Purple Man

@Water by the River Thank you so much for the thorough, interesting answer. After the explanatory part of your post, you conclude: "...Who is actually imagining this story of "beings" needing saving by boddhisattvas? Who is looking through all eyes? And what would a "being" having realized that "it" is literally the only being in existence do? Who are you again?" And that´s exactly what I meant when I made my comment. In the game of Absolute and relatives, there is a fine equilibrium in which perfection is to remain totally anchored in static True Impersonal Identity/Awareness, although not too absorted in transcendence as to not engage in playing the Expression game that has the refinement of the infinite number of Space/time avatars as only purpose, the game of one vibratory field looking like a trillion things through vibration frequency ("Eternity John-ing", "Shiva-Shakti", are nice descriptions of this perfect equilibrium). But a certain, conscious "dumbing down" is necessary for the "Expression" side to have sense and keep going (upwards hopefully). On the argument on the existence or non existence of a "True I", I would say that there being Identity as an Impersonal, Absolute "I", is self-evident, with doubts about it probably being the consequence of trying to avoid the reminiscences of manifested individuality, which is not what we´re talking about here when we say "I".

I am very interested in having your opinion, since I have a problem with the very notion of Bodhisattva. The bigger the stabilization in Impersonal Absolute as Identity, the larger the contradiction to engage in practices or concepts that imply a separate "spiritual charachter in the show", which actually belongs to what I call "Expression", or the whole vibratory manifestation of/from/within the Absolute. In my view, the Bodhisattva role only has a meaning in a stage of development where there hasn´t been a realization where every single "individual" is a vibrational character emerging within Oneself, with Oneself being the only factor with Sentience or Awareness. "Bodhisattva" thus would necessarily imply the notion of one of those actually unconscious vibrational characters being conscious, and deciding to help other supposedly conscious vibrational characters to know their real Self. But in reality, it is the Absolute that brings its Awareness, the only one there is, to each unconscious avatar, to play a game of manifestation. What´s your take on this? How would then Bodhisattva, which is a concept depending on a not completely developed sense of Identity be the key factor to open gates to higher realms? Wouldn´t that imply the irony that it takes forgetfulness of our Absolute Identity as the motor that keeps manifestation going subtler and subtler?

Now that Leo shows special special interest in non human intelligence, the wonderful Jeffrey Mishlove´s "New thinking allowed" podcast would be a good choice.

Some things that are being discussed here sound similar, and probably give an explanation, to the most bizarre moment in my life, when I woke up in a normal day (no drugs, no meditation involved) and not just the particulars of my human avatar were cut off from the "film", but also the understanding of the very notion of existing, of being a manifested form. I think I remember having the thought "What is "being alive?"". To say it was terrifying is an understatement, since it happened in an epoch in my life much later than my very early spiritual experiences that put me in the "spiritual line", but before totally devoting to find out who I was.

Would you equate these three "modes" you just mentioned (eternal and timeless background nature of True Being/Impersonal Field/Mere appearance character) to what Buddhism tags as Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya and Nirmanakaya, that is, the relationship between unmanifest Absolute and progressively denser manifestation? This is just out of cultural curiosity, because these three terms are not always that clear for someone who has not particularly adhered to Buddhism.

So true, both the "artistic" side of manifestation (the more my identity is settled as the Absolute, the more the relative becomes Art, a means of expression in space/time, with vibratory energy as the dough) and also the need of the fall of fixed patterns of old individuality to gather some freedom in this game.

I have read some cases of NDE´s, mystical raptures or even 5 MeO´s direct or almost direct jumps into a Godhead perspective (which is a weird thing to say, since regardless of the scope of the individual body-mind perspective, it´s always the Godhead´s perspective, the same Godhead which emanates, hosts and perceives either every individual perspective at a time or the sum of them all at once). Anyway, and although the thread opener question is so important and interesting (¡buenas tardes desde Galicia, Javfly!), the most important issue is the comprehension that there is one Absolute, and even accessing the whole Indra´s Net point of view would not improve or change the nature of our real Self, again, creating that Indra´s Net or Its individual perceptions into existence by the very act of emanating and perceving them. For what he´s been written, I am sure he knows this even better than myself.

