Part I
The Open Letter
The Vir is that individual who is guided by the Intellect through strategies and tactics of advancing their Control and Command over their conditions and self towards a life of Victory.
The aim of Access Denied is to initiate those degrees of knowledge necessary for a life of Command.
Access Denied, Part I is available on Amazon, in digital and physical form, and can be purchased there.
However, I highly suggest that the reader make use of the free content first, so that they can come to determine if the material matches their nature and needs, and/or is not compatible with what they are looking for. If one comes to find they are compatible, one needs only use the Amazon link provided above to purchase the digital or hard copy of the treatise.
Table of contents
A Voltential Production
© 2021 by Volt Altair
All rights reserved. The original art and the written material of this book or any portion thereof
may not be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods,
without the prior written permission of the writer,
except for the use of brief quotations in a book review and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law.
Edited by Eli LaSauvageonne
Original art by Eli LaSauvageonne
Book cover by Eli LaSauvageonne
Published by Amazon.com
ISBN : 9798756709254
First printing, 2021
Printed in the United States of America
For more information or for any request, visit
“The Valorous who engages Access Denied as a guide is not seeking to conquer you, the familiars, or anyone else for that matter. They are engaged in self conquest, and a part of that self conquest is denying a culture of access that has forbidden the need and expectation of a standard of access and an exclusive level of self ownership. Access Denied is a cultural response to the culture of the commons making their offspring subjects of the whims of others, and lacking in the expression of the confidence they were born with.”
-Volt
FOREWARNING
This treatise of self-defense is not to be taken as a NEW NARRATIVE to describe what you have already been doing. Be forewarned. This practice is common among the commons : to take the NEW WORDS of others, hijack them, and pass them off as a new way of describing what they had already believed, and behaved as. This is the mark of a charlatan, and many of you readers will behave as charlatans. The patterns in this treatise are statistically unheard of. They are born out of “Vir” type of character who is either rare, or mythological. Therefore, when one is before another who is acting like they “live this Way”, then they are likely around a shaman trying to use the narrative for seduction. There are warnings all over this piece in how to detect a shaman charlatan. Read them carefully. Presume at all times, till evidence is provided, that any recommending this piece, any saying they agree with it... is a charlatan. Then read it, and learn what that means, and see if that is the case, or if the source in agreement so-called actually lives based on the values of this. Let me make it plain and simple in the first. Only one who is before thee that is MIGHTY, that is NOBLE, that is EXCELLENT, in physical and mental health, would even come close to, perhaps, being aligned in these values. No one struggling with their emotions, their past, intoxicants, self-harm, self-doubt, and emotional servitude to others is anywhere near what this piece supports. They will be the charlatans, acting like this applies to them, so they can have new narratives to seduce others with. Call them out, and get them out of your associations. Do not try to reform them, just like this manual is not for trying to reform you, shamans and charlatans out there.
Be aware that most are all about novelties. They are into spiritualism to find new ways of lying and deceiving, and making their wanted self the focus, versus what they are. They are into books to have things to say, to impress others, because their lives lived will be unimpressive. Do not fall for this. ACTION here is key, not wordplay. Because you are reading this book does not mean what is promoted in this book is for you, and that you are special. That is not what is likely. What is likely is that you are a chump. What is possible is you were not supposed to be a CHUMP, and may have inclinations, if acted on by your own efforts, that can transmute all this to that of a Champ. The chances of you not being born to be a CHUMP is HIGHLY unlikely, and because of that, YOU, the reader, will probably be the one this warning is about. You will try to use the words as a novelty, and you will betray the words in your actions.
But the Noble have a plan for that. It's called... Show me your map. The ability to read this piece is not presumed. Literacy requires “philosophy”, and that is lacking.
.png)
Therefore, to read this piece, truly and sincerely, one needs to acquire a free mapping or paid mind map program, and map out what is being read. Put it in a mind map, and where you are in doubt about something, or something “Calls” to you... Define and deliberate on it. Build the map. When you then think you can deal in these “Patterns”, do it through your map, and where one then says “show me your map”, and you can not, you are a charlatan, having never done the mental work necessary to integrate. If you do produce the map, then those more capable can see either where you have projected your own ineptitudes, or in that you truly are near to the kind that calls out to them. This is the first EVIDENCE based form of association.
Here is the cheat, here, and it will seem shocking. NPCs, loopers, automatons are NOT ABLE to build out mind maps that show correlation in their thought. They are forbidden to do this. They can not discern and deliberate, and the absence of the mind map, but the claim they have read this, and know it, proves they did so only as an NPC, a looper, a charlatan, a CHUMP. No mind map beside this endeavor means NO mind considering it.
You have been warned... This is not some academic dribble you will be hijacking to get laid.
INTRODUCTION
I decided to make this quick piece on account of those lately taking interest in this subject matter, and having their own experiences, once shared with me, able to advance my sense of the need of such a work.
Others need this far more than I do―however, it must be warned from the start that this is a messy subject that can hardly be said to possess a science, or that is, a knowledge base, though this is the aim of the treatise I will publish in the near future.
Access Denied will be an attempt to create a knowledge based approach to the subject matter, and the subject matter is about giving access, and gaining access to others, and the motives and the tactics that surround this human endeavor.
