Introduction/lifetime insights/question for Leo and all about the "Godhead"

[Purple Man]

Hello, everyone.

Congratulations for creating this kind of rare greenhouse for metaphysics, which I found after stumbling across Leo Gura´s videos in the net several months ago. I honestly consider them some of the best descriptions of the mystical experience ever. 

As this is my first post, I´ll say that I am from Spain, and  although I´m older than most here  (46 years old) , I suppose I share the basics with all of you: natural tendency to introspection, early age insights with no proper context, obsessive search, and finally getting that context through life-changing readings (Nisargadatta mainly, but also most of Vedanta, Kashmir Shaivism, Christian Mysticism, Dzogchen, etc.) that seemed to explain previous awakenings and paved the way for future ones. 

OK. Although I obviously would like to have a response from Leo, since he´s the most experienced person here and somehow the pioneer, I would greatly appreciate any opinion/help regarding something that has been around my mind for some time, after reading some experiences that I would not say "contradict", but at least are not totally consistent with mine. Which, mind you, is solid, with some total certainties, but  not spectacular, since I never resorted to psychedelics. Let´s go:

My experience is simple (and astonishing at the same time): there is something like a translucent, absolutely impersonal bubble "in front of me", which does not belong to any "body",  or particular time or space, within which everything (the Universe, my body included, and my inner world of thought) appears, with the exception of the Awareness inside which the bubble itself arises.  And, paradoxically, I am that Unmanifest Witness or Aware Space... I already don´t feel like I am human. I see a human body and a human thoughts playing a game within me. And about the Bubble I should add that, as an unlimited canvas, any being or image can be created there. The dough is the same. John Wren Lewis, after his exceptional NDE put it best: "Absolute Consciouness focuses down into this body-mind perspective, playing something like a game called John Wren Lewesing, and it is the Absolute that watches, not John"

Everything about my spiritual awakenings relate to the fact that we already are the Aware Space to which any experience appear. No spiritual practice  could make me become more "Aware Space" than what I actually feel that I am. Spiritual practice can, however, radically affect the subtlety of what I perceive, affect  the contents of the particular perspective that the Absolute (Aware Space) is conscious of while this incarnation exists. 

So my question is based on the fact that this is as far as meditation and introspection have taken me. I am very well aware that the psychedelics are a much more powerful path, and I also know that there are insights that are veiled to me for my resistence to use them. And I am surprised when I read experiences about the Godhead as being something "out there". In some of them  you depict the Absolute Godhead as something with an outer flavour, like a distant light to reach or an external Mind to decrypt. In my (limited) experience, however, the Godhead is precisely that which perceives, The Aware Space where common daylife or colourful insights happen. The Watcher/Subject of "my" particular perspective and my true nature. ce.

I know one of the usual posters in this forum agrees ( I asked him in another platform), but I feel like this is the last obstacle I have to sort out, and I want to be sure and have the roots in the right place, so I´d greatly appreciate opinions on this paradox and a psychedelic perspective that I lack. Thanks in advance:)

Edited July 29, 2021 by Purple Man

[BipolarGrowth]

22 minutes ago, Purple Man said:

Hello, everyone.

Congratulations for creating this kind of rare greenhouse for metaphysics, which I found after stumbling across Leo Gura´s videos in the net several months ago. I honestly consider them some of the best descriptions of the mystical experience ever. 

As this is my first post, I´ll say that I am from Spain, and  although I´m older than most here  (46 years old) , I suppose I share the basics with all of you: natural tendency to introspection, early age insights with no proper context, obsessive search, and finally getting that context through life-changing readings (Nisargadatta mainly, but also most of Vedanta, Kashmir Shaivism, Christian Mysticism, Dzogchen, etc.) that seemed to explain previous awakenings and paved the way for future ones. 

