough. If one is to co-create and manifest that which is truly desired then “close counts” is surely not good enough. To co-create one must come to a knowledge of what is truth and how do I know when I have discovered it; that then is the inner work that has to be done.

Truth in the Universal sense exists throughout Creation. What you describe as going inward to discover truth is more of the learn/teaching that is required to bring oneself to the point that you can become the observer of the observed sufficiently to be able to recognize truth when you find it. It is not that truth is found within; it is simply that recognition of truth can only occur within, not without.

You see when I speak of TRUTH, I truly mean TRUTH–that which is the fundamental underlying structure that constitutes Creation. The elements that makes up Creation and existence will not be found to be different by you and different by me for if it was found to be different then we would not be existing within the same Creation.

I hope that you will find my expression useful.

Brother Asa

8/2/12 – Zingdad

Hi Bill

Yes, I would certainly prefer a meaningful dialogue to a meaningless one! 🙂

Bill, if you don’t mind, before proceeding one step further, I would like to see where our common ground is. Discussing and debating without common ground is like wrestling in quick-sand.

Here is what is absolutely irreducibly true for me: The one truth, the one thing that is ALWAYS true, even when it is hidden behind many layers of illusion, is…

“All is ONE”

Can you agree with that?

If you can then we have a starting point. If not then I will have the choice to either 1. try to convince you of this or 2. abandon this discussion. It is my policy never to try to convince someone of anything so… 🙂

If you DO agree with me then do you agree that it is intuitively obvious that The One is truly INFINITE?

This point, as far as I am concerned is not debatable as it follows as night follows day from the statement All is ONE. But, if you agree with that first statement and are not sure of this second statement then I will be willing to share a discussion on this point to see if we can find commonality on it as well. If we cannot then I will have the choice to either 1. try to convince you of this or 2. abandon this discussion. But we’ve already been over this material so… 🙂

So, Bill, please be so kind as to humour me and let me know if you are with me on or not on these two statements:

All is ONE

The One is truly infinite

If you are, then I will have a clear idea of how to proceed with a response to your email.

With love

8/3/12 – Bill “Brother Asa” Taylor


As I stated before a truth is immutable. Let’s approach it from this direction the One must be infinite for if it was not infinite it would be many or simply more than One. Since the All is One and One is infinite then All is One which also a carries forward into the All is infinite. Some what circular in statement but the underlying knowing clarifies the circularity. These are primal truths and it cannot be other than it is.

BTW, Asa is my given middle name, so either is fine. From the time I entered school until I went in the service everyone other than my family called me Asa, after going into the service it became common for me to be called Bill, short for William.

8/4/12 – Zingdad

Hi Asa

That was eloquently stated… and I agree completely.

I guess it is possible for someone to doubt that there is, beyond this realm of seeming separation, a great unifying Oneness. But I see that we very clearly have the common ground I was hoping for in this regard.

I agree furthermore that THIS is an immutable truth: “All is One”. As much as that is immutable it also, to me, irrefutably implies certain things. The first of those is that the All is infinite, as I am most pleased that you agree.

It also implies that all “parts” of the one are only illusorily apart from each other. Because, of course, there could not truly be separate bits if All is One. So the separations, divisions, boundaries and finite ends of any and all within The One are illusory. They SEEM to be so but they are not really so. For some time they appear to be real and true but they are, ultimately, found to be just experiences that we can have when we hold a certain perspective.

I’m sure you are still in agreement with me thus far?

And here comes my point about The Truth: that if we agree that The One is infinite then we must also agree that there can be no other ultimate rules or truth BUT that one. The ONLY truth can be is that The One IS. Because, you see any other TRUTH will come into conflict with that prime truth. Infinity brooks no boundaries. If there are boundaries then it is not infinite. A truth not only defines something but it also limits it. It says “this thing is THAT and it is never THIS”. Which is logically incompatible with anything that is infinite… no boundaries, no limits, no definitions… therefore no unchangeable defining truths.

Now you and I CAN experience limitations. That is the principal upon which a reality is composed. Reality. Real-ity. A place where this-and-that seems real. Not IS real… but seems real. Such as the separation that we experience in THIS reality. It seems SO real! But it isn’t. It’s just an illusion. In a similar fashion there are other realities that have been created within the infinite field of The Oneness that have other basic founding precepts (other temporary and illusory foundational limitations). They are each, in their own way, useful and entertaining for Us to experience and explore. But they are not TRUE. Not in the way you demand Truth to be. Because, although while We are within them, We do experience them to be real… when we leave these realities we realize it was just a temporary creation. Their rules and laws (truths) were just figments of Our creative imaginations.