The treatise Access Denied will go deep.
But for now, a short and simple version is needed to explain easily some things that may or may not be useful, based on who is doing the reading.
In this shorter open letter―that is, shorter not to be mistaken for short―I will be announcing some social changes I am making as of late, that I have also observed others seeking to make as a means to self stand, or hold one's own space.
This version is for a quick and ready guide for me to use when speaking with others, and mentoring others through Viritus, as I do.
Why a shorter and simpler version?
The answer is that the treatise is influencing myself and other readers towards practices, or that is, rules and standards for living. In the past, I had lived by them, and then recently, due to the pandemic, I had become lax on these standards, in response to the social shutdowns of this event.
Others coming to observe this would ask me about the “guiding principles”, and then why I have suspended them, when I was so known to follow them strictly.
As I began to answer these questions, both males and females I was writing to began to see that there were advantages in their own paths for seeking to explore these ways of holding space.
Access Denied was also to be somewhat of a personal or rather character manual for myself, to help others know “of me” better than they do, when they have their own minds to be the only source of translating my observable behavior.
Because of this intent, others have informed me that so far, what they are reading, they want to be able to have as their manual too. This way if they were to recommend it to another, they could say, “and this is the way I guide my social interactions... Now you know”.
The motivations may differ, in why one may adopt the rules and standards, and when they differ, that adopter must profess such, so as not to be misunderstood.
I am going to begin with a story about an event from years past when I was in New Hampshire, investigating the Free State Project.
The house I was staying in had formed itself around a single personality. His name is not mine to give, and therefore, I will keep this all general. This fella did not push to have it this way; he just simply was attractive, and those seeking out the project were those not often considered the popular crowd. Those who moved to the Project were in essence getting pre-established networks of friends coming there for the same thing, and access to others was guaranteed.
Though they were fashioning themselves Libertarians, many of them were like a hippy Libertarian flavor, and in actuality, they were more Socialist and collectivist leaning than they could have realized. This is not a bad thing, if it is one's nature, but can be a bad thing when it is not the nature that is marketed, and those of an individualistic and rational based thought systems come to partake.
When those having been marketed to the rational Libertarian theme would come, they would be exposed to collectivist tactics of all-inclusive access to each other, and activities.
You see, individualism, which I will explain later, tends towards higher standards and exceptionalism, when it is true individualism. This is the opposite of the all-inclusive, no standards, anything-pretty-much-goes collectivism.
Individualism leads to exclusivity and elitism, which is frowned upon, nay, attacked by collectivism, which leads to mediocrity, banalities, and the reinforcement of the material realm, while ever so claiming it's for the “greater good of the greater many”, and is a “spiritual quest”. Collectivism, because it believes a group is the primary, and the individual a secondary, begins with fictions, or that is, mental constructs that have no foundation in actual Reality, or that is, actuality, or things as they are, versus as they are believed.
A group is a body, or corpus of individuals. This is why a corporation, and/or incorporation is called as it is. All bodies of individuals become a corporation when they incorporate or join in a collective goal in which they all work towards, with shared identity.
Corpus means body, likened to that of a dead body, a corpse.
A corporation is not real in the true sense, less one comes to say a mental construct and an agreement. They are real forms of this realm, the realm of belief and thought. However, in practice, they are treated as far more realer than the individual who is subject to the body of individuals, the corpus, the collective.
All organizations and societies can be grouped in either of the two categories. None are outside of this analysis. A social body is either guided by collectivism, the default and most common setting, or individualism, the rare and new possible way of social association.
By statistical likelihood, collectivism is to be presumed to be the social program in all present social organizations, even those claiming often otherwise. It's in the behavior the truth is found here. I will address these two notions, that of collectivism versus individualism, soon, as well as the strongly correlated notions of egoism and altruism.
Back to my story.
On one of the outings with the personality that was at the head of the house, a male, I was invited to a session of The Vagina Monologues, with many in attendance. I had never been to one, and it was pretty pathetic for my taste. I had to often step out, and get some fresh air. The attendees of this room were some of the most ugly folk I had ever seen gathered. Now, if you have never thought, “wow, these some ugly people”, then there is a good chance you were groomed in the all-inclusive, nonjudgmental camp of collectivism. You are not allowed, in this camp, to say a room is full of uglies, just like as an individual, you are not allowed to think you are good-looking, and others may not be. Instead, you are groomed in egalitarian ideology, and left to believe all are the same and you should never judge a book by its cover.
At the same outing, afterwards, the group gathered outside for a “drill” where at the head of the circle was a “witchy” female who was self-appointed as leader. When I told them they were led, they denied it, saying they had no leader. This, in words, while in actions, they had dominant personalities that set the tone. Their alpha was this “witchy lady”, and the drill she was taking them through was one that would characterize saying NO as a negative thing. She did this by having them chant “no” in an angry and nasty way, and then chant “yes” in a positive or that is “happy way”. She was assigning to them the value of no and yes with a clear manipulation to demote the no as a negative, and raise the yes as a positive.