OK. Although I obviously would like to have a response from Leo, since he´s the most experienced person here and somehow the pioneer, I would greatly appreciate any opinion/help regarding something that has been around my mind for some time, after reading some experiences that I would not say "contradict", but at least are not totally consistent with mine. Which, mind you, is solid, with some total certainties, but  not spectacular, since I never resorted to psychedelics. Let´s go:

My experience is simple (and astonishing at the same time): there is something like a translucent, absolutely impersonal bubble "in front of me", which does not belong to any "body",  or particular time or space, within which everything (the Universe, my body included, and my inner world of thought) appears, with the exception of the Awareness inside which the bubble itself arises.  And, paradoxically, I am that Unmanifest Witness or Aware Space... I already don´t feel like I am human. I see a human body and a human thoughts playing a game within me. And about the Bubble I should add that, as an unlimited canvas, any being or image can be created there. The dough is the same. John Wren Lewis, after his exceptional NDE put it best: "Absolute Consciouness focuses down into this body-mind perspective, playing something like a game called John Wren Lewesing, and it is the Absolute that watches, not John"

Everything about my spiritual awakenings relate to the fact that we already are the Aware Space to which any experience appear. No spiritual practice  could make me become more "Aware Space" than what I actually feel that I am. Spiritual practice can, however, radically affect the subtlety of what I perceive, affect  the contents of the particular perspective that the Absolute (Aware Space) is conscious of while this incarnation exists. 

So my question is based on the fact that this is as far as meditation and introspection have taken me. I am very well aware that the psychedelics are a much more powerful path, and I also know that there are insights that are veiled to me for my resistence to use them. And I am surprised when I read experiences about the Godhead as being something "out there". In some of them  you depict the Absolute Godhead as something with an outer flavour, like a distant light to reach or an external Mind to decrypt. In my (limited) experience, however, the Godhead is precisely that which perceives, The Aware Space where common daylife or colourful insights happen. The Watcher/Subject of "my" particular perspective and my true nature. ce.

I know one of the usual posters in this forum agrees ( I asked him in another platform), but I feel like this is the last obstacle I have to sort out, and I want to be sure and have the roots in the right place, so I´d greatly appreciate opinions on this paradox and a psychedelic perspective that I lack. Thanks in advance:)

You have developed an absolute identity with absolute space which ultimately makes it more real than your illusory self which will absolutely never stand to any serious enlightened master as an absolute. Here is a description of what your absolute space is as well as some of the most clear and concise writing made on how to develop absolute space into absolute consciousness then nothingness then true samadhi (neither perception nor nonperception) into the highest meditative attainment according to Buddhism which is nirodha samapatti or the cessation of perception and feeling. https://www.mctb.org/mctb2/table-of-contents/part-iii-the-samatha-jhanas/28-the-formless-realms/

If there is an absolute ground, you are falling for the formless aspect of boundless space in a formed experience or maybe even a completely true and hard boundless space. The idea that you are nothing but boundless space produces the very state which would allow you to experience further subtleties which would completely unravel any previously held notions of time, consciousness, imagination, what God Realization actually looks like and means at more effective levels… Psychedelics produce crazy brain states through a raising in the intensity and seeming permanence to consciousness as an absolute. This always incorporates formless aspects possible to be investigated, but the inability to completely detune form entirely such that there is no visual field limits your ability to capture harder to find subtleties which create better insight and concentration eventually. There is no sensation of a body in a hard interpretation of the inner essence to be found in investigating hard formless realms. This is where psychedelics can be much less effective as they give you more intensity than you are used to, but intensity shifts are not as radical as the shift between all sensations and cessation. The intensity is more concentration, but the ability to develop way higher states of consciousness does rely on your ability to have that ability to some extent whether you are on substances or not or even spiritually practicing or not. 

[Purple Man]

37 minutes ago, BipolarGrowth said:

You have developed an absolute identity with absolute space which ultimately makes it more real than your illusory self which will absolutely never stand to any serious enlightened master as an absolute. Here is a description of what your absolute space is as well as some of the most clear and concise writing made on how to develop absolute space into absolute consciousness then nothingness then true samadhi (neither perception nor nonperception) into the highest meditative attainment according to Buddhism which is nirodha samapatti or the cessation of perception and feeling. https://www.mctb.org/mctb2/table-of-contents/part-iii-the-samatha-jhanas/28-the-formless-realms/

