Philosophical Speculations

Good point Cleric, and that is exactly why I pointed that the "extremist" Eastern approach of only focusing on THAT and disregarding the world of forms (as illusory "maya") and "catapulting" ourselves to that level of THAT while ignoring the current ideal content and inter-relations/patterns of our individual consciousness, is deficient and incomplete, and this is why I'm saying that integration of both approaches is needed. Even if we realize THAT, we still need to evolve and develop through all the cocoons of the hierarchy of consciousness, we still need to work on the integration of our shadows and unconscious layers, we cannot jump ahead and skip developmental stages. However, the realization of THAT is by itself is an important developmental stage that opens a new horizon and new perspective on the Reality, changes our priorities and values going forward and catalyzes our further development through cocoon stages. As an analogy, it is like you were going along the road through a tunnel with very narrow perspective on the world, and suddenly "boom" - you get out of the tunnel and see a much wider perspective on the world. However, you are still at the same place on the road and still going.

On another note, because you are used to thinking in terms of hierarchies, in your mental picture of reality the level of "THAT" is at the top of the world hierarchy, but it actually is not. As an analogy, let's say we are individual waves on the ocean, some of us are smaller ripples, the other ones are bigger waves, and the top ones are the humongous tsunami-scale waves, and we think that our only goal in life is to grow up in the hierarchy and integrate into the tsunami to become one wave. But at some point we realize that we are all actually the same ocean. But the ocean itself is not a wave, even though it always exists with waves on the surface. and the ocean is not on the "top" of anything. It is not "the biggest wave of all". It is just what all waves are made of. It is equally everywhere, not particularly on the top, or particularly at the bottom. But a wave does not dissolve into the ocean once it realizes the ocean, it still continues its course of development and participation in the interconnectedness and integration of waves, there is nothing wrong with that development process. The life of the waves and their interplay is a beautiful way the ocean expresses its "moving" creative ability. It's just that the perspective of the wave on the reality changes, which still affects it course to some extent and changes the priorities of moving forward. Such wave does not become omniscient and does not "become the ocean as a whole", because its cognition is still confined within the wave whirlpool, it's just that it now experientially sees the same ocean everywhere that always moves in shapes of waves, as opposed to previously seeing separate waves only and not noticing the ocean. The wave realizes that it is already one with the ocean and has never actually been separate from it, yet the wave may still continue its course toward the the growth and integration because it is still a better place and state to be.

In a way, it can be called the second meta-cognition (or meta-meta-cognition). The first meta-cognition occurs when conscious beings realize that they are conscious and they are having thoughts and perceptions. It is a certain developmental gate/stage of conscious beings, but no miracles happen, they still continue their development, however, such meta-cognition facilitates the development and opens new venues and opportunities. The second meta-cognition happens when they realize THAT which is actually conscious of all those thoughts and perceptions (including the thoughts of them having thoughts and perceptions). Again, no miracles happen, the development continues, but the meta-meta-cognition still facilitates the development even more and open even more opportunities for the further development.

Eugene I wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 11:32 pm As an analogy, let's say we are individual waves on the ocean, some of us are smaller ripples, the other ones are bigger waves, and the top ones are the humongous tsunami-scale waves, and we think that our only goal in life is to grow up in the hierarchy and integrate into the tsunami to become one wave. But at some point we realize that we are all actually the same ocean. But the ocean itself is not a wave, even though it always exists with waves on the surface. and the ocean is not on the "top" of anything. It is not "the biggest wave of all". It is just what all waves are made of. It is equally everywhere, not particularly on the top, or particularly at the bottom. But a wave does not dissolve into the ocean once it realizes the ocean, it still continues its course of development and participation in the interconnectedness and integration of waves, there is nothing wrong with that development process. The life of the waves and their interplay is a beautiful way the ocean expresses its "moving" creative ability. It's just that the perspective of the wave on the reality changes, which still affects it course to some extent and changes the priorities of moving forward. Such wave does not become omniscient and does not "become the ocean as a whole", because its cognition is still confined within the wave whirlpool, it's just that it now experientially sees the same ocean everywhere that always moves in shapes of waves, as opposed to previously seeing separate waves only and not noticing the ocean. The wave realizes that it is already one with the ocean and has never actually been separate from it, yet the wave may still continue its course toward the the growth and integration because it is still a better place and state to be.

Since Cleric is likely sleeping now and he won't respond for awhile, I am going to offer a few observations here...

