Transpersonal Journal

[Anderz]

The peace of God that surpasses all understanding can be understood by meta-understanding by which I mean understanding of understanding. Is there also such thing as meta-meta-understanding and so on? No, because as we shall see, meta-understanding short circuits the path to further meta levels.

Understanding is always of the past and is therefore always incomplete since it lacks the knowledge of the future. And the future is more advanced, intelligent and complex than the past, so understanding is always under-standing, a standing under the glory of God. There is no general meta-meta-understanding or higher possible since the future is only known by God.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? I read in an article that science has an answer to that question, and after examining the answer I remained unconvinced. My explanation instead is that causality is nondual, meaning systemic, meaning caused by reality as a whole chunk that includes both past and future. And the peace of God comes from nondual causality and infinite intelligence. And God is that infinite intelligence.

Quote

"Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. 7 And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

8 Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. 9 Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you." - Philippians 4_6-9

 

[Anderz]

The personal stage is stuck in understanding. And the transpersonal stage transcends understanding, for it has a fluid ego which requires nondual causality which in turn goes beyond and includes understanding.

J. Krishnamurti talked a lot about transcending knowledge and being beyond the use of will and choice which always causes division and therefore confusion.

 

[Anderz]

I find it fascinating that J. Krishnamurti in this video talks about exactly the transpersonal stage. That boosts my belief in what the transpersonal stage is. What he talks about is very similar to the meta-understanding I described earlier. What fascinates me is that I can grasp it while still being at the personal stage myself. Except I'm somewhat confused about why he still called it learning, except maybe to call it instant learning and acting is correct, but I wouldn't call it learning. Maybe he used the term learning because that's familiar to us at the personal stage.

 

[Anderz]

My definition of the transpersonal stage goes beyond what even J. Krishnamurti talked about. I include the physical level of reality in the transpersonal stage.

At the personal stage we think of the world as being material including our own bodies. But what is the human body? One might say that the body is a collection of atoms. Fair enough, but what is an atom? The Wolfram Physics Project is I believe on the right track and defines all of physical reality as being made of interconnected points of emptiness. So that's what an atom is! It's nothingness taking the shape of a particle.

And also, at the personal stage we tend to think of physical objects causing other physical objects to change. That's also how science today is perceiving the human body in biology and medicine. I heard that some people with multiple personality disorder have the color of their eyes change depending on which personality is activated. There is even a report about how scars on the body appear and disappear depending on which personality is activated. And a person with diabetes can have the diabetes disappear by switching to another multiple personality and so on.

From a materialistic paradigm stories like that can be takes as being complete woo woo and fantasies. But from the transpersonal perspective I believe that not only are the stories about people with multiple personality disorder true, but that it's actually how reality functions. It's not physical matter that ultimately is causing effects on other material things. Instead it's intelligent control of the vacuum energy of space which makes it take the shape of atoms etc.

[Anderz]

Jesus talked about how we need to become like little children and meek in order to enter the kingdom of heaven. He was of course talking about the transpersonal stage and beyond. Why? Because ordinary children are at the early personal stage, not at the transpersonal stage. Jesus was not talking about heaven being like a Lord of the Flies scenario.

And it's necessary to be meek in the beginning of the transpersonal stage because with great power comes great response-ability which is lacking at the personal stage. The meekness is I guess gradually replaced by bolder actions as we mature and evolve further into the transpersonal stage.

[Anderz]

I came to think of how ironically, the crystallized ego needs the belief in free will precisely because as J. Krishnamurti explained, it's mechanical. And without the sense of free will we would feel like mechanical robots at the personal stage.

The same with the sense of willpower, personal responsibility, volition, choice, self-esteem, morality, resolve, deliberation, character and other such things. Actual removal of free will would put all of that into question.

At the transpersonal stage the lack of free will is resolved by the fluid ego being a process of increasing complexity instead of a separate entity that needs to control seemingly separate things, people and events.

[Anderz]

Leo talked in the conspiracy video about how even in society there are no separate organizations or groups of people in control. Because it's way too complex he said.

I think that there may be very powerful organizations in control of a lot of things, for example the Roman Empire morphed into the Vatican that moved to the British empire and then later to the Unites States of America. Actually, the U.S. Senate has a lot of symbolism from the Roman Empire. Even the name Capitol Hill is similar to Capitoline Hill in the Roman Empire which "incidentally" also had a Senate.