Because I was there to partake and observe, I was in the circle with the rest of the bonobos, holding hands, but at the onset of this chant, I immediately let go, and backed away from the circle. Whatever the powers that be, they made sure by default, I could see witches and warlocks, and that I would not grant them access to my mind and being. I had by this time been quite aware that the power was the opposite; that the power was in the no, not in the yes; that saying yes was the weakness. The latter can now be said to come from being “agreeable”, and trait “agreeable” is not a trait that one ought to possess who travels this Way. Those who love the yes have no standard. Those who favor the no are starting by saying, “prove yourself” and your “right of access”. I say no first, until I see otherwise―not yes first. This is called “lacking in discernment”, to start with a yes. If you are a “yes boy” or a “yes girl”, you are in the wrong place, concerning this manual. You will not find that your nature is the one it speaks to, but you will perhaps begin to see why there are others now telling you NO. “We”, those walking this Way, do not want your yes, and “we”, those walking this Way, will not grant you access in the absence of discernment.
I judge a book by its cover, and that cover is not its appearance, but its behavior on display. Those who preach, “do not judge a book by its cover”, are those trying to hide and conceal their ways, and reinterpret what they know are foul ways inside. “Do not judge a book by its cover” is the first thing one will get rid of along this “Way”. That is not only nonsense, it's also not possible for the brain to abide by, and those claiming they do, that is, do not judge... are either knowingly lying, or they are delusional. In fact, when dealing with others, this is one of the first things I test. I bring the conversation towards this notion that “thou shall not judge”, and/or “thou shall not evaluate”, for this is what it truly means. I get others often to admit that this mantra is not possible. All brains will judge; it's just in this collective you are groomed to lie, and to hide your judgments, except for those you consider trusted―and often that category of trusted is not based on trust being earned, but simply that the trusted has become familiar through simple long-term exposure, and/or replicant interactions. This is a set of horrible standards. However, when you are forbidden to judge others, then surely, you are forbidden to judge others accurately. So then you will still judge them, but now, you will judge poorly, having never learned that you are required to judge, and that judgment has a science, a method.
These were a bunch of uglies at this event. And it must be said, in judgment, that clear studies have been conducted that have shown a correlation with attractiveness level, and that of the beliefs or ideologies one becomes attracted to in life. This is to say, how you see the self, or that is, Sense of Self, will determine how you see the world, or that is, Sense of Life, and vice versa.
There are many attractive folk who have been taken hostage by a culture of uglies, and one can tell if this is the case when attractive kinds have been submitted to granting unchecked access to themselves by others, often that of plenty of uglies. These words will seem harsh for the childish minds among you, as that mantra “thou shall not judge” keeps getting your hostage minds in check. Figure this out, if you are an attractive kind, so that you can liberate yourself. If you are an ugly, and you are reading this, then stop. It's just not for you. I have no solutions for uglies; you are probably where you are meant to be.
Attractive here, and ugly, are not purely physical terms, the way I am using it. However, physicality plays a role. It is a true statement to say it matters. If it did not matter, nature, or rather the Laws of Reality, would not have organized your physical structure with genetics and phenotypes, both being observable and indicative of health and well-being. No matter how you were born, if you are the healthy version of you, you will be attractive. If you are the unhealthy version of you, you will be an ugly. Models who are often mentally corrupt little girls are only attractive to mentally corrupt little boys, no matter the age of their body. Keeping the young and childish look as a form of attractiveness is how the collective industry operates. Women who are strong, self standing, stern, and beautiful are not promoted. Stunted “Children of Ineptitude” are. Beauty standards are not subjective. Those who have not mentally come of age will favor that which too is not of age. “Of age” is that which is competent, capable, and self standing, based on nature. Most of you have never come of age, but have been kept inept, as you were as children. So then what is often defended by those physically aging is this time of the past, when competence mattered little, and deference to your ignorance and lack of experience was high. Many believe happiness will be attained by a return or a maintenance of this state of deference. This is deeper than it sounds.
When I say uglies, it is often that I am speaking of those who have had their bodies age and breakdown with minds that are inept, insecure, fearful, incompetent, and in demand of deference, which manifests itself as a form of “effeminate entitlement”. It encompasses that which is way beyond the mere outer shell appearances, that, however, does absolutely show the inner realm of the mind.
Remember, reader, if you do not know already, the writer of this piece is a Vir. Now, you will not know what this means, when inept. Only those taking up challenges, and coming to victories will have a sense of what a Vir is. The Vir Way should not be sought by those nature did not intend to be Vir.
To give some background, when I say Vir, I mean,
“One who specializes in the strategies and tactics of advancing their Control and Command over their conditions and self, guided by a moral and definable code”.
This means Vir are rare, and I am not speaking of this in the way others would think of it, as they are common and mediocre. Those readers not yet knowing this, I am a writer who publishes under Niō Zen Productions as well. I write as the writer “Ta’ir”, as well as that of Volt, based on what the pieces are about. Voltential.me will be the new home for this work and what will follow next under VOLTENTIAL productions.
This treatise is composed of this filter, as is all of my thinking. Others that have come to know of me are investigating whether or not they are more than Fighters, but all whom I associate meaningfully with these days are and must be at minimum Fighters. Not all Fighters are Vir, but all Vir are Fighters. A Vir is more demanding, and becomes more about the mind.
