Anderz

One tricky thing I discovered is that the ego ALREADY has the true perspective of self, except for itself. The ego says things like: I have a body, my memories, I have a name, a career and so on. So the ego already has the sense of separation even from its own personal memories. And it's just that, as spiritual teachers have pointed out again and again, that it's the identification of the ego as being a separate self that is the false perception. The mistake the ego makes is that it adds its identification to its "possessions". The ego says that it has personal memories and at the same time identifies itself with those memories. That's the mistake. That's sin. It's fine to say that one did this or that in the past, when it's recognized that the actual doer of those things is the totality, not the ego as a separate self.

I believe it's true that the individual self is just a unique perspective within the totality. A perspective cannot do anything! It just is. That can sound boring as f from an ego perspective so the actual realization of that, if it's true, will involve a leap into a higher stage of development. From that new and higher perspective, the ego belief in personal doership and free will will appear as boring toys. So my guess at the moment is that the situation will flip around, so that what previously was exciting from an ego perspective becomes boring and what was boring from the ego perspective becomes exciting from the new perspective.

Here is a new mainstream science article moving in the direction of what Leo and for example Ken Wilber have talked about, that only objective studies are insufficient:

I have been curious about if my ego is a false perception, then all my personal memories are based on that false belief in separation. And so, then how to fix that? One solution that I came to think of is to look at my entire past as an object. Just like how a chair is separate from me yet part of me as oneness, so too is my personal past. The only thing personal in my past is that it's because my unique perspective of totality. Other people have their unique perspectives as a part of the same one totality. ACIM says:

Without free will, then what about moral responsibility? Someone even said that the ego is sadistic. Without free will a person deeply stuck in ego consciousness may go berserk! My guess is that the belief in free will will remain as long as we are too stuck in ego consciousness. It's an automatic developmental process. When we have reached a high enough level of development the belief in free will will drop away.

Also, another thing with getting rid of the idea of free will is that hard decisions, the big life decisions, become effortless, as Leo explains from 1 hour and 12 minutes into this video: J. Krishnamurti talked about choiceless awareness and that choice is confusion. He was probably talking about how free will is an illusion. Also notice that as Stephen Wolfram has pointed out, it's impossible to fully predict the future because of computational irreducibility. So it's not about some mechanical determinism. As the New Agers say: "Let go and let God" ..... is not a choice, it will turn out to be an inevitability.

Let's say that free will is an illusion, which I believe it is, it's still useful for reality to make the ego believe it has free will, because it creates a richer experience than being like a robot on autopilot. However, when we have walked in the ego's shoes for a while we can start to wonder: wait a minute, what kind of devilish trick is this? Do I have free will or not? And instead of being a robot slave there is another possibility: that reality has emergence, meaning unpredictable and novel things appear as we move into the future. So I will experiment with letting go of my free will. But how can I make that choice if I don't have free will? The answer is that I can make that choice because I have the knowledge that free will MAY be an illusion which will fuel the practice. And also, if reality is predetermined, which I believe it is, I want to drop the effort of personal responsibility because then that's just an unnecessary extra effort. The belief in personal responsibility and free will go together and are necessary at the ego stage of development, but should be possible to transcend.

ACIM is extreme in its teaching. Here is what it says about the world: In my view the world is obviously real. And what I think ACIM is talking about is the difference between our current (fallen) third density world and the fourth density world. That's I believe why ACIM says that we cannot see both worlds. Because it's an evolutionary leap from third to fourth density.

When A Course in Miracles is taken seriously it causes a massive cognitive dissonance in the psyche of the person in ego consciousness. Because the ACIM framework is so radically different than the current mainstream consensus view of reality. The way I deal with the cognitive dissonance personally is to compare what ACIM says to what the mainstream view is. And then to allow my mind to be confused about which perspective is correct, although with a belief that actually ACIM is correct. My idea is that what is true will sort itself out. And also the tensions in my body and mind seem suspicious to me, like how that is the result of a false perspective. And that's why I do the practice of focusing on both my confusion and my body tensions.