What Cleric is pointing to is actually so simple that it eludes the mere intellect very well (mine included a mere few months ago) - your entire analogy above is a demonstration of his remark, "So we're stuck. We want to know the top of THAT, yet we can approach this only as strong feeling. At the same time we refuse to unveil the ideal content of reality because we consider that optional." The reason you are using the analogy is because you are "stuck" at the very "strong feeling" about That which is essential to existence (probably further ahead than where I myself am stuck in terms of spiritual perception).

Now you may object, "but Cleric also used an analogy". But notice that he (1) always first points out it is a mere analogy and (2) his analogy is always pointing to something more specific than the imagery of the analogy itself. Why does he do this? It is because what he wants communicate to us has not yet been directly perceived by us. Your analogy, on the other hand, uses imagery that is equally or even somewhat more specific than the relation you want to convey. What you are claiming of Being may very well be true in many ways, but it is the "least common denominator" of the human perspective on Being as such. It conveys a "nebulous" truth about Beingness.

Consider the above point from a different angle - if Cleric starts describing the specified spiritual processes by which "sap moves in the plant", as he often does for various natural processes, why do you feel that it is a "fantasy" of sorts, one that you cannot really imagine yourself getting behind? Why do you feel it is more important to sidestep those descriptions and simply question whether he is sufficiently "integrating" Eastern and Western thought? Do you deny that he has managed to observe the actual spiritual activity of beings which give rise to those natural appearances? If so, then would not your criticism be much better directed at the inaccuracy of those descriptions? Is that not what you would do if someone came on here describing a natural process to argue for a conclusion about nature when completely misrepresenting the specifics of the process?

And if you do agree with the specific descriptions, or simply do not know like me, would it not be more productive to build on those agreements or ask questions to explore why he points to that highly specified spiritual activity of 'higher' beings in which we dwell? Like I said, I am also stuck in this manner. The difference between us is that I recognize it is me who is stuck and not Cleric who is necessarily inventing things in various spiritual scientific "fantasies" about the objective world. I do not need to take anything he describes on faith, but I also do not need to push back on something which I have not yet tested against my perception and thinking. If you take everything I wrote above and apply it to "normal" scientific inquiries instead of spiritual science, then you should see what I mean.

Ashvin, I already said hundred times that I have nothing against Cleric visions of hierarchies and what's not. But I can not confirm them with my own experiences, and I'm not a person who quickly believes in whatever other people say. There are many people having similar visions: yogis perceive their chakras, psychics perceive things in other dimensions, Christian visionaries see Christ, Mary and saints etc. I do not know if they are true clairvoyance, or if they are fantasies or hallucinations or perhaps visions/perceptions produced by their own unconsciousness. I'm always curious to know about them and I have no ground to deny them or claim that they are wrong, but likewise I also have no reason to believe that they are true. So my position with respect to them is simply neutral.

Eugene I wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 2:18 am Ashvin, I already said hundred times that I have nothing against Cleric visions of hierarchies and what's not. But I can not confirm them with my own experiences, and I'm not a person who quickly believes in whatever other people say. There are many people having similar visions: yogis perceive their chakras, psychics perceive things in other dimensions, Christian visionaries see Christ, Mary and saints etc. I do not know if they are true clairvoyance, or if they are fantasies or hallucinations or perhaps visions/perceptions produced by their own unconsciousness. I'm always curious to know about them and I have no ground to deny them or claim that they are wrong, but likewise I also have no reason to believe that they are true. So my position with respect to them is simply neutral.

No, Eugene, your position is anything but neutral. It is to "first deny or call into question" because, if anything Cleric is describing is valid, it implies that Thinking can provide a resolution on actual spiritual reality that "pure" Beingness or Awareness can never provide. You make that position perfectly clear by responding to every post where such things are brought up with the same critique that we are "missing aspects" of Reality. It is the same non-neutral position Schopenhauer (and presumably BK) take towards such claims of spiritual perception. You treat is as mere subjectivity that is on par with all other visionary accounts and that never changes - you never look for a reason to take any account more seriously than others, because you clearly do not want to find one.

Eugene I wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 2:18 am Ashvin, I already said hundred times that I have nothing against Cleric visions of hierarchies and what's not. But I can not confirm them with my own experiences, and I'm not a person who quickly believes in whatever other people say. There are many people having similar visions: yogis perceive their chakras, psychics perceive things in other dimensions, Christian visionaries see Christ, Mary and saints etc. I do not know if they are true clairvoyance, or if they are fantasies or hallucinations or perhaps visions/perceptions produced by their own unconsciousness. I'm always curious to know about them and I have no ground to deny them or claim that they are wrong, but likewise I also have no reason to believe that they are true. So my position with respect to them is simply neutral.