A Fighter is one who will be engaged in the tactical level of living. They will be in need of, and in search of the tactics that allow them to advance in their Control and Command over their conditions. A Fighter will be at the conditional and tactical level, not the self, and strategic level. A Vir is about the self, and they are strategic, but only after they have mastered the condition, and that of the tactical. This is the difference. It is chronological.
Vir are whom this manual of sorts is for. It is not for those who have not yet discovered if they are Vir, or if they are worldlings, or that of merely inept children of collectivism.
So then I would say, before one goes further, check to see if you are a Fighter, and if engaging in some fight activity that is challenging and productive excites you. Now, martial arts, to me, is not fighting. Martial arts is expressive art, like dancing, only the theme is combat themed.
Therefore, I consider martial arts “combat themed expressive dance and movements”. This does not mean that there are not those who take martial arts, and do not fight with it. There are, and I was one of them. But the fighting is not the same as the martial arts practice. Fighting is fighting, and requires an opponent, and requires going at it rather fast, and with lack of predictability and no instruction. It is meddling.
One ought to then wait until this investigation of the fight becomes their direction. It is needed to begin the process of understanding what follows in this treatise.
Now, there are those who will think this is not needed in order to have an opinion of the words that follow. Well, these are the uglies.
The uglies I speak of do not believe they need to be competent to grasp ideas. Instead, they translate competent expressions into the inept filters they find familiar. This is to say, uglies do not read with an eagerness to learn and know. Uglies read to affirm the world is ugly like them, and to subvert that which shines.
To shine and to be shining means to be in a state of excellence of expression of one's nature or innate identity. When uglies see this, they “passively” attack, and they seek access to those who shine as a means to prey on their glow. Fighters are about that glow. When one has not come to this glow, then there is nothing worth defending. So to tell another, access denied is a thing, and they have no sense of the glow, they will be baffled why one would ever deny access, and certainly, they would not see the strength and the beauty in this.
At first glance, Access Denied is an update, in many ways, to definable behavior. This is to say, if any are confused about why I am doing things a certain way, and why others may be doing it this way as well... they need only read this manual.
As a manual, then, I will try to brush the surface on some points, and then expound, or that is, take it further and deeper, to its primaries and principles.
Access Denied is designed to be an open letter, as short and simple as it can be; however, this does not mean to the readers that this will appear to have succeeded. As a writer, I can be called “philosophical” in my ways, and “philosophy” as it were is often language heavy, because by comparison to the commons, and the way they think, it is idea heavy.
Before I go further with this open letter, let me make one thing very clear. I, “Volt”, am not an “educated Man”. By education here, I mean “schooled”. I did not attend the starting, the middle, the high, or collegiate schools in the United States, or that of “America”. There is no such thing as “self-educated”. Education is institutional rearing.
Though I am uneducated, I am quite spirited in my learning, which I had come to direct with all seriousness throughout my life. This, one calls an autodidactic, or one who directs their own learning. Being free to do such directing, I was also free to be in accordance with my own mental sphere, and the mechanics natural to it. I was born prodigious in mind, and my level of intelligence has always been held by others, in observation, to be unusual and rather rare and advanced. Those who know me, especially professionally, do not find it difficult to make clear to others, if there is a genius that they know, I am one of the highest order.
To a reader this will sound like arrogance, which when defined means “an exaggeration in one's sense of worth, and/or sense of abilities”. If you began by sensing arrogance in that I simply pointed out how my level of Reasoning is categorized, then there is a good chance you are the exact type that this letter is needed for. The key word to understand arrogance is that of exaggeration. This is what one is accusing another of, when they say they are arrogant, or behaving so. In order for this accusation to be sound, the accuser needs to be able to measure if in fact, the accused is exaggerating in their sense of worth or abilities. If the accuser is not able in the field being judged, the accuser then is accusing from a position of arrogance. If the accuser is just getting their “feelies” on, and calling someone arrogant because of how they sound, then that accuser still is the arrogant one. This is often the case. One must be attained in the matter being judged in order to detect if another is exaggerating.
The fact of the matter is that the commons use attacks, such as arrogant, such as narcissist, and conceited, and cocky, as a means to often bring down those who tend to shine brighter than they do. The masses, in their mental midgetry, despise those who shine, and this is caused by the overwhelming presence in humans of fear and insecurity at their base of emotions, that come to exist even in the absence of threats and hardship. Most, by default, are with fear and insecurity, and as a baseline, they do not observe themselves under this possession. This will play a role throughout this letter.
The purpose for starting here, with this lack of education, and that of being born with a mind considered genius, so to say, was not to laud myself, though such would not be wrong. Instead, this was explained to make clear that the manner in which I shall write this letter, my use of capitalization, my specific lexicon, and the overabundance of commas and other grammatically archaic practices are not by mistake... But are in fact deliberately carried out under the style and practice of my self-directed learning. It will seem odd to the schooled mind, and such a mind will be quick to accuse me of some error in literacy in order to avoid the substance and meaning of this piece. When one observes this, before thee is a mental midget that exists as a mere echo chamber of academia, and be not surprised that they never produce any words and ideas worthy of much examination. I will not be adhering to academic and familiar structures of communication. From the start, this will bring forth the appearance of the belief of absence of skill. But be warned : this is a deliberate difference, in that I was not schooled, and therefore, in the absence of schooling, it would only make sense that my work will not be the product of a schooled mind.