I want to clarify that in my view the past is real and precisely consistent, with an actual timeline going from the beginning of time and then much later to the Big Bang of our universe and up to present day billions of years later. It's just that all that past blasts into existence instantly in the now, moment by moment, as a single block of timeless information.

Ha! The reason for why religions and spiritual teachings struggle so much is because they are still stuck in third density! As long as we believe our bodies can age and die, we are screwed, and no religious or spiritual teaching can fix that problem as long as they take physical death as being real. ACIM states that death is unreal. And even Leo, even though he still seems to believe in aging and death, has started moving into the direction of recognizing our current world as a low stage of development involving a delusion compared to higher stages of development. But isn't physical death real? What about our entire human history? As I mentioned previously, if the past is only information in the now, all human history is now and not in some actual past moving away from the now. So nothing has actually happened in the past, not even physical death. Even ACIM itself wasn't written in some actual past, it pops into existence instantly in the now like everything else we experience.

What can be achieved in any glorious heaven or magical astral real in an afterlife, physical reality can already do that with infinite intelligence. This means that the fear of living forever is removed. How do we know that physical reality has infinite intelligence? Well, personally for me it's just a hypothesis still but it makes logical sense to me. And with the fear of eternal life removed we can easily move from third to fourth density WITHOUT having to die a physical third density death. ACIM even says somewhere that death is an illusion. And as I mentioned earlier, nobody has actually died in the past, since the past is just timeless information in the now. Timeless information is lifeless in itself.

Physical reality is ALREADY infinite intelligence. In principle, the screen you are watching now could literally turn into a liquid mirror like in the Matrix movie. The whole planet earth is capable of the same things as in Disney movies and beyond. Third density is merely a severe limitation of the capacity of physical reality for the purpose of rational growth and development. Our current world is deliberately limited in ways to ensure intelligent development instead of some wild fantasy world of magic.

It seems to me that there must be a subtle body within the physical body. Like a morphic field that controls how the body grows, how wounds are healed etc. The subtle body is I believe finer vibrations of the vacuum energy. And the subtle body interfaces with the physical body via the water in the body. (Water has amazing properties.) Moving from third to fourth density involves transcending the ego and getting a more advanced and capable subtle body. The ego shadow has to "die" to allow for a rebirth into a collective fourth density consciousness. And that "birth" process is about fourth density capacity through the Holy Spirit moving into the subtle body and into the physical body through the water in the body. It's a transformation from a third density body to a fourth density body, what Christians sometimes call a glorified body.

Here is a new scientific article (from yesterday) that moves in the direction of what I discussed in previous posts: In my model, consciousness actually does serve a function, which is that it provides a much richer feedback loop for reality than a zombie state without consciousness. But I agree that survival of the fittest Darwinism doesn't need consciousness, it works equally well for zombies, haha.

Can taking psychedelics really temporarily increase our consciousness? I see consciousness as a state of being aware as a self. And consciousness is already connected to all of reality. So consciousness itself doesn't change I think. However, the degree of information density and integration of what is experienced in consciousness can be lower or higher. This even fits with the theory in mainstream science called the Integrated Information Theory: Even hardcore skeptic and neuroscientist Christof Koch has promoted the Integrated Information Theory. There are other mainstream skeptics who disagree, such as: Pansychism seems to be what Leo is talking about as the true reality. And then the Integrated Information Theory is actually compatible with Leo's claim about psychedelics being able to increase the level of consciousness. It's "simply" a result of increasing the value Phi (Φ) which in turn is dependent on how much information is integrated into a unified experience. And that's the same as the densities in the Law of One! Higher density means more information and more integration.

