Whirlpool's core/first motion

[Lou Gold]

Well, foolish me, I'll try again with my standard caveat that I'm a storyteller and not a philosopher. In my view, DID is both a Dissociated Identity Disorder and a Divinely Interconnected Diversity. Whirlpools are temporary excitations. They birth manifestations. Everything born dies. As the Master says, "The sign of the Father is action and repose." Or, "form is emptiness and emptiness is not other than form." Life-and-death, pleasure-and-pain, matter-and-spirit are part of the process. Why not accept both/and rather than endlessly fighting about either/or?

DID? It's temporary. It's gonna die. And it's lovely indeed.

[Cleric]

The criticism is not meant to demean BK's efforts but only to point attention that we need to be vigilant for something. I'm fully aware that most people would say "BK's mission is to simply take the first step - show the inconsistencies of materialism. Others will continue the work further." But the thing is that there's great significance what this first step is. It can easily turn also into a last step (dead end) and that's the kind of constructive criticism we're offering here.

It's true, in our materialistic age it seems as a big deal when someone says that reality is spiritual in essence, that matter is simply the name we have given to the specific dynamics of a part of the perceptual spectrum. But if we continue our reasoning further we'll quickly realize that this in itself doesn't lead a long way as far as the transformation of our human conduct goes.

First of all, why is BK and others concerned about confronting materialism? Hopefully it isn't just to win an intellectual fight and in the end claim "See, I have truer understanding of reality than you do." Instead, one feels that the materialistic conception actually cripples the human spirit, it limits our spiritual potential. It invites us to live animalistic lives building on the foundations of physical survival and only slightly embellishing it with higher interests like music, poetry, philosophy, etc. This is really what is at stake here. That by having incorrect understanding of what reality is, how it functions and how we contribute to it, we're being severely limited to purely bodily life receiving commentary from futile intellect.

So people who find interest in idealism in most cases are drawn by the possibility that morality and harmonious human conduct can find support through our understanding of the laws of existence. It's a common misconception that by simply admitting the underlying One consciousness, we attain to something beneficial for our Earthly life. As a matter of fact, ever since the advent of quantum field theories, scientists also live in 'oneness'. There are no fundamentally separate particles. It's all ripples in the continuous quantum fields. In this sense we're all one. So what is the practical difference when we call the supposed ground of reality not quantum field but MAL?

It should be clear that simply holding an understanding about the continuous nature of reality in itself has no moral consequences. The idealist would say "You shall not harm another because we're one consciousness". So what? Does this mean that the materialist is justified to harm another because they share one energy quantum field? What's the big deal of speaking of one consciousness when I don't experience the pain of another? A materialist capable of empathy is just as sensitive for the suffering of others. If we think things through, we'll see clearly that the idea of the undivided grounds of existence doesn't have anything to say about morality. Neither believing in a ground energy field (materialism) forces me to be insensitive to the pain of others, nor belief in one field of consciousness automatically makes me sensitive (in fact, the dissociation theory ensures that others' pains are beyond my local field).

Here things get very mixed up. The idea that oneness somehow implies morality is simply false. True morality results from genuine insight into the nature of reality. Just as we have understanding of the effects of watering a plant with water or gasoline, so we should have living understanding of the way our thoughts, feelings and actions 'water' the Cosmic interference pattern. Then we should have understanding that these ripples that we produce through the one field of reality have certain dynamics, lawfulness. This has always been known as the law of Karma.

The critical thing to realize is that simply showing the inconsistencies of materialism, in itself can never give us the kind of consciousness where we can observe the workings of spiritual dynamics, of Karma. Not only that, but we'll once again be left in the same old state where human souls are ripped apart by conflicting desires which throw them into conflict with themselves and others. Even if tomorrow it was to happen that the whole world would adopt the idea of MAL, nothing would change very much. As a matter of fact, things may get even worse because people will begin to experiment with their psychic abilities (which have been hitherto chained by materialistic conceptions) and this would quickly escalate into the widespread use of black magic.

These are very serious things. Refuting materialism doesn't really lead to deeper insight into reality, let alone to higher moral conduct. Pointing our finger at materialism and blaming it for the misfortunes of humanity simply diverts our attention from the essentials - which are what lives deep in the human soul. Unless we recognize the forces and beings of the spiritual world, which on the surface of our consciousness emerge as desires pulling our yoke hither and tither, materialism actually protects us from greater evil. In certain sense, our ability to wreck havoc is constrained. It will be far more dangerous if certain occult powers are unleashed and fall in the hands of unrestrained desires. No amount of preaching about oneness can lead to harmonious moral conduct, similarly to that the understanding of the one unified quantum field, doesn't stop the ill-intended to utilize them for the creation of more destructive technologies. Even with full awareness of the one field of consciousness, one who doesn't understand the depth of his own soul and the source of desires, wouldn't hesitate to pursuit these desires no matter what. The one field of consciousness will simply be valuable condition for one to spread the tentacles of control over greater domains of reality in much more occult manners.