But it can also be looked at from a nondual perspective, and then there is nobody in control! Of anything. So even collectively and for our whole civilization there isn't ultimately anybody in control. And that's something that should become more apparent as we move into the transpersonal stage collectively as a civilization. There is intelligent control and more and more complex structures emerging but it's an automatic process.

[Anderz]

Leo talked about the problem of pedophilia. And he discussed it from a rational perspective instead of the usual knee-jerk outrage. I have a speculative theory that children have a lot of orgone energy in them and pedophiles are attracted to the orgone energy which stagnates as we grow older at the personal stage of development.

At the transpersonal stage my theory is that then we will have a lot of orgone energy which will remove the lopsided kinds of sexual urges. Sexual energy is also extremely powerful and is the primary driving force of evolution, and at the personal stage of development the sexual force is very suppressed which also causes a lot of lopsided sexual behaviors.

[Anderz]

There are different types of orgone energy, positive orgone (POR), neutral orgone (OR) and deadly orgone (DOR). This explains (again my speculations) why some people are even attracted to dead people (necrophilia). That's the opposite side of pedophilia.

Both pedophilia and necrophilia are a result of being attracted to the usually non-sexual forms of orgone; neutral orgone which children have a lot of and deadly orgone, which in the extreme case is related to dead people.

Ordinary sexual energy is positive orgone. What happens I believe at the transpersonal stage is that the three forms of orgone energies become balanced into an integral form of orgone energy.

[Anderz]

J. Krishnamurti talked about freedom of the mind. One obstacle to that freedom is that the ego believes it can do wrong and that others can do wrong. This is necessary since the ego has to believe it can make mistakes or it can become dangerous.

From a nondual perspective the truth is that the ego cannot do anything wrong! Haha, so the ego is fooling itself in order to keep itself in check. At the transpersonal stage the person always does the right thing as the illusion of wrongdoing has dissolved.

I will take a look at this video where J. Krishnamurti talks about correct action:

 

[Anderz]

Two things I noticed in what Krishnamurti said in the talk is that he talked about how we are the entire humanity. A collective consciousness! That's my current guess because he said it is the most profound awakening, so it must as I see it be an actual realization of being the entire humanity.

Another thing he said is that it's not about the usual kind of thinking where the mind comes up with thoughts about something and then observes those thoughts. It seems to me that he was talking about how thinking is a secondary experience where we observe the ego's abstractions about things in the form of thoughts.

Practicing this is tricky. When trying to observe without thinking it's still the thinking mind that does the practice. And observing one's thoughts, that too is something done by the thinking mind as a practice. I will therefore try another approach which is to deepening the understanding of the limitation of thinking and the possibility of transcending thinking into trans-conceptual awareness which is the transpersonal stage.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Anderz

[Anderz]

Aha, the psychological shadow is unconscious desires and fears. And desires and fears are traits of the crystallized ego. So the shadow is simply the unconscious part of the ego. That's my new understanding of it.

Desires are problematic in their limitations, as crystallized structures of the past. Fear is the same thing in the opposite direct. Desires and fears are carrots and sticks for and of the crystallized ego.

Shadow work for moving into the transpersonal stage is therefore a part of the process of dissolving the whole crystallized ego, both the conscious and the unconscious parts of it.

[Anderz]

One key I now discovered to understand what J. Krishnamurti talked about is to use direct observation, the kind Peter Ralston has described and Alan Watts used to demonstrate it by pointing out what reality is by banging on a gong. The sound of the gong as it happens is direct observation.

So when J. Krishnamurti asks: what is thought? Then the answer is that thought is the thinking about the question itself, as it happens, in the moment. Any further thinking about it is itself thought so there is no need for that, for what thought is has already been and is being recognized.

[Anderz]

Another tricky thing is to practice letting go of control. Obviously doing the practice is done by the crystallized ego which doesn't have control in the first place. So it can get really confusing. Another option is to learn about control and to question control. Do I have free will or not? If I do, then what is that separate entity called "myself" that can change the rest of reality? It doesn't make sense yet the experience of separate control is a tremendously heavy conditioning of the mind.

Here Anna is describing the illusion of control:

 

[Anderz]

I wrote earlier about the peace of God which surpasseth all understanding, that under-standing is to stand under the glory of God. All understanding is of the past and is therefore a fragmented perspective. That's the personal stage of development. The transpersonal stage is to stand in the glory of God, and then we stand in the peace instead of under it.

