Dark Energy: What Is Really Happening to You

You cannot understand what dark energy is without first examining the structure and hierarchies of the Universe and the spiritual world. When we say there is dark energy in a person, is it part of the person themselves or something that entered them from outside?

I look at why people perceive the unknown as dark, why, from the perspective of the spiritual world, illness can be salvation, whether we can call dark something that is meant to become light, and why the division into dark and light energies is an area we must always look at more broadly so as not to deceive ourselves.

Dark energy: part of a person or something from outside?

What is dark energy? That is exactly how you asked it, and you named the phrase correctly. To approach this question, we should first examine the structure and hierarchies of the Universe and the spiritual world, and our understanding of the Universe and the spiritual world. Because when we talk about dark energy, are we talking about something independent of a person or something connected with them?

Imagine: you look and say, “This is dark energy.” Or: another person cast some kind of spell, exerted some kind of influence. Or: “I feel there is something dark about him” — people do say such things. What does it mean? Is it part of the person, or are there some energies that entered this person and happen to be in them at this moment?

It is like an illness that is inside them. Is it an illness — or did the body itself start a certain process? Is it, for example, some poison entering from outside and triggering a reaction, or did the body simply start some process on its own, without poison? Take cancer, for example: as far as I understand the general description of the word — although it seems to me a very broad word, something like damage to the whole system — the system itself started it.

Of course, it could have started it because of something, but fundamentally it started it itself. Sometimes people don’t understand why it started — it started for some reason. And sometimes it is very clear: a person, for example, died because someone slipped them a particular external poison; there was a purely external influence. And at a certain dose, this poison turned out to be dangerous for this person, although outside the body it might have been harmless. Rudolf Steiner describes this a great deal: outside, a substance might have been harmless, but inside the body it became suddenly and completely dangerous to the person.

That is why it is very important to come at this and look a little more broadly. When we consider the Universe from the perspective of the spiritual world, do we first of all consider that someone else exists besides human beings? Is there anything else alive besides human beings? I am not talking about animals, and I probably won’t bring plants into this now either, so as not to get into which beings have which bodies — etheric, astral — which structures, and so on. I am speaking from the standpoint of a certain fundamental perception.

Hierarchies of the spiritual world

Is there anything else, when people say there are some other beings, some spiritual entities, that phantoms walk around, someone from the past? Is there anything else out there? And of course we know there is an enormous number of descriptions and interpretations of the existence of different hierarchies — in many religions, treatises, in knowledge perceived firsthand by people who are able to observe and see this, angels and archangels in particular.

And here a question arises. There are very materialistic people who laugh at the perception of the spiritual world. Yet they go to church — Orthodox or Catholic — and worship first and foremost the angelic and archangelic system. First and foremost. After that, they worship various saints. Their worship of saints they can still somehow describe to themselves within their own system. They can say: “We venerate saints not because we perceive them as part of a living spiritual world. We perceive them as people who deserve a certain respect, a certain understanding.” And, essentially, that is often how people exalt saints.

They simply perceive them as someone powerful — just as tomorrow they will perceive as powerful an oligarch, a person who built some unicorn company, or some famous writer, artist or singer. Yet the saints did not become saints in the Orthodox or Catholic Church, or indeed in other religious systems, for no reason: there are certain accounts of how they got there. And they are all very different in terms of how they got there. And we could ask: are there people who got there by chance? Of course there are. Obviously, that is normal too.

The next question: could there be some who got in by chance in hierarchies that are not human? Could someone have been depicted or shown by chance? Since it is a human being who does this, and there is a certain randomness in human beings, could they have enrolled someone there by chance — or enrolled them with some intention, some idea, to embed something? To embed what? Why exactly that way?

For example, under all circumstances, you and I know how important Archangel Michael is for the people of our time, for the current century and recent centuries, for the past century. And it is remarkable that Archangel Michael is, in essence, the most famous image among the archangels in the Orthodox Church, for example. Although, of course, all of them are depicted and named there. I am speaking in terms of a particular fame.

So, when we go into a certain hierarchy, we understand that there are some angels, there are some archangels. And if a person allows this for themselves, if they have a broad perception, they will immediately allow that something even broader exists. Broader both in breadth and in depth. We know that archangels stand above angels in the hierarchy, although this hierarchy is defined in human terms, because the hierarchy of the spiritual world is multidimensional. And there are areas there where no hierarchy exists at all, no ranking of an angel’s importance over an archangel’s. We understand that other hierarchies exist in breadth, in depth and in some other direction too. They exist.

The unknown is perceived as dark

And within this discussion it is very important: as soon as we begin looking at other hierarchies, we no longer simply say that Lucifer is a fallen angel and that this hierarchy is clear: because he fell, because he did something bad, he is dark, and that is dark energy. But when we go a little beyond all this and see something that doesn’t intersect with this hierarchy at all — how does a person perceive it?