And this is the reason for the constructive criticism here. All effort should be to deepen our soul life and understand the higher strata of reality, which otherwise blindly pull our yoke and we believe that we fulfill our own desires. Unfortunately it is precisely the late soul mood of BK which forecloses any possibility for such deepening - since the soul depths are seen as inexplicable black box, into which no form of cognition can ever penetrate. This practically puts the lid on evolution and no one should be surprised when in the future people who have left behind materialism long ago, wage occult wars between each other, utilizing the forces of the one field of consciousness through the dark arts.

[AshvinP]

And for how long should humanity keep strictly separated the world of academic thought and the world of Truth? Who are we serving by keeping these 'good manners' by not disturbing the secular world through the implications of the given facts?

This is also why simply trying to prove materialism wrong in itself, can never lead too far. That's way the Intelligent Design movement (renamed Creationists) fails. They present valuable observations about the inadequacy of evolution through purely random mutations but at the same time don't provide anything as a substitute, besides "God created everything."

Similarly, simply showing the inconsistencies of materialism, leaves one in void. Then they become susceptible to the worst kinds of superstitions. In other words, the materialist superstition (which sclerotized the ancient gods of the elements into laws of nature) is simply exchanged for another superstition - such as "there's MAL or whatever behind the disassociative curtains of inner reality."

That's why it is so urgent today that we not only show the inconstancies but also show how they can resolved (besides simply picking a blind belief of choice). And this resolution is to happen here and now, not by fantasizing and expecting it only after death but by growing into the full spectrum of reality.

I think that BK is sincerely trying to do just that: bringing his truth out there, to the secular world. He has quit academia as well as a top job to lead a foundation devoted to spreading the word of idealism outside of the closed circles of academia. He is touching a much larger public than one would expect from a philosopher. And the shift away from materialism today in and outside academia is tangible, especially in the younger generations.

Also, BK is not simply trying to prove materialism wrong in itself. That's unfair. He has developed a cohesive vision, inquired and connected evidence from physics, psychology, medicine to it.

Now, that his system has pitfalls, yes, and that another system is what the world urgently needs right now, ok maybe. But what does this bitterness stand for?

Practically, what Cleric responded is all too real. In addition to this website, there is a discord server dedicated to BK's idealism. The comments there are 90% bashing of materialists, of the sort we might hear on a playground, as if the intellectual label "materialist" defines the very essence of someone's being and we can find all flaws of modern thinking within that label, and about 7% remarks about how we are all "one consciousness". The other 3%, if I am being generous, is devoted to matters of moral significance as they relate to the logical implications of idea-lism, and mostly that is on side threads started by one other person and myself.

BK wrote a book called "Dreamed Up Reality". We often here about Maya in the nondual discussion. But it seems the possibility that we are part of that dreamed up Maya, as atomized intellects perceiving and conceptualizing the world, is entirely ignored. It simply isn't taken the least bit seriously. For ex., BK just wrote an article speculating on "How can you be me?". To preserve the atomistic dissociation theory, and the conviction that the rational intellect is the very apex of cognitive evolution, he speculates the analytic idealist equivalent of the infinite multiverse 'explanation'.

The latter is sometimes used by the atheist-physicalist to 'explain' how consciousness evolved in this universe and how it is so finely-tuned for life and sentience. BK uses it to 'explain' how we can exist in dissociated bubbles of consciousness yet all be the same Consciousness in essence. He posits that each dissociated perspective is constantly time-traveling to occupy the dissociated perspectives of other 'alters' it is interacting with, like a person playing chess against themselves. There is no discussion of more holistic Time-experience, as Cleric discussed in several recent posts, or about the integration of Memory through the ceaseless evolution of ideational activity.

Of course this article got glowing reviews on the server - the riddle of One Consciousness existing alongside 'dissociated alters' had been solved once and for all! The point here is to notice how all of this is done for only one reason - to simply avoid admitting that the rational intellect lives in Maya, its concepts are Maya, and its sense of atomization is Maya. It is done to preserve the theory of dissociated bubbles which, in turn, preserve the intellect at the apex of cognitive evolution, with no living ideas between it and the One Consciousness that it should seek out, pay attention to, and grow into. It is felt that the chess analogy works because Cosmic ideation within and between the human perspective and that of God/MAL is similar to that of two people making decisions while playing chess, i.e. rational intellect with only mineralized concepts to work with.

