[Czymra]

I understand.

What concerns me here is the distancing from the symbolic, occult and other codes most of us are familiar with.
Yet, the book's code seems to interface with the same instance (i.e. the subconscious).

As far as I understand it, no one could really establish an ultimate model on the workings of the human essence (or whatever it is we are).
I'm familiar with i.e. "Conscious, subconscious, unconscious", especially the latter of which is interchangeable with 'genetic mind', 'akashic records' and similar terms, or am I on the wrong track?

I find it hard to conceive that this spiritual code interfaces with the subconscious. Instead, subconscious seems to have become a catch-all phrase for anything not really accountable.

Please understand that I'm not here to criticise the translation or the code or the book for that sake, I merely wish to know the basis the text was established on, especially since it claims to stand outside of the typical subconscious influencing.