But because most have been schooled, they will measure from a schooled “sense” of literature. And because of this, you will be inclined to think you can “translate” my terms and their meaning into your own... As the schools promote this.
DON'T!
Do not translate what you do not understand into something you do. This is the mark of mental midgetry, and the absence of intellect. Either pay close attention to my definition of the terms, or use an Oxford English Dictionary, and or an etymology search to come to grasp the terms more accurately than the schools have ever expected of you.
Tone of this piece
When being asked to prepare this open letter, a request was made that I attempt to do so with my Brooklyn mixed style of “philosophy”, versus that of my often Buddhistic blend of notions, and manners. It was suggested that this formal form would be easier for their familiars to digest.
The tone of my writings, even in the Buddhistic form, is often that of “wrath”. My words can be called fighting words, in that there is a combative element to the way in which I write and communicate. Wrath, in this context, in how I am using it, is a theatrical device that is used to illuminate principles and points of mental evolution. Anger that is carried out with a sense of humor is the point of wrath. Wrath is not actual anger as an emotion. It is the theatrical display of anger with humor in mind, often for a purpose. For most of the primal emotions, there is an awakened and theatrical displayed version. However, it is a version, because it is the theatrics of the awakened used to bridge over the slumbering wordlings.
The appearance of wrath, to small minds, is indistinguishable from that of actual anger. This is perhaps why it has been used by the Wise since the start : to make a point, and to move minds towards greater challenges. One who lacks Control and Command, that of potency, can not have wrath to be seen by others. Instead, the primal emotion of anger is manifested, and those limited to an inept Control and Command over self and condition will see those with wrath as merely angry. It's a good test, when one has wrath, to find a reason to express it before others, to see how they react. Those who can only see anger and do not see the guidance, the Control and Command, are mere Children of Ineptitude, and likely have no fight in them―though they may have plenty of anger.
Those who know me somewhat joke and call me “Budo-Pooh”, and/or “wrathful Pooh”, because of these two traits of mine, being side by side. The Vir, and the Taoist, calm, carefree, yet able to pounce and get down with the wrath, bear of a man. When enemies are not present, I am my Pooh. When enemies present themselves... Wrath is often needed. The first order of my wrath is with words and ideas, with the possibility of shaking the mind of the enemy to remove their sense of fear and insecurity, in order to elevate out of opposition, and into self-cultivation.
I believe the best way to handle an enemy is to guide them towards their own development, so that they no longer need to oppose, subvert, oppress, and undermine. This is to say, fix whatever problem causes them to come against you. Then they may move from enemy to ally. This, however, does not often work. And when it fails, wrath takes on another form.
I will try to get at this piece with a little Brooklyn flavor, as has been requested. But, as Yoda says :
“Do or do not. There is no try.”
On that note, the “Do” I shall do right now is some basic definitions to start this off. Do, in Japanese, is equivalent to the Tao, in Chinese, able to be spelt Dao as well. The Dao and the Do are concepts that have been hijacked greatly by the shamans throughout history, and twisted to be mysteries unable to be resolved. Most of you will be shamans who are reading this. The term means methodology, and method means a “system of Reasoning”, and then what follows is the subject matter that the system of Reasoning is applied to.
The term Dao had the meaning of a “Way”, a “Path”, and a “fella on the road”. This too is at the root or the etymology of the term method. “Logos”, often to mean “word”, but more so a sacred sense of the “Word”, is at the root of “logic”, and logic is a “method of valid Reasoning”. Because of this, there have been translations where method and Logos have been used to translate Dao. This then can be said of the Buddhist sense of Dharma.
Now, a reader may be asking, “who is this crazy man, and what does this have to do with the open letter?”
Many of you think you are into Eastern thought, and the spiritual ways of the “Buddha”, of gurus, and other foreign to your upbringing sorts. However, rarely do you actually go deep into these philosophies. I start with these definitions, because these elements will be at the foundation of the Reasoning behind Access Denied. I have kept my other works, for the most part, out of this treatise, that of Access Denied, but they will appear here in this letter, so that in preparing it for others, I also have a use for it myself.
In Early Buddhism, those taking up the Way and moving towards Dharma separated from their familiars and took up what some call voluntary homelessness, or a life of “wandering”. They often did this, because the ways of the masses, the commons, were not wise ways, and not conducive to the number one objective of a Dharma practitioner, the objective of being self standing, of being a “Sovereign”, of being self conquered.
In Early Buddhistic thought, the mental state needed for this, at the foundation, can be translated as equanimity, which means to be unmoved by the emotions, urges, passions, as well as other phenomena. Upekkā was the Pali term for this. This cultivated mind state, like the other cultivated mind states, was a part of dhyāna, which is the term to come to be translated as Zen, and poorly, or rather culturally poorly in the West as meditation, and then brutally given the nihilistic tendencies of the dim-witted hippy practitioners, who warped the meaning to match their own inclinations as shamans.