If there is an absolute ground, you are falling for the formless aspect of boundless space in a formed experience or maybe even a completely true and hard boundless space. The idea that you are nothing but boundless space produces the very state which would allow you to experience further subtleties which would completely unravel any previously held notions of time, consciousness, imagination, what God Realization actually looks like and means at more effective levels… Psychedelics produce crazy brain states through a raising in the intensity and seeming permanence to consciousness as an absolute. This always incorporates formless aspects possible to be investigated, but the inability to completely detune form entirely such that there is no visual field limits your ability to capture harder to find subtleties which create better insight and concentration eventually. There is no sensation of a body in a hard interpretation of the inner essence to be found in investigating hard formless realms. This is where psychedelics can be much less effective as they give you more intensity than you are used to, but intensity shifts are not as radical as the shift between all sensations and cessation. The intensity is more concentration, but the ability to develop way higher states of consciousness does rely on your ability to have that ability to some extent whether you are on substances or not or even spiritually practicing or not. 

Thanks for the very detailed answer:) Within an hour I´ll be able to answer back.

[Adamq8]

@BipolarGrowth Alot of complicated buddhist dogma from the branch of the theravada, buddhism today is famous for everything the original never taught. 

They completely destroyed the notion of the Soul in buddhism and they are what is called MARA.

Theravada aka " this is all thereism" 

The buddah never taught no soul doctrine.

This is one interpretation of a teaching, the original buddhist teachings was exactly the same as Advaita Vedanta.

Atman, anatman. 

Brahman.

Godhead = Brahman.

ANATTA= NOT "MY" SOUL. 

It is VIA NEGATIVA, NETI NETI.

It is not a denial of the eternal.

Tathāgata = arrived at the Absolute/Brahman.

Accordingly to ancient pali, the nikayas.

Theravada is a secretarian doctrine which is in no shape or form  even close to the original teachings of Gotama. 

 

 

[Nahm]

1 hour ago, Purple Man said:

since I never resorted to psychedelics. 

That’s like saying ‘I never resorted to using a car’ when traveling a thousand miles. 

1 hour ago, Purple Man said:

My experience is simple (and astonishing at the same time): there is something like a translucent, absolutely impersonal bubble "in front of me", which does not belong to any "body",  or particular time or space, within which everything (the Universe, my body included, and my inner world of thought) appears, with the exception of the Awareness inside which the bubble itself arises.  And, paradoxically, I am that Unmanifest Witness or Aware Space... I already don´t feel like I am human. I see a human body and a human thoughts playing a game within me. And about the Bubble I should add that, as an unlimited canvas, any being or image can be created there. The dough is the same. John Wren Lewis, after his exceptional NDE put it best: "Absolute Consciouness focuses down into this body-mind perspective, playing something like a game called John Wren Lewesing, and it is the Absolute that watches, not John"

Everything about my spiritual awakenings relate to the fact that we already are the Aware Space to which any experience appear. No spiritual practice  could make me become more "Aware Space" than what I actually feel that I am. Spiritual practice can, however, radically affect the subtlety of what I perceive, affect  the contents of the particular perspective that the Absolute (Aware Space) is conscious of while this incarnation exists. 

So my question is based on the fact that this is as far as meditation and introspection have taken me. I am very well aware that the psychedelics are a much more powerful path, and I also know that there are insights that are veiled to me for my resistence to use them. And I am surprised when I read experiences about the Godhead as being something "out there". In some of them  you depict the Absolute Godhead as something with an outer flavour, like a distant light to reach or an external Mind to decrypt. In my (limited) experience, however, the Godhead is precisely that which perceives, The Aware Space where common daylife or colourful insights happen. The Watcher/Subject of "my" particular perspective and my true nature. ce.

I know one of the usual posters in this forum agrees ( I asked him in another platform), but I feel like this is the last obstacle I have to sort out, and I want to be sure and have the roots in the right place, so I´d greatly appreciate opinions on this paradox and a psychedelic perspective that I lack. Thanks in advance:)

There isn’t a ‘my experience’ & thus the “bubble theory” is conceptual knowledge; there’s no ‘watcher’, no ‘spiritual awakenings’, ‘facts’, ‘we’, ‘aware space’, a ‘perceiver perceiving’, ‘absolute’, a ‘Godhead which perceives’, a ‘my resistance to them’, a ‘watcher/subject’, a ‘my true nature’, and thus there is no ‘obstacle’, no ‘paradox’, and no ‘I which lacks’. Welcome to the forum! ?

