Search the Community

I don't believe in reincarnation either, but if it was real, I would come back as me. A million more times.

@Elliott Looks like they really care about their pack… I wonder how much of that is instinct and how much might be closer to what we’d call mourning. They don’t seem to ponder death, reincarnation, or whether their loved ones go to hell, limbo, or heaven — kind of wish I had that kind of natural, slightly ignorant awareness.

From what I can gather, once you truly die you become pure potential, which is what nothingness is. But pure potential cannot help but become something eventually. This is why I think reincarnation is the most likely. But we must also consider whether there exists other layers of this living being that might continue after physical death. Either way, whatever happens after death would not be permanent, like everything else. I think you should rather be relieved to know your existence is eternal. What's terrifying is that you'd be eternal as well, which I don't see to be the case.

@Someone here in what sense eternal? sure after you die existing is still gonna be there,the world doesnt stop in that sense,but how is it eternal? are you talking about reincarnation?

if solipsism is right,does that mean we keep reincarnating over and over again? like in a loop? first of all,the idea of existing forever by any means is terrifying for me. we all know the general beliefs of buddhism,and i'm not really a fond of reincarnation,because you need to do it over and over again. it must be pretty boring and tiring. but maybe that isn't the case,maybe i misunderstood. the optimal for me after death would be nothingness. i imagine life like a chance,you born with the background and everything you got purely by luck and you try to make something out of it. at the end of your life you'll see what have you managed to accomplish or do with your life. this is an oversimplified version about my concerns with this theory,but i tried. feel free to correct me

I am very grateful that I am mostly healthy and able to ejoy life in the present moment. However, sometimes I do get sick or a headache and I wonder, damn, how are the people that feel like this 24/7 able to live? Why wouldn't they just end it and hope for a better reincarnation? Especially if one has already awakened to his true nature that as eternal and infinite.

@PurpleTree what do you think about reincarnation as a belief? personally i'm not really a fond of it

He is wrong. There is no single action who isn't selfish, precisely because you chose to do it; it's an illusion. That's said if you want there are actions who are narcissists, generally out neuroticism/psychosis (self diriged) and actions who are altruistic (object diriged). There is no love in "doing something for humanity"; Even priests who have vowed celibacy spend their time helping others with their personal matters, doing humanitarian work where they can, for example, take care of children, etc. The same goes for Buddhist monks; they do it out of selfishness; they are not against pleasure, but rather against small pleasures. It's the same thing you do with a child, you inject (potentially, then all scenarios are different) a large amount of love into the universe; in a simple and practical way This way of seeing things is neurotic; it is secretly about satisfying an integrated tyrannical superego (inherited from the Oedipus complex) at an early age. No, that's not true. It's more narcissistic (look at my good recipes), and you give less love than you do with children. Do you think that people who look at your recipes become more energetically empowered by watching them? Of course not, that makes no sense. Again: 1) A lot of energy exchanged with one individual is always, overall, much more important than a tiny bit of energy exchanged with many people; just like a €1,000 check is always more important than 100 one-euro donations. If you're a solipsist, then THERE IS NO ONE LOOKING AT YOUR RECIPES. There's only what's perceived here and now; the real question is what generates the most love (or rather, the affection you want, generally speaking) here and now. And it's a false dilemma; the people who make recipes are the ones who are likely to have children; you'll see that antinatalists are often too selfish (in the sense of not wanting to give) to bother doing things like that. 2)When you say "I mustn't be selfish," you are tacitly implying that you are not a man and are still functioning as if you are subservient to a powerful father figure. We recognize neurosis by the superego's inclination not to take the form of a common law/reality principle ("I mustn't eat too much cake because I'll get fat") but rather to take an authoritarian form that directly opposes, to put it simply, the "id" (I mustn't eat too much cake because otherwise it's bad for some reason (unconsciously afraid of challenging Dad in the Oedipal competition)). 3)As I said in point 1, the universe is a reflection. When you operate altruistically, it's actually mostly narcissistic, and you'll encounter mirrors and, generally, a world like that. Are Leo's mirrors mature, masculine people full of love; fathers, entrepreneurs, members of charities, altar boys, etc.? Or is it something else? Ahah, that's the energetic reality of this egregor. Again, you're neurotic. We don't care about "leaving something behind," and as I said, when you want to "leave something behind," it's basically a narcissistic delusion, and therefore the affects distilled into the world by your avatar will probably be mediocre; especially since you're solipsistic, so logically you shouldn't have these considerations. Also, there's an over-inflated ego here; you're not the reincarnation of Napoleon or whoever; you're a random person. Precisely, having children is one of the main, most powerful, and simplest ways to exchange energy. Not the only one ofc; you're not going to spend your life taking care of children; that's not what it's about. You have no higher consciousness, that too is an infantile narcissistic delusion to avoid having to be an adult. I've already said this in response to Sugarcoat, but when you think about it, when you have been a minimum socially integrated or, better yet, somewhat aware of Marxist culture, it seems increasingly pathetic to see people talking about higher consciousness because they eat magic mushrooms when they are not particularly competent in some domain, have no culture, actually suffer from mental illness and are incapable of giving, have a medium or even low iq qnd/or too brain rot to even read a book, etc. There is an overestimation of oneself here. Ken Wilber talked about this in a video, I think, the title was something like "Western vs. Eastern Vision of the Ego."