These terms are the foundation for a great deal of what is occurring, in this secular piece of Access Denied―secular only in appearance, for simplicity. Access Denied is without a doubt a part of Niō Zen, and therefore, a Niō Zen Production. The category of this work will be under that of Voltential, a new project, and its umbrella “Viritus” to be explained elsewhere.
Whoever has passed on this open letter to you was likely a reader of these works. These works are written in a way that is designed to only appeal to those with a “fighting spirit” or “essence”, in which most are not. This means, those shamans in their life of cowardice will not agree with, and see the value of my works and the pieces that come in and around them. It's not written for shamans, and I do not preach a universal path.
My works are designed for two types. The first type is the Fighter, and the second type, born out of the Fighter, is the Warrior. However, when I use the term Warrior, it is in the “Saka Way”, that of being a Warrior thinker, a Warrior Sage, a Warrior Philosopher. I also do not use these terms like effeminates do, where it's like a child wishing to be a princess or a king, and thinking it so on wish alone. One who calls themselves these things and lives like the rest is a charlatan. You do not arrive at these things through words alone. It is in actions that one becomes these things, and by degree of development.
If one does not fight and have battles, actual or simulated, then they are not a Fighter. One is not a Fighter because they live. One is not a Fighter because they argue. One is not a Fighter because they get up every morning or day, go to work, and call this “the fight”. This is not at all what I mean. A Fighter first and foremost fights, and even then, they are not considered a Fighter in the way I speak of until they begin to see, and come to train in tactics of living. This is to say, the Fighter is born on the tactical level of action. So then if one is not learning tactics for navigating life, as well as fighting battles, real or simulated, they are not the Fighter I speak of. It may be their undiscovered essence or nature, but this is as good as not being so... Till such nature becomes discovered and put in motion through expression.
Most of you reading this are doing so because someone you know has discovered or come to think they have at minimum the Fighter essence. And because of this, they are starting to live or rather behave differently from the familiar, and they will be making use of this open letter with others, to help explain some of these things. But if you the receiver of the open letter are not a Fighter by nature, you WILL NOT grasp the nature of this piece, nor likely be able to have the sincerity to care to even read it to completion. The cowards, in which the commons are, are quick to abandon anything strange and unfamiliar, which this piece certainly will be to them.
Who is the writer?
This question can not really be answered with some short bit. Many will accuse me of being some charismatic manipulator who has cast some spell on their familiar. When this is done, it shows something truly clear for the Fighter to see. It shows that the familiars do not believe that the Fighter is able to use their own mind to begin with, and make decisions for themselves. Often, with the commons, this is true. The commons have never thought for themselves, so the accusers, being commons, live an existence of cowardice, where others have done all their thinking for them. So then, in their ignorance, their arrogance, and the delusion born from both, they will attack those Fighters who dare to come to think with their own minds. DUDs or Delusional Under Domestication, can only see others so far as they can see themselves―which is highly limited.
One must ask, of those who accuse another of being spellbound and under the control of others, if they are in fact themselves free, if they are in fact self standing, if they are in fact immovable, with equanimity, or are they just Children of Ineptitude who are crying out with attacks because they are losing access, and they do not wish to earn such access.
This access is presumed and compelled by Children of Ineptitude of all ages.
Because I am a religious and philosophical writer, it is easy to accuse me of a “cult of personality”. What my accusers do not come to know, or care to know is that a part of the Fighter's training, the ones I guide, is that of self-defense against manipulation. This is to say, they undergo a great deal of study and discourse on manipulation tactics and mental warfare, studying propaganda, studying seduction, studying psychological manipulation, and so on. In addition, depending on their degree of development and involvement, they study behavioral philosophy elements and body language, with deception detection as a primary pursuit.
This does not come later in one's development as a Fighter; this is a starting set of degrees of development. This way too, they can avoid the self-delusion most accusers suffer under. The very foundation of Access Denied starts here, in that the Fighter is now watching their familiars through a scientific and philosophical lens. While their familiars are using the same Children of Ineptitude lens they always have, and suffer under, the Fighter is getting clarity through demonstration and rigorous examination, through logic and methodical Reasoning. Demonstration and proof is primary in Access Denied. Faith, that of trust and that of belief are NOT elements of Access Denied; yet the accusers, the familiars who act in insecurity and fear of losing access, will be, admittedly or not, faith based, in need of trust, and surrounded by beliefs never founded on demonstration or rigorous Reasoning. Because of this, the Ways of Access Denied will be contrary, seemingly disruptive, foreign, and manipulative.
What is “manipulated” is carried out by the Fighter. They are “manipulating” their own minds towards higher Reasoning, and greater demand of standards, which most familiars will fail to meet. Familiars are called so, because the only standard asked of them and others has been simply continued exposure and that of all-inclusive access. Later on, I will explain the source of this need for familiars and how in primal conditions it was sound, but in domestication it is injurious.
“Philosophers” are and always have been uncommon.
In the ancient past, they were even more so. These days, a “philosopher” by name alone is often an academic who is merely trained in the history of ideas they call “philosophy”, and then just repeats the “old ways” in books, and talks; often more than not, NONE are living philosophically.