I would like to add a little disclaimer to what Ashvin said. What I've attained as higher experiences, as I've mentioned elsewhere, are really the most basic and general things that can be approached. To this it could be responded: "If they are so basic how come I've never experienced any of it?" The answer is the simplest of all - the direction where these experiences are to be found is never investigated. It's like saying "How come unicycles exist but I've never had the experience of riding one?"

The thing is that not only the direction is not investigated but thanks to the popular spirituality of today, the direction is by default taken to be of inferior character. And how could it be otherwise when everywhere we hear about focusing on the container of consciousness, rising above all contents. Spiritual cognition on the other hand goes through the focused metamorphosis of our thinking. This seems as big contradiction to the popular conception of meditation. It's like ignoring the foundations of being and focusing only on a specific element. Yet as said in the previous post, this focus on the container never goes beyond a nebulous feeling of 'oneness'. The focus on spiritual activity also aims to understand the container but it does that through the evolution of cognition. The basic method of investigation can be understood in the following way (described in similar lines in the Man, Know Thyself essay). Even in our ordinary state we can tell that our thinking activity is being shaped by the most varied factors - sense impressions attract our attention, feelings and desires force us to think about them and so on. In a way our human spiritual activity is one part our own creation and another part inner and outer influences which shape the cognitive landscape. It is within thinking itself that we can discern what is it that we really bring forth and what impresses, constrains and shapes our thinking environment. Higher cognition is natural continuation of this process. Almost everything that I speak about can be derived from quite generic experiences within three higher realms, which in a sense reveal the higher order reality of what we experience as thinking, feeling and willing in the ordinary state.

Just as we can discern how the living processes of our personal life, even if subconscious, shape our cognitive environment, so when these processes are followed ever further, we arrive at what lies beyond the personal, which belongs to the Cosmic environment. In the Deep MAL essay I drew a picture with common center and differentiated periphery (the faces) but this is only a geometric symbol representing ideal relations. In the same way we can envision that the center is the individual and as we expand towards the periphery we approach the common. In this sense, our cognition begins to perceive how the idea processes in the Cosmic environment act as the carrier waves on which our ordinary consciousness is modulated. For example, what the nervous system reflects to us, and more specifically the brain, is like concentration of the Imaginative consciousness in the whole Moon sphere. I remind that by Moon sphere is meant not the physical moon but a sphere concentric to Earth and as large as to encompass the Moon orbit. Of course even this is only an indication for spiritual processes, yet there's justification to express in this way. This sound horrible but in certain sense all our astral brains are as large as the Moon sphere and they interpenetrate - not necessarily being aware of each other, just like different radio frequencies pass through each other. Similarly our heart organ is related to the Sun sphere.

I'm saying all the above to bring the metaphor of the cocoons to more concrete details. When our cognition becomes a touch-organ for the spiritual world we can expand into the spheres and investigate these cocoons on whose carrier waves our Earthly being is modulated.

Now you say that

Eugene I wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 11:32 pm Even if we realize THAT, we still need to evolve and develop through all the cocoons of the hierarchy of consciousness, we still need to work on the integration of our shadows and unconscious layers, we cannot jump ahead and skip developmental stages.

So we agree that we must go through the cocoons yet we disagree on the actual path that leads through them. The path described above is the natural unfoldment of the metamorphic process. We're simply having a slight detour through the obsession with building thought-toy-models of reality instead of living it. But other than that, the stream has been going steadily for those who are able to perceive the milestones. In the most general sense, we should no longer investigate only how the factors revealed trough the senses shape our be-ing but we should also begin to consider the spiritual processes within Earth, man and the Cosmos. All this can be thought about and understood by unprejudiced thinking. Just as we can understand quite a lot about the structure of a unicycle, how it's ridden, even without attempting it, so we can understand in great details how our cognition transforms into the higher forms and how the so revealed supersensible perceptions fit together and throw detailed light on our Earthly state.