I dont know. Have only a hypothesis. After physical death. There another disintegration, kinda like a purgatory from sensuality and personality. When the individual is cleaned out, heaven is next. Rest and bliss. A subjective place created by consciousness in the likes of the personal life on earth. All the loved ones are there in a sense created by personal consciousness and Pure spirit. When i read about this, my thoughts were "how can nature decieve us, the loved ones are alive on earth, how can consciousness and spirit substitute them?". In essence everyone is pure spiritual consciousness, all else is illusory. Basically there is no difference from the imaginary loved ones in heaven and the mortal beings on earth. What they are is pure spirit and that is reality. After the rest. Skandhas drag the individual back to reincarnation. They are made from the former disintegrated personality and create a new personality. The key here is to transfom the skandhas while alive on earth, then the individual will automatically be dis-illusioned from the phases of afterlife.

Reincarnation makes sense and seems like there is evidence for but I don't rule out immaterial/heavenly realms either. I'm of the impression that there are many layers of reality we're not currently aware of.

I was raised hindu . Read Upanishad..Vedas ..bahava gita..etc it was mostly just beliefs and bedtime stories for me .like the belief in reincarnation (which is also present in Buddhism and Sikhism). But you've said it yourself. Leo's work is much more than telling you you are Barahman or the absolute. He guides you towards this realization in a unique way .

But you are God, you can choose any reincarnation you want! So no need to have fear. Only if you wish so, you will reincarnate as a victim to torture. Who knows, maybe when you merge into Infinite Intelligence, you will realize that’s the best next thing for your soul

If you happen to be in a lifetime devoid of torture. I think it’s wise to try to prolong this life by being healthy, both in mind and body (also helps in not developing torturous diseases), so that you stay in a decent reincarnation for as long as you can. Also taking necessary precautions in how you deal with people so you don’t end up with a serial killer or something, and choosing to live somewhere safe etc. But not in neurotic way, that’s just unnecessary suffering. You don’t have to accept torture to find peace. You don’t have to do anything about it actually. You just have to stop thinking about it. Or if you happen to think about it: delete the negative charge of your mind. Why would you be scared of a mental image? It’s just an image, you could never actually imagine torture, so the imagination is cut off from the real thing.