They perceive it as the unknown. And how do they perceive the unknown? As something dark.

If you look at how all this is perceived — even if you look at all the films there are — the unknown is perceived in a very particular way: negatively, in its own way. That is the essence of the unknown — it is perceived negatively. This, by the way, is one of the remarkable things: why people are drawn into a certain unknown, what they are actually drawn to, what pulls them in. Even the cosmos — both as a word and in a person’s perception — differs in its essence.

And what we observe is the spiritual world. The whole cosmos is the spiritual world; ninety-nine percent of what is visible is the spiritual world. And this is simply hard to imagine. How can you imagine that you see stars, yet what you see is not stars but a spiritual being? That there is no materialization of an object there? How can you accept that? It is very hard to accept.

In fact, if in the spiritual world you focus on any dark space — I am focusing on one right now — and enter it, you begin to see radiant light in that dark space.

Not in every dark space, of course, but in many of them. This is very visible in drawings, when you start to draw. Just yesterday I was sitting and painting something: you see an object, start painting it, then you go into it, and a whole multidimensionality of colors appears there. And you think: “How on earth do I depict this?” For me, as someone who isn’t especially skilled with a brush and is still figuring out even how paints chemically interact with water, with air, with everything else, it is really hard to convey, because I see one thing and then, suddenly, something completely different. As if a completely different area is opening up for you.

Illness is salvation

So, imagine: it turns out that we can see something, from the perspective of the system’s hierarchy, that will appear as both extremely dark and extremely light at the same time.

Let’s take a person’s illness. A person’s illness is always seen as something very bad. In this case, instead of “bad,” let’s use the term “dark.” A person’s illness is seen as something bad, dark.

That is, illness is the person’s recovery, their healing from the perspective of their spiritual system. By the way, it is actually known that during spiritual work a number of illnesses can flare up as a kind of processing of one’s whole system. I think this is even recognized in medicine. I believe that if you dig even into ordinary medicine, there will be some areas where it says that this illness was for the system’s recovery. I think, Galya, this is exactly such a case. For example, the body responded with a fever to start the system’s recovery in response to a particular virus, or to flush out certain toxins. That does happen, doesn’t it? That is the sense I mean.

Of course, there is another kind of illness — one that started, for example, on its own as the destruction of a person’s tissues, their skeletal system or their brain. That is not a response that saves; it is a response of destruction, a kind of destruction. But if we look more broadly, that too is the system’s recovery. The only question is: which system? And the question of how people actually relate to it.

So can illness be called a bad event? It can. And can it be called a good event? It can. Is this how we should relate to dark energies?

After all, what has today’s social world done with words? This was largely done by Lucifer’s energy, with some influence from Ahriman as well — Ahrimanic energies, I think. They created a system in which they explained that certain damage to human development and certain dark energies are for the good, that they are a blessing. There is an explanation. A person often says: “I need to live through this stage because…”, “I need to take this action in order to…”

And we see it even on a global scale, when some people say: “We need to kill this people, because that is the healing and salvation of the world.” The reasoning has been taken right to that point — it is a very clear, specific line of reasoning. Within a certain interpretation. After all, everything can be interpreted in different ways.

And you and I know perfectly well that any phrase can be interpreted in different ways. I see, for example, how people periodically interpret me and say: “That’s exactly what you think.” I start describing how I think. They tell me: “You’re lying.” I say: “How am I lying? What other motive could I have? This is just an addition to how I think.” You simply want to understand certain systems in a distorted way, to distort your own perception, rather than truly understand perception in its breadth.

Dark today, light tomorrow

That is where you and I have wandered. Now let’s return once again from illness to the areas that lie outside the hierarchy of angels and archangels, in terms of dark systems. Why do I suggest exploring this part? First, these energies are already appearing now; they have been appearing over the past hundred years, and they have different names. And probably the only one in whose work I have seen them described is Steiner. Although they are probably described elsewhere too, in some profound treatises.

Are these energies dark or light? Or is this an entirely different construct altogether? Could we say that they are not dark in the sense of Lucifer? And one more thing.

Can we call dark something that is meant to become light? This, too, is a very important perception.

From the perspective of the future world, it is believed that Lucifer will come over to the side of light. Ahriman, of course, never will. That contrast, by the way, is a very interesting subject of study in general. If Lucifer will come over to the side of light, can we consider him dark now? And should we consider him dark now? And should we consider dark those energies that are dark today but become light tomorrow — just as a certain transformation of a person’s spiritual being takes place?