So we can experience a limitation on infinity. But only as an illusion. Only as a transitory creation. Not as an eternally immutable fact.

The ONLY eternally immutable fact that I recognize is:

“The One IS”

Everything else is is a matter of creation that can be re-created differently or upon which We can take a different perspective. Everything else is an imbalance in the eternal field of the Oneness and is balanced out and cancelled out elsewhere else (“true” over here… not true over there).

So, if you are demanding only the most rigorous usage of the word “truth”, then there is but one truth I recognize:

“The One IS”

HOWEVER. I myself seem to be real. I really, really, really do! If I investigate this in every way possible to me then I can find no breach to the evidence that I seem to be real. This SEEMS true to me. So, for as long as I am me, then I have a truth about myself: I am real. I exist. This truth, it seems to me is a pretty high-order one. I really, really, really believe it. But it does seem to me that at SOME point somewhere, the “I” that I am imagining myself to be might return to The Oneness. So the “truth” that “I exist” seems to be a very little bit less true than “The One IS”.

So it seems to me that “The One IS” is the ultimate truth and “I exist” is MY truth. And so a distinction springs up.

Now I have no such truth about you though! My dear Asa, as interesting and fun as it might be for me to engage with you by writing all these little text characters on the screen, it is entirely possible for me to doubt your very existence. There is SOME evidence that you exist and that you are real. But last night I had a series of very real-seeming interactions with dream-characters and then I woke up and decided they were in fact NOT real. So… it is entirely possible that I am engaged in some much higher-level dream right now. It is entirely possible that you, and this conversation, are a figment of my imagination. So I do not have a truth about your existence. But it would not be useful for me to engage with you (or any other being for that matter) with the basic premise that you don’t exist! So I choose to concede that, in all probability, you are also another mote of The One who is also experiencing your own existence. I choose to accept that you have your own truth that is different from mine:

That YOU exist.

And so I allow for a second distinction. I accept that probably you have YOUR truth that is different from MY truth but that, ultimately, both of these are subordinate to the one TRUTH.

Now this is just the very simplest and most basic illustration of the concept but no matter how hard I try nor how deeply I delve I seem to come up with the same thing: there is just this one universal truth and then there are an infinite number of things that seem to be true from one perspective or another.

Allow me to further illustrate using your proposed truth that we are all ultimately CONSCIOUSNESS. You say this is the TRUTH – the eternally immutable kind. Okay. I say this is Truth of the transitory kind. What I mean is that I too have come to this very conclusion: that I am not my body (obviously) and also that what I am is actually immortal. So I like that conclusion. It seems to me that I am consciousness. You and I agree on that. But is it an immutable truth?

Let’s see, shall we? You proffer Quantum Mechanics as evidence. Okay. The problem there is that the theoretical physicists who are the ones actually producing the quantum mechanics theories… are atheists. Pretty much all of them. They understand the meaning of words such as “observer” differently from what you and I do. I don’t reeeeealy get their contention. Really I don’t. It seems to me that the result of their experiments MUST be pointing to the primacy of consciousness. My own spirit guide tells me that their science will continue to stumble in the dark indeed UNTIL they do recognize consciousness as a fundamental principle in the Universe. So you and I ARE on the same page here. But the point must stand that we are looking from a distance and coming up with conclusions that those who are actually DOING this science are not. So it doesn’t seem as if QM is as clearly pointing to the primacy of consciousness as all that.

And then… here is a little thought experiment for you. What if you and I met “on the other side” and discovered ourselves to be, as we had expected, to be beings of pure consciousness. Wonderful! Right? But then we meet someone who is much further advanced than we, the newly awakened “pure consciousness” beings that we now are, who tells us that there is a higher state of existence yet. We can, if we choose, let go of this attachment to consciousness and awaken to this even higher state. Avid searchers after growth and awakening that we are, we leap at it and we do this. We then discover that at this higher state we are much, much more than mere consciousness. We are something else entirely. Something, in some way that I now can’t imagine, truly limitless and sublime. We discover that “consciousness” is just the vehicle that we used for ourselves while playing WITHIN the separation reality we were previously in.

What then?

Is CONSCIOUSNESS still an ultimate truth? Or is it just that, from the perspective of those inside this separation-reality, that it might appear to be so as we awaken?

I know this is just a thought experiment. I know I can’t “prove” any of this to you. But that is exactly the point. If I dig hard enough then EVERYTHING turns out to be like this. EVERYTHING turns out to be just another story, just another set of thoughts and ideas. Nothing seems to have the kind of eternal validity that you are demanding the word TRUTH must imply. Nothing, that is, except The One IS.