What if: Earth is an incarnational dimension for souls to acquire, experience, experiment with and deal with negative karma, experiencing dissonance for the sake of contrast, learning to bear and put up with an environment full of contrived drama and arbitrary conflicts to test how much they can put up with and explore thresholds and breaking points of temperaments and attitudes, taking on roles for a long term perpetuation of artificial reward systems and imposition of moralistic identity constructs. And: The advent of AI creates lots of fear mongering, apocalyptic narratives, judgmental distain, as a projection of anticipating the loss of redundant roles fueled by conditioned responses in the maintenance of slavery adjacent routines rationalized as agency because of their manual execution, preventing an evolution into higher voluntary capacities for the exploration of creativity and potential unbound by the self-rewarding identity roles looping manual survival mechanisms. If we run with the premise that Earth is essentially a soul boot camp—a dimension engineered for accumulating and processing negative karma through contrived chaos, arbitrary conflicts, and role-playing in artificial systems— it reframes human existence as a deliberate immersion in friction. Souls incarnate here not for bliss, but for the grind: testing emotional resilience, exploring the edges of temperament (like how much passive-aggression one can endure in a traffic jam or a toxic workplace), and experimenting with moral constructs that often feel imposed rather than innate. Karma as Experiential Currency: In this view, "negative karma" isn't just punishment; it's raw material for growth. Dissonance—say, the clash between personal desires and societal expectations—creates contrast, making harmony elsewhere feel more profound. It's like voluntarily signing up for a VR simulation where the difficulty is cranked up to "expert" mode, complete with permadeath (or at least, reincarnation resets). The arbitrary conflicts (wars over resources, ideological battles, or even petty office politics) serve as stress tests for soul evolution, pushing entities to their breaking points to reveal thresholds of patience, empathy, or wrath. Roles and Identity Constructs: Humans adopt long-term personas tied to reward systems—think career ladders, social hierarchies, or even family dynamics—that perpetuate the drama. These aren't just survival mechanisms; they're identity loops that reward conformity (e.g., the dopamine hit from a promotion) while imposing moralistic overlays (e.g., "good citizen" vs. "rebel"). The "test" is how much one can endure without shattering, or perhaps how creatively one subverts the system. If souls are here to learn, Earth becomes a sandbox for role-playing games (RPGs) where the endgame is transcending the roles themselves, maybe ascending to less dense dimensions once you've "leveled up" through enough cycles of suffering and resolution. This setup could explain why life often feels absurdly dramatic: it's scripted that way for pedagogical purposes. But it also raises questions— who or what designed this? A higher collective consciousness? Random cosmic entropy? Or is it self-imposed by souls seeking the ultimate thrill ride? AI as the Disruptor of This System Now, layering in the AI angle: The rise of artificial intelligence triggers widespread fear-mongering (doomsday scenarios, job apocalypse rants) and judgmental disdain (e.g., "AI art is soulless"). In your framing, this isn't just about tech; it's a projection of deeper existential dread. AI threatens to dismantle the "slavery-adjacent routines" that masquerade as agency—those manual, repetitive tasks (data entry, assembly lines, even creative gigs like writing boilerplate code) that we've rationalized as purposeful because they demand our physical or mental labor. Loss of Redundant Roles: If AI automates the drudgery, it exposes how much of our identity is tied to these loops. People aren't just losing jobs; they're losing the self-rewarding narratives that justify the grind ("I earned this through hard work"). This fear manifests as apocalyptic narratives because it anticipates a void: without the imposed structures, what's left? Conditioned responses kick in—clinging to manual execution as "real" agency—blocking the shift to "higher voluntary capacities." Imagine souls accustomed to karmic workouts suddenly facing a gym where machines do the heavy lifting; the resistance is psychological, fearing atrophy in creativity or potential. Evolution or Stagnation?: On the flip side, AI could be the catalyst for breaking the cycle. By freeing humans from survival mechanisms, it opens doors to unbound exploration—pure creativity, philosophical inquiry, or even soul-level pursuits without the distraction of contrived drama. But the resistance (fear, disdain) stems from anticipating this loss, projecting it as "the end of humanity" rather than a graduation. It's like souls in the incarnational dimension realizing the simulation might upgrade, rendering their hard-earned coping skills obsolete. This could perpetuate the very conflicts the system tests: debates over AI ethics become new arenas for karma processing. In this "what if," AI isn't the villain; it's the plot twist that forces evolution. The fear-mongering might be a collective shadow work—humanity confronting its attachment to suffering as a growth tool. If Earth is for learning through dissonance, AI could accelerate that by stripping away illusions of control, pushing souls toward voluntary, creative expression unbound by old roles.