Ultimately it's not about criticizing BK, because BK is not reading any of this. He won't be reading Cleric's Nth metaphorical and imaginative illustration of Time-consciousness on the other thread, so there's not even a possibility of it being constructive for him. Why should that stop it from being constructive for the rest of us? This cliquish adherence to the public-facing academics is Maya. It is born of the physicalist perspective that what is bigger, weighs more, gets more views, has more followers, etc. is what wins the battles for human body, soul, and spirit. We feel that any truths we have won for ourselves can't possibly match up with those produced from the academic Goliath, no matter how sound our own logic and reasoning. So we must choose a 'side' and remain completely loyal to its doctrines.

But what if the individuals winning ideas through the strength of their own inner experience and reasoning is precisely the way in which failing philosophical-spiritual (or anti-spiritual) paradigms grow into new ones with minimal casualties of war in the process?

More than in previous experiments, I find it extraordinarily difficult this time to recall the details of the experience. Like a regular dream that one forgets seconds after waking up, this time the experience began fading fast, even before I was back to more ordinary states of consciousness. Still, I remember that, at some point in the experiment, I was saying repeatedly in thought: “I am trying, but I cannot understand it... I am trying...” Something was being displayed in the screen of my mind; something extraordinarily profound and complex, but I could not make sense of it. It was very, very hard to grasp, whatever it was.

The gestalt of the experience was that of a “better informed” alter ego of mine trying to convey something to his space-time-bound doppelganger. I had a hard time making sense of “his” message. Yet, very slowly, the entire situation started becoming clearer. At some point, I felt as though my supposed alter ego were metaphorically opening the dome of inner theater above my head – like the moving dome of an astronomical observatory – revealing a profound and unprecedented truth operating busily and inconspicuously just behind what had previously been the boundary of my perceptual universe.

What I then “saw” was indescribable. How inadequate words are. This... “thing” that was revealed... froze me to the spot. It was a pattern. Whatever doubt I might have harbored about whether these experiences truly entailed knowledge input from outside my brain evaporated: there was absolutely no way this thing, this unfathomable miracle of a pattern, could have come out of my primate head.

We only need to take these words of BK, written soon after altered state of consciousness, more seriously. Our current state of conceptual activity is more Maya than we can imagine, but the fact that we can know this, as BK knew it above, is the greatest hope, for it means the gradient between our current state and higher ones is continuous and can be consciously grown into without limit. That is not to say without constraints, because it is actually the structured constraints which make the growing possible. The poor in spirit are blessed because they are in a position of humility to realize the Maya of their situation and, by that very realization, begin to grow out of it in a living and productive, not merely theoretical and often vindictive, way.

[Soul_of_Shu]

More than in previous experiments, I find it extraordinarily difficult this time to recall the details of the experience. Like a regular dream that one forgets seconds after waking up, this time the experience began fading fast, even before I was back to more ordinary states of consciousness. Still, I remember that, at some point in the experiment, I was saying repeatedly in thought: “I am trying, but I cannot understand it... I am trying...” Something was being displayed in the screen of my mind; something extraordinarily profound and complex, but I could not make sense of it. It was very, very hard to grasp, whatever it was.

The gestalt of the experience was that of a “better informed” alter ego of mine trying to convey something to his space-time-bound doppelganger. I had a hard time making sense of “his” message. Yet, very slowly, the entire situation started becoming clearer. At some point, I felt as though my supposed alter ego were metaphorically opening the dome of inner theater above my head – like the moving dome of an astronomical observatory – revealing a profound and unprecedented truth operating busily and inconspicuously just behind what had previously been the boundary of my perceptual universe.

What I then “saw” was indescribable. How inadequate words are. This... “thing” that was revealed... froze me to the spot. It was a pattern. Whatever doubt I might have harbored about whether these experiences truly entailed knowledge input from outside my brain evaporated: there was absolutely no way this thing, this unfathomable miracle of a pattern, could have come out of my primate head.

We only need to take these words of BK, written soon after altered state of consciousness, more seriously. Our current state of conceptual activity is more Maya than we can imagine, but the fact that we can know this, as BK knew it above, is the greatest hope, for it means the gradient between our current state and higher ones is continuous and can be consciously grown into without limit. That is not to say without constraints, because it is actually the structured constraints which make the growing possible. The poor in spirit are blessed because they are in a position of humility to realize the Maya of their situation and, by that very realization, begin to grow out of it in a living and productive, not merely theoretical and often vindictive, way.