[BipolarGrowth]

1 hour ago, Adamq8 said:

@BipolarGrowth Alot of complicated buddhist dogma from the branch of the theravada, buddhism today is famous for everything the original never taught. 

They completely destroyed the notion of the Soul in buddhism and they are what is called MARA.

Theravada aka " this is all thereism" 

The buddah never taught no soul doctrine.

This is one interpretation of a teaching, the original buddhist teachings was exactly the same as Advaita Vedanta.

Atman, anatman. 

Brahman.

Godhead = Brahman.

ANATTA= NOT "MY" SOUL. 

It is VIA NEGATIVA, NETI NETI.

It is not a denial of the eternal.

Tathāgata = arrived at the Absolute/Brahman.

Accordingly to ancient pali, the nikayas.

Theravada is a secretarian doctrine which is in no shape or form  even close to the original teachings of Gotama. 

 

 

So where can I look for actual Buddhism? I love holons of insane love. Time for some more duality ?

 

You can’t be eternal if you can’t evolve. You can’t be self or not self ever in any consistent safeguard from the raw nature of what is. I use Theravada because it actually works when paired with investigation. I go where it says you can go better and better by following the specific techniques. To be anything but dogmatic on what is the greatest gift you could ever hope to give anyone presenting as illusory Self oneness or no lasting self doesn’t quite make sense. You want to freeze frame God but you don’t realize true experiential freeze frame doesn’t occur to consciousness in any investigable way yet an experience of at least a gap in experience brought about by awakening practices in a reproducible way is a good model as far as it having more or less solid criteria for what is enlightenment vs. what isn’t enlightenment. 
 

The criteria is more clear and thus passes a certain standard of being effective at something quite amazing whether it’s your perfect past Buddha illusion who said it first or Jesus is king doesn’t mean shit to the underlying framework of this illusion we see before us. 

 

Thank you for standing your ground on what you deem to be most true and important. That is honorable of you. 

Edited July 29, 2021 by BipolarGrowth

[Purple Man]

@BipolarGrowth Now that I read the text you spoke about, I have a better understanding of your own post itself. And to be honest, I think that the "Aware Space" I speak about is not related to the "Boundless Space" the text details. There is nothing objective about Aware Space as I understand it. Furthermore, it contains any notion of "nothingness" or "boundless consciousness". 

Aware Space, or at least as I experience it, has only subjective qualities, and it is not even a dim nothingness or perceptible void of any kind. It is the place where everything happens. It provides everything that is perceptible with a context in which to appear, and it is that which knows it.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, Purple Man said:

My experience is simple (and astonishing at the same time): there is something like a translucent, absolutely impersonal bubble "in front of me", which does not belong to any "body",  or particular time or space, within which everything (the Universe, my body included, and my inner world of thought) appears, with the exception of the Awareness inside which the bubble itself arises.  And, paradoxically, I am that Unmanifest Witness or Aware Space... I already don´t feel like I am human. I see a human body and a human thoughts playing a game within me. And about the Bubble I should add that, as an unlimited canvas, any being or image can be created there. The dough is the same. John Wren Lewis, after his exceptional NDE put it best: "Absolute Consciouness focuses down into this body-mind perspective, playing something like a game called John Wren Lewesing, and it is the Absolute that watches, not John"

That's basically correct.

Quote

Everything about my spiritual awakenings relate to the fact that we already are the Aware Space to which any experience appear. No spiritual practice  could make me become more "Aware Space" than what I actually feel that I am.

You can become a thousand times more aware than you currently are. Of course that won't undermine the basic point that you are Nothing.

[Purple Man]

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

That’s like saying ‘I never resorted to using a car’ when traveling a thousand miles. 

There isn’t a ‘my experience’ & thus the “bubble theory” is conceptual knowledge; there’s no ‘watcher’, no ‘spiritual awakenings’, ‘facts’, ‘we’, ‘aware space’, a ‘perceiver perceiving’, ‘absolute’, a ‘Godhead which perceives’, a ‘my resistance to them’, a ‘watcher/subject’, a ‘my true nature’, and thus there is no ‘obstacle’, no ‘paradox’, and no ‘I which lacks’. Welcome to the forum! ?