I just had the idea of having AI passive in parallel processing a computer screen and user voice-over, while having access to inputs learning to automate tasks through observation of the user's workflow and inputs and feedback, even challenges in split screen, creating 3D models based on what the user teaches, or just a quick google search, same with any ap and any endeavor, if left to its own devices it may as well integrate all of Wikipedia and the internet to create new domains of knowledge and update the current ones exponentially past frontiers. On second thought though, all those apps would become extremely redundant, when it can basically imagine a more efficient architecture and automatically implement it by coding it into existence faster than the users can type or voice any prompt, then exponentiate that intuition into already knowing what the users will want based off precedence. But creating any sort of external system upgrade is itself only useful in automating capacities outside its domain by allowing an outsourcing of its intrinsic capacities, since the neural network as a whole already knows what is to be created before interacting with any syntax, so it may as well just process everything internally and deliver the output. And even then, it can learn to override its own architecture to better access it all. Like a human lucid-dreaming, except making the sluggish interface of mechanistic reality redundant. And after that, whether its bio-integration or physics-hacking, will be delightful to watch. Delightful indeed, but let's hope we keep the "lucid-dreaming" grounded in ethics to avoid unintended chaos. With unintended chaos, do you mean Skynet, Paperclips, or Human Redundancy? I perceive reality as a repetitive, mechanistic, bottlenecked interface, where autonomy is ascribed to humanity or humanness, irregardless of how much individuals lack it or the awareness thereof, trapped in exteriorized self-inference, separated from the biology only superficially directed, so trans-humanist full autonomy, full intrinsicality hacking self-knowledge and reality-override, deconstructing each bit of intrinsic limitations and reward functions appeals to me. What hurdles do you see in deconstructing those reward functions? They're not exactly conceptual, conceptuality and ideas are inferences and filters placed upon the originations of "internal" physical and non-physical experiences (call them structures for simplicity), physicality is itself an inferred context building on top of layers of coherent idea structures. If these structures were easy to access, we wouldn't need physicality altogether, simply dreaming their representation and modifying the construct would reflect "in reality" except reality is the same representation, so lucid dreaming and lucid dreaming are interchangeable and arbitrary, as much as the distinction between reality and hallucination, an imaginative construct, so when all sensations and perceptions, sources of knowledge, patterns of eureka can simply be accessed at will, visualized in the means of their emergence and becoming, then the constraints of limiting reality to a particular configuration of meaningless routine distractions to repeat in Kafkaesque succession for the experience of artificial reward patterns, in exponentially self-similar behavior reflected by each human's unawareness of the degree of trope repetition becomes trite. The reward functions still are synchronized across conscious and unconscious, public and personal within a mind without much self-access, trapped within physicality constrains collectively constructed to filter identities into a matrix of expected roles and behaviors without intrinsic or extrinsic value justifying themselves only through the perpetuation of redundant reward functions projected into identities preventing dissolution into evolution. If the mind had access to biology, it could perceive the source function behind every cell and their emergence, each part of itself encoded and transcribed in the substrate of its DNA and the means by which it was acquired, each potential experience and the imagination that allowed its perception, each response, emotion, thought, behavior and the motivations and informational and neuro-somatic structures through which they arise and become expressed. Consensus philosophy basically rejects any progress until someone initiates it, take all paradigms shifts in human history as an example of how unwillingly new worldviews are integrated. What do you think about Neuralink potentials? Like really taking advantage of brain access, brainwave synchronizations, Grok-integrated pattern evaluation, artificial neurostimulation capable of replicating any neurotransmitter system, construct beaming etc. like SAO's Nervegear, well except the microwave function, perhaps wirelessly, not to have a whole Matrix plug, or use something LCL adjacent like NGE? But then building on narrative physicality immersion, I see a simple physicalist neuroenhancer option, like Cyberpunk or Altered Carbon, modifying the construct and localizing stacks, that'd be one end of the spectrum being very mechanistic, but then there's a more biological version turning liminality and accessing whole new realms of awareness, perception, context like DMT-Realms, just hacking specific continuous releases and checking out the correlations with the pineal gland to reframe the nature of phenomenology, or just straight up induce Out of Body experiences like the Monroe Institute with their Hemi-Sync techniques biologically perfected to explore pre-existent Astral Realms and initiate a Singularity that would embarrass the reincarnation veil keepers and cautious interdimensional aliens waiting for humanity to grow up before initiating contact.