This is the early writing from BK—supposedly inspired and informed by the 'daemon'—that drew me into his ideas. Alas, that daemon seems to have abandoned the BK we have now, who leaves me feeling little but discouragement with the direction his self-described 'primate head' (a curious linguistic concession to physicalism's 'mind-is-in-the-head' assertion) has taken more recently—seemingly more inspired and informed by some bitchy mini-me 'alter' ... Oh daemon, why hast thou forsaken us?

[Lou Gold]

More than in previous experiments, I find it extraordinarily difficult this time to recall the details of the experience. Like a regular dream that one forgets seconds after waking up, this time the experience began fading fast, even before I was back to more ordinary states of consciousness. Still, I remember that, at some point in the experiment, I was saying repeatedly in thought: “I am trying, but I cannot understand it... I am trying...” Something was being displayed in the screen of my mind; something extraordinarily profound and complex, but I could not make sense of it. It was very, very hard to grasp, whatever it was.

The gestalt of the experience was that of a “better informed” alter ego of mine trying to convey something to his space-time-bound doppelganger. I had a hard time making sense of “his” message. Yet, very slowly, the entire situation started becoming clearer. At some point, I felt as though my supposed alter ego were metaphorically opening the dome of inner theater above my head – like the moving dome of an astronomical observatory – revealing a profound and unprecedented truth operating busily and inconspicuously just behind what had previously been the boundary of my perceptual universe.

What I then “saw” was indescribable. How inadequate words are. This... “thing” that was revealed... froze me to the spot. It was a pattern. Whatever doubt I might have harbored about whether these experiences truly entailed knowledge input from outside my brain evaporated: there was absolutely no way this thing, this unfathomable miracle of a pattern, could have come out of my primate head.

We only need to take these words of BK, written soon after altered state of consciousness, more seriously. Our current state of conceptual activity is more Maya than we can imagine, but the fact that we can know this, as BK knew it above, is the greatest hope, for it means the gradient between our current state and higher ones is continuous and can be consciously grown into without limit. That is not to say without constraints, because it is actually the structured constraints which make the growing possible. The poor in spirit are blessed because they are in a position of humility to realize the Maya of their situation and, by that very realization, begin to grow out of it in a living and productive, not merely theoretical and often vindictive, way.

This is the early writing from BK—supposedly inspired and informed by the 'daemon'—that drew me into his ideas. Alas, that daemon seems to have abandoned the BK we have now, who leaves me feeling little but discouragement with the direction his self-described 'primate head' (a curious linguistic concession to physicalism's 'mind-is-in-the-head' assertion) has taken more recently—seemingly more inspired and informed by some bitchy mini-me 'alter' ... Oh daemon, why hast thou forsaken us?

I dunno Dana. I was drawn to BK by "More Than Allegory" which (I believe) he still claims as his best work. What I see now is a guy in process, perhaps not unlike what Richard Tarnas discusses in this lecture...



I can't help but recall a few years back when I first showed up at this forum. I was puzzled, so in ritual space I asked, "What's up with this forum?" The instant answer was, "NO MOTHER!" I don't feel forsaken by the daemon. I feel it's pushing BK and us to where we have to go.

[Soul_of_Shu]

I can't help but recall a few years back when I first showed up at this forum. I was puzzled, so in ritual space I asked, "What's up with this forum?" The instant answer was, "NO MOTHER!" I don't feel forsaken by the daemon. I feel it's pushing BK and us to where we have to go.

So the mother has forsaken the forum? I guess the mod will have to do as the surrogate mommy ... Now go outside and play, before I give you a piece of my 'primate head'

[Soul_of_Shu]

I dunno Dana. I was drawn to BK by "More Than Allegory" which (I believe) he still claims as his best work. What I see now is a guy in process, perhaps not unlike what Richard Tarnas discusses in this lecture...

Regarding the Tarnas lecture, I've actually listened to it before. On a curious sidenote, when I once noticed that BK had Tarnas' Cosmos and Psyche on his shelf, I asked him in an exchange if he would recommend it, and he had to concede that he hadn't yet actually read it, after not being able to get beyond the first chapter. Perhaps he has read it since, but if not then one has to wonder why, and if he wouldn't feel much the same ambivalence about the lecture. But it could have just been the writing style that deterred him.

[Lou Gold]

I can't help but recall a few years back when I first showed up at this forum. I was puzzled, so in ritual space I asked, "What's up with this forum?" The instant answer was, "NO MOTHER!" I don't feel forsaken by the daemon. I feel it's pushing BK and us to where we have to go.