Quote

"And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." - Philippians 4:7 (KJV)

 

Edited October 6, 2020 by Anderz

[Anderz]

J. Krishnamurti said that there is choice when we choose what car model to buy or what food to order etc. I want to challenge that claim! Because to me a practical choice is still a choice. The difficulty as I see it is when we think of no choice as the opposite of choice. That's duality. And it's even worse than that. Not making a choice is still a choice.

And a term such as "choiceless awareness" is at the personal stage taken as meaning being a helpless victim at the mercy of a mechanical and automatic universe. And when such condition happens to a person at the personal stage of development it's called a psychological depersonalization disorder.

Is choiceless awareness a psychological disorder? When there is a person experiencing life as happening to them without them having any control, then yes that's a pathological state. It only becomes a healthy state at the transpersonal stage where the individual person is recognized, experienced and actualized as being the whole of existence.

Instead of thinking of it in terms of choice or no choice, I will ponder the idea of replacing choice with another process. Choice can be seen as a cause and effect result of past personal and biological conditioning. From the nonduality perspective that's a false belief! Nondual causality is the result of reality as a whole, including both past and future. So choice can instead be seen as a process of increasing complexity.

[Anderz]

I discovered (from the video below) that the idea of causation has already been question by for example Bertrand Russell who pointed out the problem with causality as it usually is perceived being asymmetric. And more recently Rupert Sheldrake came up with the idea of morphic resonance, with causality that works across time. Sounds similar to my idea of nondual causality!

The dualistic, asymmetric and according to Bertrand Russell erroneous law of causality is very much related to the personal stage of development. And the systemic kind of causation across all of time is related to the transpersonal stage.

Quote

"The law of causality, I believe, like much that passes muster among philosophers, is a relic of a bygone age, surviving, like the monarchy, only because it is erroneously supposed to do no harm." -  On the Notion of Cause, by Bertrand Russell in 1913

 

[Anderz]

Now I found that David Hume questioned the cause and effect belief already in 1739. And Immanuel Kant defended Hume's view.

Quote

"In the Preface to the Prolegomena Kant considers the supposed science of metaphysics. He states that “no event has occurred that could have been more decisive for the fate of this science than the attack made upon it by David Hume” and goes on to say that “Hume proceeded primarily from a single but important concept of metaphysics, namely, that of the connection of cause and effect” (4, 257; 7; see the Bibliography for our method of citation). Over the next few pages Kant defends the importance of Hume’s “attack” on metaphysics against common-sense opponents" - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Amazing, why isn't this generally taught in school? I think I know why, because as it's said in this video, science just takes cause and effect for granted! Without explaining it. The "law" of causality is as dogmatic as any religious belief.

 

[Anderz]

But then what about the Wolfram Physics Project, doesn't the graph in their model explain causality? Yes, I think it does! But even then the causality is systemic and a result of the rules for the expanding graph.

My current guess is that the Wolfram model only explains the basic laws of physics. They have talked about applying the model even to evolution, but I suspect that they will run into problems explaining how complexity increases, and I mean complexity as information structured as holons.

Even if the Wolfram model can explain evolution and even consciousness (one article mentioned that their model is similar to a mainstream model of consciousness), my own model can easily be the same as the Wolfram model by simply removing the need for causality from future to the past, and it's still nondual causality.

I will take a look at what kind of causality Max Planck described.

Quote

"It has been left to Prof. Max Planck to treat with wide scholarship and philosophic insight one of the most difficult of the problems known to the thought of any age that of the meaning and validity of the concept of causality." - Nature, Prof. Planck and the Principle of Causality in Physics

 

[Anderz]

It was difficult for me to find information about Planck's causality, but I found this:

Quote

"An event is causally determined if it can be predicted with certainty." - Planck M. 1941 Der Kausalbegriff in der Physik. Stuttgart, Germany: S. Hirzel.

I found it in an article that claimed that causality is a genuinely theoretical notion. If by that it means that science has causality figured out I disagree because the article uses probabilities to explain their theory of causality. That to me is just another turtle (probability) beneath the first turtle (causality).

Can for example events be predicted with certainty in the Wolfram model of physics? Yes, but as Stephen Wolfram has explained, there is something he calls computational irreducibility which says that such process must be run in order to find out the answer. It's impossible to jump ahead and predict future events without performing all the calculations, and when it comes to the universe as a whole it's impossible to compute faster than the universe itself.

But in principle Planck's definition of causality might be valid, I don't know enough about philosophy to answer that and it also depends on definitions and meaning and things, so it can quickly become a big mess of elaborate theorizations. I will take a look at this video to lean more about the topic of causality:

 

Edited October 6, 2020 by Anderz