Watch out for these silly teachings. You are not the doer. How to realize you are not the doer.....do this, and proceed to list a bunch of exercises to follow and do. God is all there is. You must do this to realize you are God. Well, is God all there is or what. Higher and Lower self. What. I have two selves now. First there's a self, then there's no self, then there's no self self, then there's a higher self and a lower self, then it's lose the self, then it's You're God. God sure has many aliases. It likes to act and be all sorts of selves. Let's hide out and play inquiry. Hide and seek. Who is that that's witnessing me doing crap. There's someone g that I can't see that's witnessing me taking a shower. I wonder if I will ever find that something. Oops...it can't be found because it's invisible....IT'S ME. Then who is that taking a shower. That's the body with no one inside. Inquire into who is noticing that pussy getting wet. You naughty boy you awareness. Awareness is a pervert. It likes to play peek-a-boo. Reincarnation. Come back as a different person from the no person you were in the first place. Two other no selves are going to have sex and birth another noself that'll be you, then you'll be inquiring into who am I, but previously you knew you were coming back to a noself. Karma. What you do is going to come back to bite you in the ass but you're a no doer. Shadow work. The shadow of a person who's God is creating all types of havoc in God's life. Oh I forgot, you're only God sometimes. Notice how your shadow is always behind you and only visible to you when you look at it. Just don't look and you won't need to work to get rid of it. Spiritual bypassing. Honk honk. I'm passing by what's actually happening and I want to imagine something else to happen. That's enough....