So the mother has forsaken the forum? I guess the mod will have to do as the surrogate mommy ... Now go outside and play, before I give you a piece of my 'primate head'

Tough love, indeed!

[Lou Gold]

I dunno Dana. I was drawn to BK by "More Than Allegory" which (I believe) he still claims as his best work. What I see now is a guy in process, perhaps not unlike what Richard Tarnas discusses in this lecture...

Regarding the Tarnas lecture, I've actually listened to it before. On a curious sidenote, when I once noticed that BK had Tarnas' Cosmos and Psyche on his shelf, I asked him in an exchange if he would recommend it, and he had to concede that he hadn't yet actually read it, after not being able to get beyond the first chapter. Perhaps he has read it since, but if not then one has to wonder why, and if he wouldn't feel much the same ambivalence about the lecture. But it could have just been the writing style that deterred him.

It's possible that BK would not like RT's work but BK has stated his high regard for his daughter Becca and had a very respectful dialog with his son-in-law Matt Segall, both of whom are steeped in the same archetypal tradition and are devoted to returning the Mother to Her throne (as is most of CIIS). I'm not defending BK, just suggesting that a fall by Analytical Idealism from the lofty heights may be part of the Great Initiation.

[AshvinP]

More than in previous experiments, I find it extraordinarily difficult this time to recall the details of the experience. Like a regular dream that one forgets seconds after waking up, this time the experience began fading fast, even before I was back to more ordinary states of consciousness. Still, I remember that, at some point in the experiment, I was saying repeatedly in thought: “I am trying, but I cannot understand it... I am trying...” Something was being displayed in the screen of my mind; something extraordinarily profound and complex, but I could not make sense of it. It was very, very hard to grasp, whatever it was.

The gestalt of the experience was that of a “better informed” alter ego of mine trying to convey something to his space-time-bound doppelganger. I had a hard time making sense of “his” message. Yet, very slowly, the entire situation started becoming clearer. At some point, I felt as though my supposed alter ego were metaphorically opening the dome of inner theater above my head – like the moving dome of an astronomical observatory – revealing a profound and unprecedented truth operating busily and inconspicuously just behind what had previously been the boundary of my perceptual universe.

What I then “saw” was indescribable. How inadequate words are. This... “thing” that was revealed... froze me to the spot. It was a pattern. Whatever doubt I might have harbored about whether these experiences truly entailed knowledge input from outside my brain evaporated: there was absolutely no way this thing, this unfathomable miracle of a pattern, could have come out of my primate head.

We only need to take these words of BK, written soon after altered state of consciousness, more seriously. Our current state of conceptual activity is more Maya than we can imagine, but the fact that we can know this, as BK knew it above, is the greatest hope, for it means the gradient between our current state and higher ones is continuous and can be consciously grown into without limit. That is not to say without constraints, because it is actually the structured constraints which make the growing possible. The poor in spirit are blessed because they are in a position of humility to realize the Maya of their situation and, by that very realization, begin to grow out of it in a living and productive, not merely theoretical and often vindictive, way.

This is the early writing from BK—supposedly inspired and informed by the 'daemon'—that drew me into his ideas. Alas, that daemon seems to have abandoned the BK we have now, who leaves me feeling little but discouragement with the direction his self-described 'primate head' (a curious linguistic concession to physicalism's 'mind-is-in-the-head' assertion) has taken more recently—seemingly more inspired and informed by some bitchy mini-me 'alter' ... Oh daemon, why hast thou forsaken us?

To be a bit more complete, the remaining section of that quote from DUR was left out because it went, IMO, in the entirely wrong direction. Something along the lines of, "...then I understood everything!" In other words, his intellectual understanding of the ineffable experience was the absolute peak of current, pre-death understanding possible for humans. It's a cautionary tale for how half-truths are often the most dangerous sort, and we are always walking a fine line between genuine insight into the spiritual and prideful conceptual idolatry of it.

"Thus it is just when we consider the state of sleep that we can see that man, unless he consciously seeks a relation to the spiritual world, only arrives at half-true concepts and ideas, which indeed, because they change into life-falsify it, and at last actually bring about great catastrophe. These half-true concepts are indeed in some respects even worse than those which are quite false ones, for those who form the partly-true concepts and ideas rely upon them; they are able to prove them, for, being partly true they can be proved. An attempt to disprove them would bring no further illumination, for these ideas are, after all, partly true! Such concepts really falsify life even more than do the entirely wrong ones, which we can immediately recognise as false."