Hello and thank you, Nahm. I usually enjoy your posts:)
Language is conceptual and has flaws, but we need it in order to communicate our experience. One thing I can assure you: there is no conceptuality in  the unity of the manifest in that bubble or in the fact that it is perceived from beyond the bubble itself. It is direct experience.

Thanks for both responses and the welcome. Maybe someone will take this even further and shed a clearer light.

 

[Purple Man]

15 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That's basically correct.

You can become a thousand times more aware than you currently are. Of course that won't undermine the basic point that you are Nothing.

Thank you very much, Leo. You´ve been very important in my last years´spiritual development. 

Regarding what you say, I think I am not being able to correctly express what I mean by Aware Space. You say that I can be 1000 times more aware. From your perspective, would it be correct to rephrase it and say that what I am aware of  could be 1000 times more developed? If that´s what you imply, I´d totally agree , since I am very conscious of the limitations of what I can be aware of.

But I can´t understand how the very Awareness that is aware of my PC is ontologically different than the Awareness that is aware of the subtlest realms. To me that´d be like going to the cinema and saying that the cinema screen where "The Lord of the Rings" is being projected is different from the one where "Casablanca" was projected last week due to the difference in the perceptions. 

In your experience, is the Awareness that is watching my text right now the same one from which you had your deepest realizations? If that is the case, I think you and I would be talking about the same thing: Absolute Awareness/Godhead, projecting and watching the manifest Universe. If that is not the case, then I think I´d have to dig deeper  to understand your view:)

Edited July 29, 2021 by Purple Man

[BipolarGrowth]

25 minutes ago, Purple Man said:

@BipolarGrowth Now that I read the text you spoke about, I have a better understanding of your own post itself. And to be honest, I think that the "Aware Space" I speak about is not related to the "Boundless Space" the text details. There is nothing objective about Aware Space as I understand it. Furthermore, it contains any notion of "nothingness" or "boundless consciousness". 

Aware Space, or at least as I experience it, has only subjective qualities, and it is not even a dim nothingness or perceptible void of any kind. It is the place where everything happens. It provides everything that is perceptible with a context in which to appear, and it is that which knows it.

Can you say whether it is a cessation of consciousness or not a cessation of consciousness? Was there a sense of time? Nonexistence? If not, you have more in your capability. Aware space is just simply an end and why would you ever want it to be the ultimate. A defined reality I can’t be better than. How is that fun? All I’m saying is cessation transformed my baseline levels of consciousness more than any other shift. I’ve played around with subtler aspects of what you’re working with. It can be deconstructed by insight or you’re officially the most enlightened God solipsist heavenly truth of everything forever. Any other Buddha or arahant who could separate things into more subtle sensations never had the ultimate reality because it’s you!!! Bingo! The cause of all religious suffering—promises so empty you actually think it could work. These are golden chains. It was just a temporary self, but it wasn’t you. That’s a good thing. You have much better progress in your future than getting stuck on aware space alone. Dukkha is always here and what allows emotional range and significance to that aspect of temporary experience which is ultimately all bliss sensations too. Impermanence is what makes true permanence. 

[Purple Man]

33 minutes ago, BipolarGrowth said:

Can you say whether it is a cessation of consciousness or not a cessation of consciousness? Was there a sense of time? Nonexistence? If not, you have more in your capability. Aware space is just simply an end and why would you ever want it to be the ultimate. A defined reality I can’t be better than. How is that fun? All I’m saying is cessation transformed my baseline levels of consciousness more than any other shift. I’ve played around with subtler aspects of what you’re working with. It can be deconstructed by insight or you’re officially the most enlightened God solipsist heavenly truth of everything forever. Any other Buddha or arahant who could separate things into more subtle sensations never had the ultimate reality because it’s you!!! Bingo! The cause of all religious suffering—promises so empty you actually think it could work. These are golden chains. It was just a temporary self, but it wasn’t you. That’s a good thing. You have much better progress in your future than getting stuck on aware space alone. Dukkha is always here and what allows emotional range and significance to that aspect of temporary experience which is ultimately all bliss sensations too. Impermanence is what makes true permanence. 