So even if all of this is found to be completely logical, why are such messages still being resisted? It's very simple - the revealed details are disliked. And from this point we all know how the conversation goes
E: We need to go through the cocoons of consciousness to reach THAT.
C: Spiritual perception reveals that these cocoons are the finer bodies of man which connect us to the spheres of the Cosmos. The spheres are the carrier waves of higher beings' activity. These waves form a kind of telos for our human beingness on the surface. We need to investigate them in order to unfold our potential in the most constructive way.
E: This sounds too totalitarian. There are other more liberal paths. The cocoons form the matrix of reality but we are not really that dependent on them.
C: How can we know this unless we investigate the cocoons? How can we gain knowledge of the cocoons if we don't penetrate then cognitively?
E: It's not clear. There are too many contradictory sources, NDEs, traditions, etc.
C: So we just sit and expect something to happen which will reveal the truth to us?
E: It's either that or we'll see what happens after death.

I hope this summarizes the usual course of our discussions The only path that leads to direct cognition of the cocoons (that we agree must be consciously traversed) is dismissed simply because of antipathy towards the findings it brings to light. Thus it's preferred to simply wait for something a little more sympathetic to emerge or we simply see what happens after death.

Cleric, you only see one-dimensional perspective on the cocoons. But in reality, we are in the realm of Consciousness and this realm is multidimensional, There is no single hierarchy of cocoons, but a variety of dimensions and paths where we can evolve. As an analogy, in human realm there is a large variety of professions and creative activities, each of those develop consciousness, but each in its own direction and realm, developing different areas of consciousness, modes of perception and cognition. Each realm and path has its own developmental stages, gates and cocoons to go through. Consciousness is a multi-dimensional fractal.

Neither I see anything wrong with dissociation into alters and do not believe that the developmental vector/telos of the MAL is towards a total integration with elimination any dissociation. I think dissociation is a natural way for Consciousness to learn from a variety of experiences and to explore the fractal from a lot of very different perspectives, which it could not do in an integrated state. IMO the developmental vector of the MAL is not towards the integration, but towards the unlimited development and creative exploration-creation of the infinite multi-dimensional fractal of various conscious states, forms and ideas. Once the meta-meta-cognition is realized, the "urge" towards the non-dissociated unity goes away, because the fundamental unity of Consciousness becomes experientially known, which dissociation never breaks, so dissociation is no longer seen as problematic. IMO in reality there is an equilibrium of integrative and dissociative tendencies/forces (Yin-Yang) which keeps the whole organism of Cosmic Consciousness evolving through the fractal without collapsing into the singularity or breaking into totally disconnected pieces There are souls/alters moving towards the center/integration, and the explorer souls moving towards dissociation and peripheries. The latter ones, after doing their exploration, later travel back and bring their experiences and perspectives on the previously unexplored areas of the fractal back to the community. You are the soul travelling towards the integration, and there is nothing wrong with it, so if you wholeheartedly believe that it is the path to go, then definitely go for it, because it is definitely IS the path to go for you. But do not judge those who travel along different paths, they have their own direction and telos, which, similarly to your path, is inspired by the the creative forces of the wholeness of Consciousness.

Eugene I wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 1:59 pm Cleric, you only see one-dimensional perspective on the cocoons. But in reality, we are in the realm of Consciousness and this realm is multidimensional, There is no single hierarchy of cocoons, but a variety of dimensions and paths where we can evolve. As an analogy, in human realm there is a large variety of professions and creative activities, each of those develop consciousness, but each in its own direction and realm, developing different areas of consciousness, modes of perception and cognition. Each realm and path has its own developmental stages, gates and cocoons to go through. Consciousness is a multi-dimensional fractal.

Please, Eugene, reveal to us some specifics of these "variety of dimensions and paths where we can evolve". Cleric has offered his many times, what are yours? Are they spiritual beings which offer these paths through their activities? What are those activities? Do they have any names we can identify in ancient philosophy and mythology? If so, then which names correspond to which activities? Or should we abandon notion of spiritual beings altogether and imagine them in some other way? What then is that other way which illuminates the essential nature of the variety of paths before us? Illuminates as opposed to simply trades in one vague set of concepts for another equally vague set of concepts; a never-ending string of vague analogies and concepts. We need specifics here if we are to ever find what you are claiming satisfying to THAT aspect of our Being-Beingness which unceasingly calls upon us to Think.

And... if my entire desire to find such specifics is an artifice of my narrow Western perspective, then please just admit to me that your view will never provide me such specifics because it does not seek to provide them as it finds no value in providing them.