When the commoners then come to discover one who can carry this label, and lives according to their words, or their words, better yet, match the way they live, this one is seen as a “foreigner”, with suspicion and contempt being common.
A philosopher can be called the most judgmental one could possibly be. The commons, which most familiars are, are Children of Ineptitude, and such kinds of children are fearful and insecure about being judged and falling short. Therefore, their commons, as a social order, are designed to remove judgment and measurement, making life comfortable and with ease, leading to massive amounts of deference, or that is, yielding.
A philosopher historically came and upset this comfort and deference, levying greater demands upon their own life, and the lives of their associates. One can call themselves a “philosopher” these days, who merely speaks some academic jargon, but they can not call themselves a “Sage”, in that this is the kind who not only thinks in uncommon ways, but does not live the common way of deference. To this matter then, this Ancient term Sage is used by me, for self title, as well as in the order of “Warrior Sage” versus “Warrior Philosopher”, which falls short.
I must remind the shaman readers, which most will be, that the Buddha was called “Saka-Muni” far more, and long before the title Buddha came about. Muni means Sage, or Wise-one, them who know, and so on. Saka were the people he came from, which were all Warriors, and they had no Brahmans or shamans among them, by choice. The Saka removed from their Ways the shaman and the Brahmin ways for a reason. However, Brahmins would come to dominate Buddhism, shaping it to its present state, which is hardly representative of the Saka culture that began the deviation.
To say Saka-Muni was to say Warrior Sage, and the Buddha is quoted as saying :
“A man may conquer a million men in battle, but one who conquers himself is, indeed, the greatest of conquerors.”
This was being said during his war with Mara, which in modern terms would equate to the hive mind, the collective mind that you familiars have been promoting as echo chambers your whole lives, suffering under, and raising your young under, making them soft for exploitation and subjugation.
In Latin, there is the phrase,
Bis vincit qui se vincit in victoria.
This phrase, “we” use in our simulated battle groups as a greeting and a departure.
The Valorous who engages Access Denied as a guide is not seeking to conquer you, the familiars, or anyone else for that matter. They are engaged in self conquest, and a part of that self conquest is denying a culture of access that has forbidden the need and expectation of a standard of access and an exclusive level of self ownership. Access Denied is a cultural response to the culture of the commons making their offspring subjects of the whims of others, and lacking in the expression of the confidence they were born with.
This confidence is what makes them a Fighter by nature, not choice. They would not have found these works, and been attracted to these Ways if they were not born with confidence. Finding is not the point. Attraction to the work is. One can stumble across these works, but when they show they can not truly read them, and integrate them, it is because the attraction was not present inside the individual.
This expression has roots in the same Buddhistic ideas I have been speaking of. These are the words used by Mytho-Buddha to describe those who come to the Saka Way. He describes them as being “born with confidence”, not with doubt and insecurity. He describes them as “noble” in nature, with the drive towards “excellence”, a term in Greek of Arete, and in Pali, ariya (Sanskrit : ārya).
When your offspring is like you, familiar, they are likely with doubt and insecurity in life. They then need to turn to others for validation, for attention and acceptance as a means to feel that of security. They then live easily as you do, though they too suffer like you do. And you as familiars do nothing, and have not done anything to have it differently. You just complain and live defeated, complain and live vanquished.
The Mytho-Buddha is quoted as saying :
“It is better to die fighting than to live as one vanquished.”
This is a motto of Access Denied, as are other mottos channeled throughout.
One who is born to the familiars, who is born with confidence and Arete will seek other means to be expressed, but their familiars will teach them the narrative they suffer under : narratives of doubt, of insecurity, of fear, of nihilism, and of inept thoughts of fluffy shamanistic pleasures. Too then they will be no stranger to intoxicants, be it alcohol, be it “weed”, be it the assortment of “checkout drugs” available in the marketplace these days. The ultimate sign of a weak mind and weak character is intoxicants. And these intoxicated shamans will speak of their “checkout drugs” as being spiritual and meaningful, while their cowardice is seen all over the place. A coward needs to be intoxicated, because a coward is seeking to escape judgment, and that of being seen by Reality as inept.
Let it be said with the utmost clarity that one who engages in intoxicants and does not cease immediately, upon reading and receiving this Call, is not right for this course. Those who struggle with ending intoxicants would never be right for this “Way”. There is no compromise in this realm. The presence of intoxicants is the clear sign that one is inept, and therefore, if they put forth any of the ideas of this piece and claim an association, they are to be discovered and treated as subversives. Niō Zen, Viritus, Voltential, and all that is related has no allowance for intoxicants AT ALL.
Viritus is the ethical system of Niō Zen. Access Denied is the self-defense manual in regards to associations of Viritus. Viritus as an ethics can be considered as a standalone. This piece, then, is about Viritus, and there is no need for Niō Zen at this point.