This is one of the clearest, deepest buy playful, serious but joyful posts you´ve ever written in this forum, and you´ve written quite a lot of clear, deep, playful, serious, joyful stuff. Yes, the harder the anchor in/as the Absolute, the freer the individual relative perspective and smaller the sense of urgency for new relative body-mind perspectives. That is the proper Hierarchy of Reality. As John Wren Lewis implied in the most herculean feat in the History of Mysticism, that of resuming that Hierarchy in two words, "Eternity John-ning" (just substitute "John" with any particular avatar the Absolute emanates in a particular incarnation), it only takes turning "John", or any other apparently solid entity, into a gerund (that is, an "action"), substracting with this simple trick ontology and Identity from the particular avatar (human or not) which most take themselves to be, and placing them into the Impersonal Absolute.

Edited due to the topic starter not finding it helpful.

Thank you very much for the recommendations. I have already read some Ziewe´s books. Fascinating subjects, filled with an unusual scent of honesty, although he´s a dry writer, more a data collector than a word artist. Spangler will be a future selection. Nothing wrong with researching the Middle Areas or learn about those who have accesed them in profoundity, provided one´s anchor is strong in the unmanifest impersonality that allows for the show to exist. Actually it is the only way to truly enjoy them.

Although he does not introduce anything that has not been pointed at in the metaphysics of the History of Mysticism for millenia, I found it fascinating that Vallée, by means of his sober intellect only (no meditative insights, no psychedelics, just pure hard-nosed intellectual approach) reached a refined and sophisticated explanation for "miracles", unusual facts, UFO´s, non-human lives, etc. Especially interesting is the way he dismisses space-time as we understand it, as it is not valuable for storing information (time and space are not proper ways to collect it and reach it later), which lead him to assume that if the most efficient means to retrieve information from storage is associate what we look for with a key word (that is, "getting close" to the information we´re searching via a "word of power"), maybe we, humans, traverse events by association, and everything in the multiverse is reachable this way. So called mysterious, paranormal phenomena would be the result of our getting close to that phenomena, maybe with practices (he does not mention it but it looks like he´s hinting at it), breaking our old (and fake) space/time barriers, and turning every weird fact, every unexplainable event into an event within Consciousness.

Surprisingly enough (or not), I came across this book in a general Amazon search just before you posted this comment, and it caught my eye. Would you recommend it even if it´s just for the sake of enjoying a bizarre and interesting subject? I like the topics the author addresses, but there is something about him that gives me strange vibes.

Please, lend me a hand on this: How is the leap for the Godhead from not manifesting to manifesting possible if Self-Awareness is just an option that actualizes only after manifestation? This is really the last piece of the puzzle. I just can´t understand how Self Awareness, that is, Awareness of Its own Existence, is not the very essence of the Absolute even when there is cessation, since it takes "volition", "creativity", "desire to manifest", for manifestation to appear.

This comes as a synchonicity, since yesterday, after meditation, it became as obvious as to write it down that, as impersonal Awareness lies beyond the game of vibrational frequencies, there´s no ultimate Identity to search or find within the bubbles of individual consciousness and their unending vibratory forms and vibrational avatars and realms. What marks our real Identity is just the capability of being Aware, the very existence of Awareness, not the scope of a particular individual body-mind perspective. As Jackson Peterson said, "if you´re aware, you´re the Absolute". Once anchored as what we are ( unimprovable Impersonal Awareness), there´s no reason to not engage in "improving techniques" (energetic traditions, esoteric meditations, Light Body practices, etc.) that apply to the avatar (while the game is on, we better have a nice avatar), and we could do that without falling into deception or contradiction.

Surprisingly enough, most people, not "even", but "especially" intelligent people fall into the trap you mention. I haven´t read the article, but I know that most hard-nosed materialist scientists use the argument of the brain having measurable, visible activity while the person has a powerful spiritual experience as proof of its being just brain fabrication. Well, you can also visualize and measure the scientist´s brain activity while using that logic...