That is why I was asking: is it the person themselves or something from outside? A person always looks for a description for themselves: did they do it themselves or not? And it turns out that if darkness was taken out of a person and it was not theirs, they say: “I’ve been freed.” If that darkness was theirs, they say: “I’ve worked through it.” Everywhere there is a certain achievement-chasing, an unwillingness to get to the very essence of what is happening. But does the very essence of what is happening matter at all? Does what we call dark matter at all?

If a person hits another person, is that a dark act, an act against the laws of the Universe, or an act arising from the underdevelopment of the person’s spiritual being? And here the question arises. Imagine that you and I rewind the time of human development, of the development of the human spiritual being, and look at the person’s spiritual being when it still had a different structure of spiritual bodies and committed certain acts within that level of development and that structure. The actions that were considered light back then — are they considered light or dark now? And those that were considered dark — are they considered dark now, or light?

A multidimensional structure instead of “dark” and “light”

This is not an area of “A or B,” “one or two,” “yes or no.” It is a multidimensional structure in which there are no states of “dark” and “light,” but different states.

You know how they draw graphs with lines extending out? If you draw a vertical Y-axis and a horizontal X-axis, there is plus Y and minus Y, plus X and minus X — and you get four areas, four squares. Then in the square where X is plus and Y is plus, you can also draw four squares. And within that square, four more. That is a two-dimensional system. Imagine that such a system is multidimensional. We — bam — stretch it, and it becomes the same thing, only a cube. And inside there are further intersections, and a third axis appears — the Z-axis. It is usually drawn at an angle on a flat surface so you can see that it is there.

If we considered the notions of X and Y — since we have already introduced two variables, positive and negative — and said that X is only dark and Y only light, then even if we introduce Z, what is Z then? And imagine that, beyond this three-dimensionality, we introduced one more dimension. That is already hard for the mind. What is it, how would you draw it? And if we introduced yet another dimension — everyone needs to remember their mathematics here — and another? What would it look like then, what formulas would there be for the calculations and for being at a particular point, in a particular state inside it?

But there is one nuance here: a person can be in different states at the same time. A human being is a spiritual system that contains a great deal: not just many bodies, many structures, many energies, many convergences. A person is also under the influence of an enormous number of things. A person watching this video is also in the energy of this video, of the energies I am talking about now. They come into contact with a great many energies.

Can we isolate them? Can I separate you and your spirituality from this video? And — bam — the energy would collide as if with glass, unable to break through, or it would bounce back. By the way, in terms of isolation, this is not an easy experience; the effect can be very complex. I could have made such an influence; I had the right to do so together with you.

How to tell what is dark and what is light

How, with this multidimensionality — multidimensional systems, multidimensional bodies, multidimensional influence — can we determine what is dark and what is light? Even if we stay with a linear system, that is an enormous number of points. A person will even start comparing which of their points is bigger, which is smaller, which is better, which is worse. But that is the wrong conclusion about life. In general, it is a wrong, untrue perception.

To truly evaluate what kind of energy this is and draw a conclusion about it, you need to study it very seriously.

Because there are actions that happen in a karmically right way even when a person comes under the influence of dark energies from other structures. Karmically, that was their task and their passage. We must not forget that in any karmic setting of such things and such tasks, certain dark forces — even if we keep this expression, at a certain level it still has meaning — try to pull this person away, even if it was agreed with the spiritual world. They try to pull them away, take them, try to win, because there are worlds, there are energies that try to win, but they also fight among themselves.

When we study Archangel Michael’s fight with the serpent, or a person’s fight with darkness — what are they fighting? The darkness within themselves? But what exactly within themselves? And does this darkness fight within itself or not?

I have always said: Lucifer and Ahriman also fight each other. And inside them, some structures also fight each other. And there are also forces that either fight or don’t fight among themselves. And everyone keeps quiet about this — many people keep quiet about it. People describe a certain amount. And this amount, by the way, is at some point sufficient for a person to study. Just as, essentially, it is enough for a person to remember that they need to perceive other people.

A fixed opinion limits development

Yesterday a person quite close to me told me: “You know, I have never studied anyone and I’m not going to. I don’t do that. I live my life, I don’t do that, and I don’t want to.” And then came a very interesting sentence that reveals everything. The person said: “I have a fixed opinion about everyone. My opinion is already formed.”

When we live in a world of fixed opinions, certain layers of study and of acquiring knowledge are pointless. It makes sense to set yourself just one single goal: to understand that other people are developing and that there can be no fixed opinion about them. It is the unknown.

A fixed opinion about other people limits your own development. At the very least, you have formed an opinion about yourself, closed yourself into a single point and stopped the development of your whole self.

And you are already a corpse. You have died, you are not developing, you do not exist. You are already dead.

🎥 Video for this article