Ashving, here is one specific example: MAL wanted to experience (from the first-person perspective) what it is like to be Bach and experience the creative process of composing Chaconne, Toccata and Fugue and so on. The life of Bach was a small chamber-area of the fractal of Conscious states that the MAL wanted to explore and experience. The only way to do that was do dissociate into an alter and "incarnate" into Bach's personality, abandoning its integrated state and global perspective. This was the only way to make the composition of those music masterpieces to happen. And then, once Bach's body died, his soul brought those experiences back to the MAL. Now those music pieces belong to the treasury of creative works of Consciousness that MAL can share and enjoy together with all its alters.

I quoted this video many times because I believe this presents a generic NDE experience of communication with the Source, which is confirmed by thousands of other similar NDE experiences. Here Nancy describes the Source as "Loving, Curious and Creative". He wants to explore and experience "what it is like to be" a rock, a number, fish, an animal, a human, and he loves those creatures and the results of their creative activities. Love is the integrative force, Curiosity and Creativity is dissociative force. Both together keeps the process of creative exploration and creation-development of the fractal in equilibrium and ever-going.

Eugene I wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 3:24 pm Ashving, here is one specific example: MAL wanted to experience (from the first-person perspective) what it is like to be Bach and experience the creative process of composing Chaconne, Toccata and Fugue and so on. The life of Bach was a small chamber-area of the fractal of Conscious states that the MAL wanted to explore and experience. The only way to do that was do dissociate into an alter and "incarnate" into Bach's personality, abandoning its integrated state and global perspective. This was the only way to make the composition of those music masterpieces to happen. And then, once Bach's body died, his soul brought those experiences back to the MAL. Now those music pieces belong to the treasury of creative works of Consciousness that MAL can share and enjoy together with all its alters.

I quoted this video many times because I believe this presents a generic NDE experience of communication with the Source, which is confirmed by thousands of other similar NDE experiences. Here Nancy describes the Source as "Loving, Curious and Creative". He wants to explore and experience "what it is like to be" a rock, a number, fish, an animal, a human, and he loves those creatures and the results of their creative activities. Love is the integrative force, Curiosity and Creativity is dissociative force. Both together keeps the process of creative exploration and creation-development of the fractal in equilibrium and ever-going.

Thanks for the response, Eugene, and I will try to watch the video soon, but here is the thing I notice write off the bat - your example is redirecting me back into the Earthly realm of music. It is taking me to the realm that I already experience through videos on YouTube and songs on Amazon Prime. I do not feel it is providing any further insight into the deeper spiritual activities which give rise to those musical experiences. In fact, I feel that the deeper spiritual reality of MAL is so abstract, vague and devoid of quality that I do not want to travel in that direction. Rather I prefer to stay forever in this differentiated realm where the musical qualities are. I am left thinking MAL's "dissociation" and "incarnation" into "alters" is infinitely more rich in experience than its amorphous harmonious state. There is nothing wrong with exploring the endless forms of aesthetic qualities in the Earthly realm, of course, but we should then admit there is no desire to go beyond those qualities towards the more integrated spiritual realities they point to. Cleric's examples have the exact opposite effect on me - they make me eager to start traveling towards the spiritual realities I have not yet perceived directly. Is that just my peculiar sensibility or is there something deeper and more universal about that effect?

Ashvin, as I said, there is an equilibrium of forces and a diversity of exploration paths. One of the very strong forces and major paths is the integrative one motivated by Love - the path you and Cleric are on. Without such integrative force/path Consciousness would disintegrate into disconnected pieces and chaos. However, the Creativity and Curiosity of MAL maintains the opposite strong force that motivates continuous major path of dissociations and continuous explorations of newer areas of the infinite fractal, with consequent integration of these experience. So, these explorer alters are travelling towards the exploration and creativity paths, but they will return back to the integrative path once they accomplish their specific explorative/creative missions. Since the fractal is multi-dimensional, there is a wide variety of such explorative paths, none of them being "truer" than others, because they are all true - the mission of each of them is to explore specific but different areas and dimensions of the fractal. A musician is exploring the space of musical forms, an engineer is exploring the space of technological forms, and each of those explorative paths is "true" in its own sense and is needed for the exploration of the fractal. This dissociation-integration exploration-creation process is never-ending because the fractal is infinite and can never be fully exhausted. In such view, the dissociation is not a "mistake", "sin" or "disorder", it's a natural way for the MAL to evolve and explore the infinite fractal space of its own conscious states. But for such exploration to work, the dissociation also has to be paired with integration, hence we alters naturally feel the spiritual motivation and attraction back towards the integration.