Purple Man

Yes, the only ideological link between Putin´s Russia and Trump´s America is precisely their opposition to the "Brave New World" direction we´re heading. They preferred to be two differentiated enemies than part of the same formless mass without any historical, cultural, spiritual root that the Big Tech is aiming to.

There are as many explanations for the situation as perspectives and temporal distances one takes. But even those who abhor the media simplistic trash and dare to dig deep into the historical roots of the conflict, fail to see that Putin has a long-term ideological project in his hands: he is trying to become the last man standing against the global technocratic dystopia the world is heading to. He wants Russia to be the spiritual shelter for those who around the world despice the rute the WEF and Big Tech is pushing down the Western World´s throat. In other words, he doesn´t want Russia to go "woke". And thank God, BTW. If the means is worth it, that´s another subject. But there´s little doubt that with this move, he´s accelerating the creation of an heterogeneous, multi-national faction of traditionalist roots that confronts technological globalism, a self´sustainable parallel civilization. And that´s even more important than a geopolitical move that would aim to Russia´s right to have a safe area around its borders, which is obviously a reasonable petition that has been ignored by the Western World, too occupied with trying to create a foreign administration that substitutes Putin and extends the woke imperialism right to Moscow. The rest are details.

There is a quote that comes from the Sufi master, Ibn Arabi, that sums it all up. In it, he speaks of the Absolute creating Creation "in order to become objects of my knowledge within them". Just read it carefully. It is one of the most explanatory, succint ways to express the relationship between absolute Oneness and relative multiplicity, solving the solipsistic paradox at the same time. There is One Awareness, which is the same for every creature, and "creature" is nothing but the Absolute knowing Its Creation from a particular body-mind´s perspective. Or rock´s perspective. Or planet´s perspective. Or divine being of light´s perspective. Or devil´s perspective... And of course, the higher the perspective, the nearer to the Ultimate Perspective, which would be that of the Godhead before Creation. Thus the pyramid Leo Gura spoke about that culminates in Total Oneness, which some might wrongfully perceive as terrifying because to them it resembles the aloneness of a desperate human being. It also confirms the mystical insights some of us have had, through whatever means, where it is understood that one´s real nature is indeed the Godhead. And there is no blasphemy there, nor you have to be able to perform physical miracles to be it. Your Awareness is the Godhead. Your core is the Godhead. That which perceives and manifests your particular bubble is the Godhead...but while you are incarnated in a particular body-mind, you will have the limited physical abilities that fit that incarnation. That´s why creation was thought into existence in the first place, for the sake of the One having multiple telescopes, microscopes, without stopping being the One.

This is basically the summary of it all. "Solipsism" as a concept is within the bubble too. The experience of that kind of Cosmic Loneliness would also be within the bubble of experience.

This man has been battling against the materialist paradigm in science, with the merit of doing it from within science, for so many years. I´ve read some essays more than one decade ago, and he´s as radical as I´ve seen a scientist be on this subject, and has received foreseeable backlash. It looks like he´s winning, because it certainly looks like considering Consciousness as primordial and the Universe "only" a byproduct of It has stopped being anathema in some scientific stages.

I hope you like this music I composed some time ago for an orchestrating contest over an already shooted video from Maxim Zhestkov. I think it suits the spirit of the thread:

There is a reason why many realized individuals keep following the habits and practices of the mystic tradition that lead to their liberation. Some people think that a realized master is fake when he/she keeps chanting, making puja, or praying, because they should be aware of the dream-like nature of the incarnated experience and of those practices themselves. But many among them keep doing these things in order to have an anchor and to try to be the best mirror for the Absolute they know they are.

The great physicist, David Bohm, had a interesting theory, where he affirms that "light" in itself (not the beams we´re able to watch going from one point to another, but "light" in a self-referential mode) is infinite, not a part of space/time, thus invisible per se. And to become manifest, it freezes itself into beams that reduce their speed to create space/time objects. That is, every object is light, but light at reduced speed, with beams going forward and back in a congealed pattern, which we perceive as limited, although their real nature is eternal.

@Leilani The text you posted from that woman, Teal Swans, is the opposite of what her website transmits. I would discard her in a second for the New Age looks. But that text has really brilliant descriptions of the process of understanding why Love and Oneness are the same ("In truth there is nothing that is not me. And for this reason, pain is always an indication that something has been dis-included from yourself.), and of the process of embody that truth, one that can be obvious in the exalted states of meditative/psychedelic states, but not so much in the usual waking state.

Actually I think there is a semantics problem. When I spoke about the bubbles, I did not mean that the real "I" is inside it. At least from my experience, the individual body-mind bubble is clearly perceived by "I", and "I" is that which creates and sustains the bubble.

Thank you. I knew of Danison. Very interesting. Most NDE´s are restricted to first stages of human ego dissolution. But others are extremely valuable, and I would not discard them as a reliable source of knwledge. John Wren Lewis´ experience, for example, totally mirrors my awakenings.

I basically agree. To me, the solipsist terror is the a posteriori reaction of the human mind. It has all the characteristics of the human reasoning. But I asked Leo about that in a different topic, because there are levels that have been hidden to me yet. And I am close, but not there yet.

Leo, I joined this forum with the honest aspiration to understand the few steps left for me, so help me on this, please: My daily experience is Pure Subjectivity, a formless, trascendent, unmanifest Awareness, which serves as the source, perceiver and host for all the individual body-mind perspectives or bubbles of individual consciousness. I know my Identity is this Point Zero, so I am not looking for intermediate levels of spirituality. I´ve gone way too far to not want Absolute Truth. I am close. Now, that said, I have not had access at all to the details of why there is manifestation and why the individual body-mind perspectives have appeared. Many, even in this forum, have stated that the existential terror, the epic aloneness of God is so total that it created a cosmic game where It could forget Its tragic fate. That seems total absurd to me, but I can´t totally deny the possibility. Others think that the solitude of God is more blissful than the the highest experiential state, so creating the Universe would be just a Love-based impulse, not a "need". Can you please say something on this? I´d appreciate it.