On your first questions: 1/my experience is one of  unity of all perceptions within the bubble, time included. 2/The bubble appears and dissappears (deep sleep, for example), and this on/off is not perceived by the bubble itself or by any object within it, but from beyond. 3/ That "beyond" is total "no thing". No perception perceives. Only that "No thing" is capable of sustaining Creation. 

You also speak of there being more stages. Leo Gura frequently speaks about "Love". As Robert Adams righfully said, when you experience life in Advaita Vedanta´s way, you become some kind of cold fish until energies and love enter the game. I am in a particular moment when this knowledge (whether partial or not, it doesn´t matter) filters  life´s high and lowlights. It gives a warmth, a constant satisfaction, but I certainly feel that the dry Vedanta realization is not as profound as Kashmir Shaivism, or any other metaphysics system that allows for a better integration, or for the appearence of Love.

Edited July 29, 2021 by Purple Man

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Purple Man said:

You say that I can be 1000 times more aware. From your perspective, would it be correct to rephrase it and say that what I am aware of  could be 1000 times more developed?

No, I am saying something more radical than you can fathom.

I mean you can become infinitely conscious, and you are nowhere near infinitely conscious right now.

Quote

But I can´t understand how the very Awareness that is aware of my PC is ontologically different than the Awareness that is aware of the subtlest realms.

There is only one thing: Consciousness. Low awareness is not ontologicalally different from high awareness. Just like dim light is not ontologically difference from bright light.

Consciousness is capable of taking on infinite degrees of self-awareness, much like light can take on many degrees of brightness.

Quote

In your experience, is the Awareness that is watching my text right now the same one from which you had your deepest realizations?

The light in my house is of the same nature as the light in your house, but that does not mean they are of equal brightness.

If you were infinitely conscious you would know how you designed every hair on your ass.

And if you became even more conscious than that, you would be so conscious that the hairs on your ass would all collapse and dissolve into pure Infinity, along with your ass

[Purple Man]

@Leo Gura 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

 

Consciousness is capable of taking on infinite degrees of self-awareness, much like light can take on many degrees of brightness.

The light in my house is of the same nature as the light in your house, but that does not mean they are of equal brightness.

 

Thanks very much for the responses.

Actually I think those two phrases would perfectly sum up my experience. One Consciousness, different stages of capability and reach. One Consciousness, differently developed perspectives. And I know that my present perspective´s development won´t show me the way the Universe works, but the Consciousness which is aware of the limitiation in my particular scope is the same one that would be conscious of the way the Universe (including my ass´hairs)  works if my personal reach was high enough. The magnitude and subtlety of the perceived don´t  change the ultimate nature of the Awareness to which they happen. It does not change the fact that I am God, even when my particular perspective is not able to access God´s perspective´s input. Is this coherent with your knowledge?

A different thing is Love. My path is dry, and the certainty that I am No Thing/Absolute Awareness does not translate into love for manifestation. And I am not saying this in a depressed way. I am more than happy and enjoy my particular existence a lot, but the kind of Love you speak about is beyond my reach.

Edited July 29, 2021 by Purple Man
English is not my first language. I saw mistakes and edited for the sake of correct comprehension

[Leo Gura]

18 minutes ago, Purple Man said:

but the kind of Love you speak about is beyond my reach.

That's because consciousness is lacking.

Take psychedelics to see what you are missing.

[The0Self]

4 hours ago, Nahm said:

That’s like saying ‘I never resorted to using a car’ when traveling a thousand miles.

LOL! 

[The0Self]

21 minutes ago, Purple Man said:

A different thing is Love. My path is dry, and the certainty that I am No Thing/Absolute Awareness does not translate in love for the manifestation. And I am not saying this in a depressed way. I am more than happy and enjoy my particular existence a lot, but the kind of Love you speak about is beyond my reach.

Psychedelics...

Love is the whole game.

Also maybe try Metta very steadily until then.

You seem spiritually fit enough for psychedelics to potentially provide an utterly massive breakthrough -- infinite love.

[fopylo]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Take psychedelics to see what you are missing.

At what age would you suggest to start taking psychedelics?

[The0Self]

3 minutes ago, fopylo said:

At what age would you suggest to start taking psychedelics?

21

[fopylo]

@The0Self

What could be the alternative then?