Not from where I stand.

And that, my friend, is MY truth. It is for now. Because MY truth changes and grows as I do. Because I come to decide that truth IS mutable. It is the scaffolding upon which I build my own very being. And my inner being-building exercises are very energetic! 🙂 So I need scaffolding that can handle the changes without getting brittle and snapping. It updates as I learn new things and it morphs as I release old items that no longer serve me. So my truth-set changes. And as it changes so my experience of life changes. Because what is outside of me is nothing other than a mirror of what is inside of me. I don’t need to heal the world… I only need to heal my own beliefs. Which is my truth-set.

But I do not insist that YOUR truth should in any way support or match mine. So I accept completely that you might balk at all this “my truth” and “your truth” stuff. If that is wrong for you then that is okay. I do not need you to agree with me or to believe what I do or… anything. I don’t write to you to convince you. I write to you only because you asked and I see in you “another me”. It is my joy to engage you in conversation. It is my joy to share with you MY truth… even if you don’t like me calling it that.

With love,


8/4/12 – Bill “Brother Asa” Taylor


I do appreciate that you are taking the time to indulge in these conversations with me. There are those of us who are striving to daily exist at these levels but we are spread out around the world making it difficult to have conversations such as this. From a personal perspective it is through conversations such as this, entered into with an open mind, that helps keep me from becoming trapped in a box of my own making.

For the casual observer what we may appear to be discussing would lie more into the arena of semantics—whether what we are doing is discussing whether the correct use would be to use the term “truth-sets” or “perceptions” but it is much greater than that. It is how we perceive and find where we are within the ALL.

We both agree that within the ALL there is a TRUTH—“ALL IS ONE”. If I have it right, originating from your precept of operating from truth-sets then one would have to allow that within the ALL there has to be the provision for the existence of everything. We have already agreed that ALL IS ONE is a truth, therefore, the existence for truth to exist within the ALL has been established. That truth would have to be, as expected as part of the ALL, infinite so as it would be found to be as truth everywhere within the ALL.

Having embraced that ALL IS ONE is infinite, therefore, it has to contain infiniteness then truth must be infinite as well since without truth being infinite ALL IS ONE being truth would not be infinite. That would seem to fulfill your position that there are infinite sets of truth. However, we also agreed that Truth was immutable since ALL IS ONE is immutable truth. There then seems to be a conundrum, a mystery, how can Truth be immutable and infinite at the same time?

To be honest I do not know! I can offer a different perspective that for me helps to alleviate the conundrum and that is that what we in this existence defined as “truth” is not truth as much as it is perception based on limited knowledge of ALL IS ONE. From that arises that since Truth exists within ALL IS ONE that is immutable then allowing for the existence of infinite within ALL IS ONE there has to be immutable truths.

The question then becomes how do I prepare myself to recognize these immutable truths when I encounter them? Say for instance would the Universal Law of Love be an immutable truth—Love is the greatest thing in ALL IS ONE and ALL IS ONE is Love or is it as you perceive it to be simply a truth-set with mutability? What then of the Universal Law of Polarity–within the ALL IS ONE opposites exist with infinite varying degrees between them? There is Light (knowledge) and Dark (lack of knowledge) with infinite varying degrees between. Which says that One, Prime Creator, Infinite Mind, Source of All That Is exists at one polarity and something exists at the other. If that is the law and that is as it will be found to be, is that not a truth and would it not be found to be that truth across all realities, dimensions, Universes, and whatever within the ALL IS ONE that we find ourselves?

The same would apply to the Law of One—we are All One, we are All part of one Energy, we are All of One Mind, we are ALL from One Source, The Infinite Mind, The Prime Creator, The Source of All That Is, That Which Was Not Manifested—would it not? Meaning is it not an immutable truth to be found and recognized as such. My question then goes to the heart of the search, is not what we are seeking is those very truths to become once more an integrated part of us? If so, then what I must do is prepare to be able to know when such truths have been found and not to dilute the intent of the search by obscuring what it is I seek.

Now we are to the heart of the matter. I ask that, if you would be so gracious, to help decipher whether these which I refer to as Laws are as they would appear to be, simply immutable truths, or are they merely illusory and there is no rhyme or reason to ALL IS ONE.

Much Love,


I posted this to Zingdad on 8/4/12 and I have received no reply. Should a reply subsequently come in then I will post it as an additional to my blog.