ACIM Journal

[Anderz]

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:

 

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.)

 

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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:

Quote

"This paper presents a theory about what consciousness is and how it can be measured. According to the theory, consciousness corresponds to the capacity of a system to integrate information. This claim is motivated by two key phenomenological properties of consciousness: differentiation – the availability of a very large number of conscious experiences; and integration – the unity of each such experience. The theory states that the quantity of consciousness available to a system can be measured as the Φ value of a complex of elements." - BMC Neuroscience, Springer Nature

Even hardcore skeptic and neuroscientist Christof Koch has promoted the Integrated Information Theory. There are other mainstream skeptics who disagree, such as:

Quote

"I expressed doubt that the hard problem can be solved--a position called mysterianism--in The End of Science. I argue in a new edition that my pessimism has been justified by the recent popularity of panpsychism. This ancient doctrine holds that consciousness is a property not just of brains but of all matter, like my table and coffee mug.

Panpsychism strikes me as self-evidently foolish, but non-foolish people—notably Chalmers and neuroscientist Christof Koch—are taking it seriously. How can that be? What’s compelling their interest? Have I dismissed panpsychism too hastily?" - Scientific American, John Horgan 

Pansychism seems to be what Leo is talking about as the true reality.

Quote

"In philosophy of mind, panpsychism is the view that mind or a mind-like aspect is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of reality.[1]" - Wikipedia

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.

[Anderz]

Here is a new scientific article (from yesterday) that moves in the direction of what I discussed in previous posts:

Quote

"Kastrup: No, Consciousness CANNOT Be Just a Byproduct

Kastrup begins by emphatically restating his main argument:

"The target of Jerry Berry’s latest rant and rage has been an essay I wrote claiming that, under the premises of mainstream physicalism, phenomenal consciousness—that is, subjective, qualitative experience—cannot have been the result of Darwinian evolution. The gist of my argument is that, according to physicalism, only quantitative parameters such as mass, charge, momentum, etc., figure in our models of the world—think of the mathematical equations underlying all physics—which, in turn, are putatively causally-closed. Therefore, the qualities of experience cannot perform any function whatsoever. And properties that perform no function cannot have been favored by natural selection." - Mind Matters News, Feb 15, 2020

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.

[Anderz]

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.

Quote

"Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again." - John 3:3

 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.

Quote

"Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." - John 3:5-6

 

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.

Quote

"In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the experience of psychological stress that occurs when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, values, or participates in an action that goes against one of these three. According to this theory, when two actions or ideas are not psychologically consistent with each other, people will do all in their power to change them until they become consistent.[1] The discomfort is triggered by the person's belief clashing with new information perceived, wherein they will try to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort.[1][2]" - Wikipedia

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.

[Anderz]

ACIM is extreme in its teaching. Here is what it says about the world:

Quote

"The world is false perception. It is born of error, and it has not left its source. It will remain no longer than the thought that gave it birth is cherished. ...

The world was made as an attack on God. It symbolizes fear. And what is fear except love’s absence? ...

The mechanisms of illusion have been born instead. ...

We must save the world. For we who made it must behold it through the eyes of Christ, that what was made to die can be restored to everlasting life." - ACIM W-2.3

"The world you see must be denied, for sight of it is costing you a different kind of vision. 2 You cannot see both worlds, for each of them involves a different kind of seeing, and depends on what you cherish." - ACIM T-13.VII.2.

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.

[Anderz]

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.

[Anderz]

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.