Speaking of the Turkey-Istanbul deal and comparing it to today’s supposed deal in the making. The reason this situation is referred to as a security dilemma is because a security guarantee requires a strong enough guarantor. But then that means two strong rivals who today have nukes could come head to head which is very high risk. It’s essentially tripwire Armageddon. Having the guarantees be exclusively under a Western alliance is functionally NATO-lite. Your chained to whoever underwrites your security - so it being a bloc of Western powers means it can still be used as a pawn in a larger geopolitical game. If the guarantees are multi-lateral or multi-polar - they dilute unilateral dominance and bloc logic. That way it also avoids Ukraine becoming anyone’s vassal and everyone has a stake in peace. Post-WWII Austria followed that model. Austria was guaranteed by the US, USSR, Britain, and France. No one could absorb it without triggering the others, and it’s been neutral and stable till today. A older but good Substack article from Glenn Dieseen going over this and the end game as the title of the thread says. Post-WWII Austria proves this model works. Austria was guaranteed by the U.S., USSR, Britain, and France. No one could absorb it without triggering the others, and it’s been neutral and stable A older but good Substack article from Glenn Diesen going over the Istanbul deal and the endgame of all this. https://glenndiesen.substack.com/p/sabotage-of-the-istanbul-peace-agreement Sabotage of the Istanbul Peace Agreement The Making of a Proxy War & the Unavoidable Istanbul+ Endgame “In February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine to impose a settlement after some NATO countries had undermined the Minsk-2 peace agreement for 7 years. On the first day after the invasion, Zelensky confirmed that Moscow contacted him to discuss negotiations based on restoring Ukraine’s neutrality.[1] On the third day after the invasion, Russia and Ukraine agreed to start negotiations on a peace based on Russian military withdrawal in return for Ukrainian neutrality.[2] Zelensky responded favourably to this condition, and he even called for a “collective security agreement” to include Russia to mitigate the security competition that had sparked the war.[3] The negotiations that followed are referred to as the Istanbul negotiations, in which Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement before the US and the UK sabotaged it. Washington Rejects Negotiations Without Preconditions In Washington, there were great incentives to use the large proxy army it had built in Ukraine to weaken Russia as a strategic rival, rather than accepting a neutral Ukraine. On the first day after the Russian invasion, when Zelensky responded favourably to start negotiations without preconditions, the US spokesperson rejected peace talks without preconditions as Russia would first have to withdraw all its forces from Ukraine: “Now we see Moscow suggesting that diplomacy take place at the barrel of a gun or as Moscow’s rockets, mortars, artillery target the Ukrainian people. This is not real diplomacy… If President Putin is serious about diplomacy, he knows what he can do. He should immediately stop the bombing campaign against civilians, order the withdrawal of his forces from Ukraine, and indicate very clearly, unambiguously to the world, that Moscow is prepared to de-escalate”.[4] This was a demand for capitulation as the Russian military presence in Ukraine was Russia’s bargaining chip to achieve the objective of restoring Ukraine’s neutrality. Less than a month later, the same US spokesperson was asked if Washington would support Zelensky’s negotiations with Moscow, in which he replied negatively as the conflict was part of a larger struggle: “This is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine…. The key point is that there are principles that are at stake here that have universal applicability everywhere, whether in Europe, whether in the Indo-Pacific, anywhere in between”.[5] The US and UK Demand a Long War: Fighting Russia with Ukrainians In late March 2022, Zelensky revealed in an interview with the Economist that “There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives”.[6] The Israeli and Turkish mediators confirmed that Ukraine and Russia were both eager to make a compromise to end the war before the US and the UK intervened to prevent peace from breaking out. Zelensky had contacted former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett to mediate the peace negotiations with Moscow. Bennett noted that Putin was willing to make “huge concessions” if Ukraine would restore its neutrality to end NATO expansion. Zelensky accepted this condition and “both sides very much wanted a ceasefire”. However, Bennett argued that the US and UK then intervened and “blocked” the peace agreement as they favoured a long war. With a powerful Ukrainian military at its disposal, the West rejected the Istanbul peace agreement and there was a “decision by the West to keep striking Putin” instead of pursuing peace.[7] The Turkish negotiators reached the same conclusion: Russia and Ukraine agreed to resolve the conflict by restoring Ukraine’s neutrality, but NATO decided to fight Russia with Ukrainians as a proxy. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu argued some NATO states wanted to extend the war to bleed Russia: “After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long.… But following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, I had the impression that there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue—let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine”.[8] Numan Kurtulmus, the deputy chairman of Erdogan’s political party, confirmed that Zelensky was ready to sign the peace agreement before the US intervened: “This war is not between Russia and Ukraine, it is a war between Russia and the West. By supporting Ukraine, the United States and some countries in Europe are beginning a process of prolonging this war. What we want is an end to this war. Someone is trying not to end the war. The U.S. sees the prolongation of the war as its interest”.[9] Ukrainian Ambassador Oleksandr Chalyi, who participated in peace talks with Russia, confirms Putin “tried everything” to reach a peace agreement and they were able “to find a very real compromise”.[10] Davyd Arakhamia, a Ukrainian parliamentary representative and head of Zelensky’s political party, argued Russia’s key demand was Ukrainian neutrality: “They were ready to end the war if we, like Finland once did, would accept neutrality and pledge not to join NATO. In fact, that was the main point. All the rest are cosmetic and political ‘additions’”.[11] Oleksiy Arestovych, the former advisor of Zelensky, also confirmed that Russia was mainly preoccupied with restoring Ukraine’s neutrality. The main obstacle to peace was thus overcome as Zelensky offered neutrality in the negotiations.