Intoxicants include anything we ingest, inhale, or inject into our system that distorts consciousness, disrupts self-awareness, and that is detrimental to health. Now too, to be clear, this is not subject to one's opinions, one's wants, desires, and subjective stances. One is NOT a part of this Way, is NOT sincere if they drink alcohol, if they get high, if they use hallucinogens, if they smoke, and if they have ANY addictions. The term “drug” is not in use here for a reason. “Drug” is more general, and there can be drugs for sickness; drugs as cures. Those who then would say “medicinal uses” of intoxicants would manipulate this notion. If one needs this as “medicinal” use, then they will not have the Vigor, the Vitality, and the default settings necessary for the Way. This is to say, this is not about what the commons do. It is not “wrong” for the commons to engage intoxicants. It is not a universal wrong to engage intoxicants. It's low in consequences for the commons to do so. When you do not prize your consciousness, your mind, then you will not be able to detect impediments. When you are not of this Way, then you will not know what impedes this Way, and therefore, will think what you do does not. You will be WRONG, and a charlatan and a subversive. It is absolute that intoxicants in no way are a part of this Way. None. If then it is uttered by an individual that they can not stop, then they should not. But they should STOP reading, and associating with this Way, for it is not for them, and they will exist only as a subversive and be called out as such. NO INTOXICANTS, for the presence of such makes one subversive. It is the mark of ineptitude.
Subjugation
The number one way that the commons subjugate their young is to give them no venues that would express a different nature, one they may have been born with. With no venues and no alternatives, even those born with confidence and Arete will be directed by their inept familiars to pick up on their inept ways, and continue through their inept world of despair.
If you want to ultimately know who I am, reader... It is this simple.
I am that Ancient who “remembers” the Ways of Viritus, and as such, born to this form in the present conditions, it is not the present conditions that I listened to. It is the old Ways of the Viritus that spoke to my nature, and directed me in how it would become expressed. I am that Man who did not get caught up in your inept education. I am the Man who did not take to your intoxicants. I am the Man who did not bow to your ideologies of ineptitude, preaching fears, insecurities, doubt, nihilism, collectivism, altruism, and the self-sacrifice these all lead to.
I am the Man who refused to be sacrificed by the shamans. The Man who refused and refuses to be exploited. The Man who has and continues to refuse access to those inept in nature and character. I am the Man who had no need to be a “runaway slave” because I am the Man you commons failed to capture. Because of this, to the familiars, I will be a villain, a rogue, and be accused of all the things having happened to you your whole life. I will be called the one bringing about manipulation with negative intent. I will be the one accused of seduction with negative intent. I will be the one thought of as an aggressor.
Why, if not true?
Why, it will be because I do one simple thing. I write and illuminate the notion that “we” are not all the same, and some, though they be few, among you familiars are born with confidence and Arete, but they have been held in captivity. I am the villain, because I dare to tell them that there is a way towards liberation, if and only if they try to get there by their own light; that is to say, by their own efforts.
The first step in that way is to stop being exploited; is to stop being used by others for their emotional fears and insecurities. Stop being the target of others, where they seek validation and unearned attention. Stop being used by others in roles where the role matters, but the individual in the role is expendable and replaceable. I am the villain, because I take away the victims of Children of Ineptitude, those commons, those masses, those multitudes.
I am the villain, because everything I said above, in my own way, is too exactly what the Mytho-Buddha had taught from the start. He saw the masses as a “heap of rubbish”.
Which is where those born with confidence and Arete may come to rise up and out of the muddy water, and into fruition as the lotuses. These few are whom he spoke to, and the masses and the many were seen as worldlings bound to a mere loop of material existence, forsaking the only thing that could save them and end their suffering, that thing some call the Mind.
Shamans do everything to destroy their own mind, and the mind of others. This, because they were not born with confidence and Arete. They were born fearful and insecure. Because of this, the shamans build all-inclusive societies and cultures, committing their offspring into a state of softness so that their kind can exploit them, have access to them, and never be judged accurately.
Recently, I was told a story about a young lady whose name is not mine to give, who confessed that when she was young, her mother required her to hug house guests when they came by. She told her friend that she did not want to do this, and was uncomfortable. Yet this would then become her culture, and eventually she would find reasons to justify the continued practice.
This young lady has never met me. This young lady has never read my works. This young lady felt inherently the issue with granting others access to her body and being, without her own approval. I have, over my years of guiding others, seen these issues in males and females constantly come up. Being from a culture of Brooklyn, I did not have these issues. This fight of mine, in Access Denied, is a part of cultural warfare and it's a fight I do not carry out for my own needs. I have been charged by others to take up this fight and provide them with the “armor” and “weapons”, to engage it in victoria.
Who am I, the writer?
I am Wrath, and I am that Vir Sage whom familiars will see as the enemy to their ways, failing to realize that their ways are oppressive, and the source of their misery and suffering. You familiars, you commons, have not failed to live in accordance with your beliefs. It is the success you have in living in accordance with them that makes you cowards and downtrodden. Your beliefs are the problem, and there will be those among you, perhaps your offspring, who will begin to see this, and decide it's time for them to self stand, and set themselves apart.
You familiars are for the most part replicants, lacking in individuality. Therefore, this is not about you, but is something much bigger; it's about a culture war, and you have merely been the echo chambers of this war, not Fighters, not active participants, but passive dupes carrying on ignorant and delusional. Stooges be warned, the jig is up!