Rupert is a such a talented teacher. One of the few alive that don´t look like a clown compared to the greats in the near/far past. And if there is something he would never claim is that there is separation between "perception" and "reality". Actually much of his discourse is based on the illusion of this separation. That said, I don´t think his take on individual minds coexisting is outrageous or shows minor awakening. "One Source-many minds" is a well established reality, I think, for most of us. Whether or not those individual perspectives are lived simultaneously or one by one is a debatable issue, in my opinion.

While it´s true that many NDE´s seem to fall short in their depictions of the "afterlife", there are remarkable NDE´s which are among the deepest descriptions of the transcendent that have ever been written, like John Wren Lewis´ , which I find fascinating, given the ragey materialist past of this scientist and his excellent communicative abilities.

I´d also like to know his take. My awakenings have taken me to the point to undoubtedly see Pure Subjectivity, or Godhead, which is One, as Identity, but the process of the One projecting zillions of individual bubbles of consciousness is still a mystery to me, with highly awakened minds stating both that it is the result of epic existential, solipsistic terror from God (manifestation would be a cosmic game to bear this solitude) or the opposite, that is, it is only the human mind that beholds this solitude with terror, while God´s aloneness previous to manifestation is actually the ultimate ecstasy.

1.8 and 3.3. "You score for primary psychopathy was higher than 35.37% of people who have taken this test. You score for secondary psychopathy was higher than 81.09% of people who have taken this test." in other words, or Axl Rose´s words, "you know I fuck you alllllllll!!!" In all seriousness, secondary psychopathy, according to their definition, is totally a virtue.

Yes, that mirrors my experience. I am not able to remain in the knowledge all the time, and I don´t even know if it´s possible to operate in a world like ours through that principle, but when I stop and breath, it´s clear that the dough is the same for a star and for an ant and for Mars. It´s all Consciousness, frozen fragments of the same substance.

Maybe it´s a semantic thing. I use "form/formless" as synonimous to " Perceivable Universes/Consciousness". Wouldn´t you say that every perceivable "something" (stars, planets, bodies, brains, hellish or heavenly realms, thoughts, angels, NDE´s tunnels, lights and beings) is a function of Consciousness? Because in my experience, even if I´m lifted to the highest, most subtle realm conceivable, that is also within Consciousness. Even my own body is clearly like a frozen form created within and by Consciousness.

Totally agree. But if that´s correct (and I have no doubt about it), that would also imply that "form" (every possible perceivable "something") is dependent on formlessness, not the other way round. Or, in other words, that "matter" is dependent on Consciousness, and of a different ontological status, as it´s my direct experience, which most don´t share. That does not turn "matter" into a non-existent, but the Universe and every possible experience and perception residing within Consciousness turn the latter and the former into what you call "1st order" and "2nd order ", respectively.

One of the most fascinating records ever.

Thank you for the reply. I don´t want to insist, since I know you are a busy guy, but in one of your best videos, you say this: 1/ "I am God sitting inside the fractal . God is the emptiness that sits on the center of the fractal. The fractal is the form. God is the formlessness within which the fractal exists. I am God looking through these eyes. God looking down to Creation." .-Eternity is what is being conscious of this moment right now." Well, that is exactly my experience. Exactly , basically for a decade. But the problem is, although I feel Creation as flowing from me, (so "mine" in a sense) I don´t feel it as "I". Yes there is a subtle duality there. But if I were the form, I would not be aware. Form is not aware. I am aware. The formless eternity is aware. I can´t understand how I can share (or transfer) my sense of Self with that which appears within me. I am not trying to challenge you. It is just that it does not corresponde with my experience, and I am very curious on a state where the Universe that appears flowing from/being watched by unmanifest Awareness (my Self) can share the ontological status with unaware forms. 2/ You also say: "When the world of form dissapears, existence without content exists." That´s what I feel as my Self, the Godhead. So now I ask you, and this is a very important question for me: My experience of the world is one where pure subjectivity transcends the manifest, but in some way it needs the latter to be self-aware. In your experience of the Godhead, is that "existence without content", or "Consciousness devoid of all form" self-conscious? Is there self-reflection of any kind, any understanding from the Godhead of being so? If that´s the case, how, since there is no objective reflection whatsoever (no thoughts, no sensations, no thing perceived) I mean, even in deep sleep there is total lack of reflection, total lack of self-consciousness. Thanks in advance.

Actually I refered to the fact that I see form, and "am" formlessness, which I don´t see, because I am "it". But maybe we´re talking about the same. Words can get tricky, that´s why interviews as the one Leo did with Curt are fantastic, but rarely lead to a total understanding of what both sides really mean.

I´ve heard this "form is formlessness" mantra for as long as I have been into meditation. Maybe my understanding of what it really means is different from other people´s, but to me it is a game word that has no equivalence with my experience. I clearly see as an everyday fact that some totally unmanifest, impersonal, formless Awareness is projecting "form", the manifest, creating it through the very act of perceiving it. Form is nothing but the solidification of perception, the solidification of the energy, of the cosmic "dough". But this energy has no existence on its own. It depends on Source, it depends on its "being perceived", and Source is formless. That is my experience.

Well, several considerations: First, for form to be necessary in order to realise formlessness, it would take formlessness (that is, Godhead, Source) to be unconscious in the absence of form. Besides, "realizing" is a feature of the mind. The mind needs form to realize formlessness. That does not mean that formlessness needs form to exist. If that were the case, there would never be a universe created into existence.