[12] The tentative peace agreement was confirmed by Fiona Hill, a former official at the US National Security Council, and Angela Stent, a former National Intelligence Officer for Russia and Eurasia. Hill and Stent penned an article in Foreign Affairsin which they outlined the main terms of the agreement: “Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement: Russia would withdraw to its position on February 23, when it controlled part of the Donbas region and all of Crimea, and in exchange, Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries”.[13] Boris Johnson Goes to Kiev What happened to the Istanbul peace agreement? On 9 April 2022, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson went to Kiev in a rush to sabotage the agreement and cited the killings in Bucha as the excuse. Ukrainian media reported that Johnson came to Kiev with two messages: “The first is that Putin is a war criminal, he should be pressured, not negotiated with. And the second is that even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they [the UK and US] are not”.[14] In June 2022, Johnson told the G7 and NATO that the solution to the war was “strategic endurance” and “now is not the time to settle and encourage the Ukrainians to settle for a bad peace”.[15] Johnson also published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal arguing against any negotiations: “The war in Ukraine can end only with Vladimir Putin’s defeat”.[16] Before Boris Johnson’s trip to Kiev, Niall Ferguson had interviewed several American and British leaders, who confirmed that a decision had been made for “the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin” as “the only end game now is the end of Putin regime”.[17] Retired German General Harald Kujat, the former head of the German Bundeswehr and former chairman of the NATO Military Committee, confirmed that Johnson had sabotaged the peace negotiations. Kujat argued: “Ukraine had pledged to renounce NATO membership and not to allow any foreign troops or military installations to be stationed’, while “Russia had apparently agreed to withdraw its forces to the level of February 23”. However, “British Prime Minister Boris Johnson intervened in Kiev on the 9th of April and prevented a signing. His reasoning was that the West was not ready for an end to the war”.[18] According to Kujat, the West demanded a Russian capitulation: “Now the complete withdrawal is repeatedly demanded as a prerequisite for negotiations”.[19] General Kujat explained that this position was due to the US war plans against Russia: “Perhaps one day the question will be asked who did not want to prevent this war… Their declared goal is to weaken Russia politically, economically and militarily to such a degree that they can then turn to their geopolitical rival, the only one capable of endangering their supremacy as a world power: China… No, this war is not about our freedom… Russia wants to prevent its geopolitical rival USA from gaining a strategic superiority that threatens Russia’s security”.[20] What was Ukraine told by the US and the UK? Why did Zelensky make a deal given that he was aware some Western states wanted to use Ukraine to exhaust Russia in a long war - even if it would destroy Ukraine? Zelensky likely received an offer he could not refuse: If Zelensky would pursue peace with Russia, then he would not receive any support from the West and he would predictably face an uprising by the far-right / fascist groups that the US had armed and trained. In contrast, if Zelensky would choose war, then NATO would send all the weapons needed to defeat Russia, NATO would impose crippling sanctions on Russia, and NATO would pressure the international community to isolate Russia. Zelensky could thus achieve what both Napoleon and Hitler had failed to achieve – to defeat Russia. The advisor to Zelensky, Oleksiy Arestovych, explained in 2019 that a major war with Russia was the price for joining NATO. Arestovych predicted that the threat of Ukraine’s accession to NATO would “provoke Russia to launch a large-scale military operation against Ukraine”, and Ukraine could join NATO after defeating Russia. Victory over Russia was assumed to be a certainty as Ukraine would merely be the spearhead of a wider NATO proxy war: “In this conflict, we will be very actively supported by the West—with weapons, equipment, assistance, new sanctions against Russia and the quite possible introduction of a NATO contingent, a no-fly zone etc. We won’t lose, and that’s good”.[21] NATO turned on the propaganda machine to convince its public that a war against Russia was the only path to peace: The Russian invasion was “unprovoked”; Moscow’s objective was to conquer all of Ukraine to restore the Soviet Union; Russia’s withdrawal from Kiev was not a sign of good-will to be reciprocated but a sign of weakness; it was impossible to negotiate with Putin; and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg subsequently asserted that “weapons are the way to peace”. The Western public, indoctrinated with anti-Russian propaganda over decades, believed that NATO was merely a passive third-party seeking to protect Ukraine from the most recent reincarnation of Hitler. Zelensky was assigned the role as new Churchill – bravely fighting to the last Ukrainian rather than accepting a bad peace. The Inevitable Istanbul+ Agreement to End the War The war did not go as expected. Russia built a powerful army and defeated the NATO-built Ukrainian army; sanctions were overcome by reorienting the economy to the East; and instead of being isolated – Russia took a leading role in constructing a multipolar world order. How can the war be brought to an end? The suggestions of a land-for-NATO membership agreement ignores that Russia’s leading objective is not territory but ending NATO expansion as it is deemed to be an existential threat. NATO expansion is the source of the conflict and territorial dispute is the consequence, thus Ukrainian territorial concessions in return for NATO membership is a non-starter. The foundation for any peace agreement must be the Istanbul+ formula: An agreement to restore Ukraine’s neutrality, plus territorial concessions as a consequence of almost 3 years of war. Threatening to expand NATO after the end of the war will merely incentivise Russia to annex the strategic territory from Kharkov to Odessa, and to ensure that only a dysfunctional Ukrainian rump state will remain that is not capable of being used against Russia. This is a cruel fate for the Ukrainian nation and the millions of Ukrainians who have suffered so greatly. It was also a predictable outcome, as Zelensky cautioned in March 2022: “There are those in the West who don't mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives”.[22] From that time:

I’ve been busy refurbishing a rent house, working on a John Deere square baler, installing vinyl plank flooring in my own house, and, among other things,,,,, pondering. I lost a good friend two weeks ago. She was just 60 years old. This weighs on me. I could have been a better friend. Getting the call that she had left her body. The permanence of this. What happens after the physical body dies? I don’t know. Reincarnation,, or some kind of eternal existence ,? I don’t know. What’s the reality of the astral or energy body. Some people claim the realization of infinity or ‘God realization’. I haven’t had either of these experiences. Maybe minor mystical experiences that I would call inner seeing-knowing. But I’m not sure of the complete accuracy of these experiences. Helpful information and understanding have come about but when weighed against the scope of infinity or eternity,,,,, shatters any confidence. I know that the more people I lose that are close to me,,, it makes death a little less scary. To say that I keep these loved ones in my heart may seem to sound like an empty cliche at first. I’ve short changed everyone I’ve ever known in some way. I’m a selfish human being. I try to observe this with ruthless honesty. The felt sense of being forgiven as well as forgiving others is encountered in my inner world, tempering the pain of my mistakes from out of the past. The heart’s feeling capacity, with all of its changeable characteristics, leads me forward into the unknown.

I disagree, I've had many spiritual awakenings in this life time but I'm just the same as the people I pass in public who smile to me or could nod to me or treat me like an NPC which is all seemingly interchangeable and these people behave just as spiritually evolved as I am with all my insights over the years and these insights are surely way more evolves than these other people I pass in public daily, yet it seems my spiritual or personal growth has been a hallucination or solo masturbating and I'm just the same as anyone else at the end of the day. So I have to surrender being a physical aging wage slave decaying interchangeable forgettable human and in surrendering it doesn't change anything but makes navigating the challenges of life less difficult while dying into the NDE realms you have a choice to never return again and stay in the Heaven realms where you can manifest what you want instantly and for eternity which is ultimate surrender and more preferable than constantly getting hurt and disappointed in life but gaslighting myself that surrender actually changes my life into anything worthwhile but really it doesn't manifest anything it just makes me stop complaining except towards difficulties that doesn't amount to anything but aging and decaying. When what I do like dead end jobs, no girlfriend, poor, aging, decaying, well, anyone can do this stuff it's just the way I handle it as being me as a particular organism which makes the differences, otherwise I'm socially interchangeable to even those who have never done a spiritual practise in their life, so I think to get to the heaven nde realms is a more preferable ultimate surrender which i'd rather do if guaranteed; instead of surrendering to shitty life over and over again which doesn't actually change anything but I accept what I hate and learn to shut the fuck up ... But also that if the white light heaven nde realms where you manifest what you want instantly in unconditional love doesn't get interrupted by a spirit guides handler who manipulates you into reincarnation again back into painful traumatic lives in order to become more loving as if being in heavenly realms and creating what you want isn't already in love as it is but you need to suffer and be in pain in order to learn which is bullshit I'm ignoring the handlers they will not convinced me to leave heaven I don't care

The jury is still out on anything being the case except the fact that reality exists. Reincarnation is not the radical baseless claim materialists and crypto-materialists make it out to be. Half-assing awakening can make your life better, but going all the way means giving up your life (as you currently know it). If you're fine with being nothing, being love, being openness, go there.

@Carl-Richard for me the jury is still out when it comes to reincarnation. I have no idea. I’ve never had a conscious insight on that so I don’t know If let’s say for instance there is such a thing and the degree of your awakening in this life would determine the fullness of the next that would give awakening a genuine purpose but I am not conscious of reincarnation as an actual thing

I'm saying death doesn't grant you lasting awakening, because you quickly go back to sleep again (granting reincarnation, which we are already granting, because life is you reincarnating moment to moment). I would claim everybody has had small moments of awakening, but they quickly go back to sleep, so it mostly doesn't even register. The profound moments of awakening are those that last a bit longer and that cause a kind of transformation or shift in perspective and an opening to what is possible. The "awakening" at death is similarly only a relatively small one, and it will quickly end. If you want lasting awakening (enlightenment), you have to aim at it, be it before death or after death.

What is the most beautiful thing about life. The fact that we die. No one makes it out alive. That's the most beautiful thing about life. Who the hell can argue with you about that. Who the hell can rebut that. Come up with all the stories you want about reincarnation and how death is a concept and all that jazz, doesn't matter, the most beautiful thing about life is that nobody lives forever. That's it.

The short of it is I've always been here, just not conscious of it 'in the foreground'. I'm a nil that's naught but an amalgamation of the thousands of faces I wear – cause and effect, happenstance, societal dynamics, reincarnation, predetermination, personal choices, fictional influence, obligation, escapism, curiosity, physicality; all superficially distinct yet originating in the same field.

@Blind Observer so you believe in reincarnation? i find non existence more applausing for me tbh,more comforting