Leo said that the physical reality we live in now is delusion land compared to what can be experienced with psychedelics. One interpretation I can make to make that radical statement fit into my picture is that what Leo has seen and experienced firsthand through psychedelics is actually temporary shifts into what the Law of One calls higher densities. And then it makes sense! Because third density, which is the (fallen) world we live in now, what I call the global ego, IS very much a deluded stage compared to fourth and higher densities. Then it fits with what Leo said about how our current physical reality is one of the lowest and least truthful stages of development.

There is one major difference however between Leo's description of reality as a hallucination and my model. He said that consciousness can create any kind of hallucination and that our physical reality is just one out of a countless possible hallucinations. In my model our physical reality is the foundation, or as Mark Passio said, physical reality is where the rubber meets the road. And another difference is that in my model consciousness is connected to the infinite unmanifested but it is just a state. So neither consciousness nor anything else can actually do anything in my model. And our physical reality is the foundation because for infinite intelligence to manifest itself there has to be consistency of experiences on a vast scale for long-term development. In astral realms all kinds of scenarios are possible but those are less consistent than our physical reality, and therefore actually less intelligent.

Interesting, Leo has a similar explanation to my guess of how psychedelics works. And Leo has vast actual experience of psychedelics. He even went one step further and called our whole physical reality a hallucination. I think Leo used that term deliberately as a contrast to mainstream experts who claim that psychedelics are just about brain chemistry. Is reality a hallucination? Well, in my model technically yes, that's a valid term since physical reality is information observed in consciousness. And the information in turn is a result of a timeless structure, a platonic form one might say, without substance. So the foundation of reality is a "no-thing" not some material stuff. Hallucination usually has a special connotation of something crazy but technically, yes that's a valid term IMO.

Leo's new video is about psychedelics. My guess is that psychedelics open up higher density capacity. And actually, it may NOT be the chemicals that themselves produce the transcended state and instead that the drugs are just third density "keys" for temporarily unlocking higher density capacity, even way beyond fourth density. (Density is the term used in the Law of One to describe higher stages of reality.)

Whoa, this is almost spooky. In Mooji's last satsang I noticed a difference between the questioners in the audience coming from ego consciousness while Mooji seemed coming from a liberated state. In his latest satsang some of the questioners also seem to be free of ego! Could just be my imagination, but I sense a difference.

If there is no separate self, then how can there be the experience of an individual self? That's simple! The individual self is a unique perspective within the totality. And it's ONLY a perspective, from a unique point, not a separate object, not any object or thing at all. The ego is "just" a bunch of conditioning based on a false belief in separation. Including, as I mentioned earlier, all personal memories. All personal memories are contaminated by that false belief.

Mooji said in the recent satsang that we can't use willpower to become free from our identification with personhood. I have heard similar statements before but now it hit me that the willpower comes from the same entity which is the conditioning of identification with personhood itself! I got a deeper realization of that now.

Leo said something like how one can zoom into a physical object to infinity. Does that match my model? Yes, it actually does. Manifested reality is always finite. Okay, so then say a coffee cup, even as all its physical particles are entangled with all other particles in the universe, then is it possible to describe the cup as information? Actually, no. Even if we take all zillions to the power of zillions bits of information in the entire omniverse, the next moment in time that information in the omniverse has expanded to an astronomical degree. And possibly even when zooming in into the cup, into atoms, as Nassim Haramein has proposed, the protons in atoms are actually black holes. And then it's possible that each proton contains a baby universe. And within such baby universe, as it expands, the size of it from a being in the baby universe is the same size as our universe and it has its own physical particles and within those particles are baby-baby universes and so on to infinity. And even if only large black holes, such as the center of galaxies have baby universes, the expansion of information is going on which means that the information required to describe the cup expands forever. Also, the mainstream science view is that entropy always increases, and interestingly, top physicist Leonard Susskind said that entropy is hidden information, so even the mainstream current view is that the information in our universe is always expanding.

Brad Johnson has a new video, all kinds of New Age topics some of which I found refreshing compared to the mainstream global ego view: