Going from unaware to seeking awareness and then to joyfully unaware

[RevoCulture]

Is life full of patterns?  Are there paths that are tread over and over again?

Are there people who  are raised within culture, no real focus on anything outside of its playful dance, that somehow someway come to question its boundaries?  People who come to question, "is there more?"  When they develop the sense of potential, what do they fit into that void?  What pictures, stories, and potential do they create?  Where do these creations come from, what fuels them?  Do we not reference what we know when we project a sense of what might be?  We don't know what we dont know, yet somehow we think that we develop a sense of the unknown in a way that is authentic to it.  A model that represents it and is free of the realm we are so firmly rooted within.  We believe we have a framework to project upon the "spiritual" that is free from the reality we inhabit.  So many projections and claims, so many proclamations,  oddly enough they hold an incredible resemblance to the model we physically exist within and have known deeply. (setting aside the fact that all life is "spiritual."  Getting lost in the layers.)

Is it interesting that people are so focused on transcending something, transcending a reality they view as inferior, delusion, or illusion?  A person raised in a town who can't wait to escape it, the only thing they have ever known, everything out there is soooo much better.  This place I have always known is inferior, a dump, a trap, the limit to all that I am.  If only I could escape its gravitational pull, I could transcend this place.

What happens when a person travels to distant lands?  Who do they become?  Are they no longer who they were, are they present in wherever they go?  How does a person come to feel about the place from which they left, once sufficient time and distance has been achieved?  Was there anything to physically run away from, to leave or was it an issue that existed existentially requiring growth?  In order to stay do we need to leave? In order to appreciate do we need contrast?  Is the awe, the illumination, the awakening more of subtle acceptance than it is a mighty raging stream of power to which others get giddy and shower praise?  The animal kingdom, the primal nature, lives in awe of power that stands above others, has the ability to sustain itself against the pressure, to rise.  Dominant position and authority, sure to succeed and be accepted and lifted up by others, the way of the primal mind.  Unity is without division, there is only semblance.  No highs and lows.  No flash, no lust, no glitz, no shoulds, no musts, no sense of over there is better than here. Simply being and doing what is present, part of which is holding energies/feelings that are" restless and uncomfortable," creating motion.

 

Edited December 2, 2022 by RevoCulture

[A Fellow Lighter]

Wow... Looks like someone has been contemplating deep in thought.

[RevoCulture]

@A Fellow Lighter Thx.  I do believe perspective is the holy grail, the thing we seek whether we realize it or not.  Appreciate your acknowledgment, in my experience these types of posts don't get much engagement. 

[A Fellow Lighter]

3 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

I do believe perspective is the holy grail, the thing we seek whether we realize it or not. 

And I believe that perspective is but another way of saying Mind: that it's the ultimate Mind that we seek, one that will enable us a broader consciousness than this - our collective current level, a ‘Cosmic Mind’ if you will. So if you ask me, I'd say to evolute our perspective is the thing we seek. Of course, whether we realize it or not.

3 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

Appreciate your acknowledgment, in my experience these types of posts don't get much engagement. 

And I appreciate you for choosing to share your thoughts rather than keeping the map to the holy grail only to yourself. ?

On 02/12/2022 at 5:09 PM, RevoCulture said:

We don't know what we dont know, yet somehow we think that we develop a sense of the unknown in a way that is authentic to it.

I especially liked this point ☝️. It's more than food for thought, if you ask me. Very deep.

[RevoCulture]

@A Fellow Lighter

9 hours ago, A Fellow Lighter said:

And I believe that perspective is but another way of saying Mind: that it's the ultimate Mind that we seek, one that will enable us a broader consciousness than this - our collective current level, a ‘Cosmic Mind’ if you will. So if you ask me, I'd say to evolute our perspective is the thing we seek. Of course, whether we realize it or not.

Appears we are on the same page, many was to interpret & express.  100 painters  staring at the subject producing unique interpretations. The evolution of perspective is what I would point towards, the thing we seek.  I believe there is a perspective that leaves a person in total peace with all that has happened and will happen, while at the same time driving them to change and alter what is present.  A desire to participate in changing something not because it should be, no value of better or worse, simply because it is the way, a humble submission to the order.  A process, an evolution, an expression that unfolds and enfolds. 

A perspective that provides peace through knowing the broadest of brush strokes, a framework.  In my opinion we can not choose to be compassionate, loving, or accepting.  We can try to be.  We can desire to be.  Only a truthful experiential union with the components of reality that represent those expressions allow us to be those things, to become those things.  To know thyself.  The aspects of reality that must be engaged and known directly through personal approach, the willingness to become them, isn't for most. 

Alas, a reminder whispers to me that the grandest of truths are best expressed within silence.  Two paragraphs of linear language, pointing, suggesting, completely incapable of holding or clearly representing what is present within the beating chest or fingers tapping keys. 

9 hours ago, A Fellow Lighter said:

I especially liked this point ☝️. It's more than food for thought, if you ask me. Very deep.

I have specific thoughts on this point, it feeds into something I am working on. 

I appreciate your words, thanks for sharing with me. 

[A Fellow Lighter]

2 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

I believe there is a perspective that leaves a person in total peace with all that has happened and will happen, while at the same time driving them to change and alter what is present. 

Yes

2 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

A desire to participate in changing something not because it should be, no value of better or worse, simply because it is the way, a humble submission to the order.  A process, an evolution, an expression that unfolds and enfolds. 

Exactly

2 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

perspective that provides peace through knowing the broadest of brush strokes, a framework. 

Yep. I've even assigned a name to such a perspective in my spiritual work. I call it the Love for Light. Although I would add that this is more of a Spirit than a perspective, simply because it is living. So.. a living perspective, if you will. 

The name-phrase, Love for Light, doesn't really have a human relation to it as.. seeing how our collective Mind hasn't yet reached this level of perspective due to all the egotistical biases and all. So I don't expect that name to make any massive sense. But it does to me. Hence the universal recognition A Fellow Lighter

2 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

In my opinion we can not choose to be compassionate, loving, or accepting.  We can try to be.  We can desire to be.  Only a truthful experiential union with the components of reality that represent those expressions allow us to be those things, to become those things.

Yes, of course. I mean for as long as you haven't penetrated the soul of some thing or some body, how could you realise the Oneness, the Spirit, the Cosmic Mind that you share with those “other” expressions? We are everything within and around us right now. We only lack the proper perspective to be conscious of this.

2 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

To know thyself.  The aspects of reality that must be engaged and known directly through personal approach, the willingness to become them, isn't for most. 

Well, I could actually argue that it's for all of us, rather than least or even most of us. See, we are all One. And so any effort to be engaged in this knowing endeavour is, at all times, a collective human effort. Individuality in its common sense is an absolute illusion. We all share the same body - that is the Body of Human Consciousness. It is a single organism, actually. This isn't theoretical by the way, it is completely experiential.

However, on the ego-level of our human beingness, yes, the willingness isn't for most. Though it is equally important to realise how Hitler and the Nazis, the Colonialists, and oppressive empires of our history have also played much a role in the revelations of all truths, including the absolute truth, and grand shift of our perspective. It is through the light of the free will of other beings that we learn, step by step, the knowledge of oneself.

2 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

have specific thoughts on this point, it feeds into something I am working on. 

Cool. I'd like to learn of them once you have them ready. 

[RevoCulture]

First, this is me thinking out loud.  It may read like I'm telling you but I'm not, I'm sharing with you.  Please hold that sense while reading.  Part of me wants to erase this, but I feel like you might enjoy in some ways.  I am not right or wrong, you are not right or wrong. Ours paths can be very different and be perfect, our language can be very different and still be in sync.  I am speaking truthfully from where I am at this time.  I speaking to my journey, how I am being asked to proceed.  I don't truly know your angle, perspective, or intentions so my writing has less to do with you and more just me typing.  What follows challenges or pushes back some, all in the spirit of awakening. no right, no wrong. 

6 hours ago, A Fellow Lighter said:

Yep. I've even assigned a name to such a perspective in my spiritual work. I call it the Love for Light. Although I would add that this is more of a Spirit than a perspective, simply because it is living. So.. a living perspective, if you will. 

The name-phrase, Love for Light, doesn't really have a human relation to it as.. seeing how our collective Mind hasn't yet reached this level of perspective due to all the egotistical biases and all. So I don't expect that name to make any massive sense. But it does to me. Hence the universal recognition A Fellow Lighter

 

Within my purview everything is spirit or spiritual, it isn't possible for something to not be spiritual.  I also hold the tenant that there isn't a thing or an act that is more or less spiritual than another.  Perspective is synonymous with spirit in my usage.  I also extend that to the language others use, the language isn't the reality it is only a placeholder.  Language doesn't define a person's intention.  Although we try to define our intention with the language.

Love for light has a ring.  I like it but I, personally, have wrestled with phrases and language that have a long history tied to "spirituality" or "new age.'  You say that it doesn't really have a human relation to it, I believe from your position or relation that is true.  The average person, however, hears those words and it comes preloaded with lots of connections and content.  Thus, my conflict.   Perspective is loaded too, I would say from a psychological studies flavor but doesn't carry the metaphysical vagaries and the focus it brings can be wielded.  Ultimately I think we need a new language. 

I owe plenty to the spiritual / new age community and at the same time I see an evolution of wisdom that stands on their shoulders, praises the effort, but expands beyond or is rebranded, or repackaged.  We know that wisdom is an onion, all fields of human wisdom continue to peel. Yet, spirituality or religion tend to have a more rigid grip (host of reasons that make sense as to why). Combine that grip with the fact that humanity is psychologically designed to crave the familiar and certainty, a place within the tribe, and we have a situation. The majority of humans seek a place within what is present, they want to preserve what is, no peeling just preserving.  They say they want growth and progress, they believe they want growth and progress, and they do want growth and progress but... There is power and status to be had in owning what everyone has agreed to be truth.  There is comfort to be found certainty, to proclaim we have it.  To exist within uncertainty takes skill and grit, and to expand requires letting go and embracing uncertainty. 

I believe the abundance of spiritual / new age is locked within duality, even the teachings that claim to be centered in non-dual or oneness are filled with good intentions but fall short.  I'm not saying there isn't immense stores of valuable truth, obviously there is a treasure trove. However, there is a continual awakening underway.  While the core kernel may have been touched and expounded upon many times, how that manifests into culture and society, even how it functions isnt so easily nailed down.  Saying we are all one is broken into myriad expressions and interpretations, each of our interpretations both individually and collectively evolves.   I have found the deeper I go the less I have a desire to associate language firmly rooted in the new age / spiritual community.  The words used I believe are misleading, when considered from the position people are starting from and the path that must be walked, even the points of awakening along the way aren't honored by the coloring of the language.   By language I mean how the words are interpreted by those setting off on the journey. People who have profound awakening can expand the content of the word to match their experience, but how they are reshaping the word is indicative of the problem.  TBH I believe there are many people who have "awakenings" and the definition of the word doesn't really change, actually reinforces it.  (not saying their "awakenings" are not "awakenings" every moment is an awakening, these discussions get tricky, linear language)

What is the goal, to give people a sense of beauty or to awaken them to beauty?  Do we want language and imagery that points to something or do we want to arrive, become, be?   I guess I am tip toeing around the notion that the path to the "light" is through the "dark."  Even though the dark is the light and the light is the dark, that isn't common knowledge,  People who shun the dark don't truly know the light.  There perception of the light is rooted in personal biases, they project inaccurate interpretations, and it could easily be seen as abusive.  Just because something is false within a "positive" way doesn't mean it isn't abusive.  A celebrity figure who is only known for the light, the sheen, the glitz, everyone fawning and marveling; the celebrity feeling hollow and unseen.  The people projecting feel awe, wonder, joy and they are lost in their own "illusion" while the object of their attention is sorrowfully drowning in their "positive" projections.  The light and dark must often "feel" this way, how humans project and engage from positions of duality, primal biology, limited perspective.   Alas, it is the awakening process.

Trying to bring people to new conscious landscapes with old language that is heavily laden with preconceived notions is compounding the challenge from my perspective.  But, when we think of spirituality we think of what we know, not what we don't know.  We think of what we have been shown, what has been stamped as spiritual.  The chosen language and imagery, we submit.  Again, not that it isn't true, or truthful.  It is.  There is a reason why things are cycled, reborn, re imagined.  We need to cleanse, let the old go, be grateful, have gratitude, but be willing to start fresh when things have become saturated.  Parents don't wish for children to live within their shadow, they want them to soar beyond.  Yet when it comes to culture there is a sense that we must cling to it, it would be disrespectful to soar beyond.  I believe their is a psychological trap that encourages the clinging.

Again, this isn't about right or wrong.  It is about efficiency and effectiveness, what brings us to where we want to be.  What is effective, what delivers is paramount.  Growth means change.  Doing the same things expecting different results is insanity.. Problem is we know what we know and we don't know what has never been and discovering what has never been comes with a host of variables that make it challenging.

7 hours ago, A Fellow Lighter said:

Well, I could actually argue that it's for all of us, rather than least or even most of us. See, we are all One. And so any effort to be engaged in this knowing endeavour is, at all times, a collective human effort. Individuality in its common sense is an absolute illusion. We all share the same body - that is the Body of Human Consciousness. It is a single organism, actually. This isn't theoretical by the way, it is completely experiential.

However, on the ego-level of our human beingness, yes, the willingness isn't for most. Though it is equally important to realise how Hitler and the Nazis, the Colonialists, and oppressive empires of our history have also played much a role in the revelations of all truths, including the absolute truth, and grand shift of our perspective. It is through the light of the free will of other beings that we learn, step by step, the knowledge of oneself.

Yes, it is for all of us, there is no choice in the matter.  We are bound to the wheel, we play regardless of whether we swim with the current or fight against it.  What I am saying is when a person chooses to fully engage the process it isn't the type of love, light, and rainbows people associate with the new age / spiritual community.  Awakening is not a joyride, it isn't easy.  Being broken open, burnt to the ground, and rising from the ashes isn't something most people are going to choose willingly. They are not seeking that out.  If someone thinks they can bypass that process and awaken without being put through a "death process," they are mistaken.  They are clinging to edge of the abyss, to everything they know, to their identity, the culture, all that is familiar and safe.  A person must die to be reborn, and that is scary, painful, disorienting, and can potentially leave people in permanent psychosis.  Most people are not willing to initiate that journey, they would rather focus on pleasantries and speak of unity and love, continue to do what we have always done but in a "better" way.

The participation we typically see is one of being dragged through not marched into.   Many who are marching, chanting unity and love, are being dragged from behind.  They are marching away, not into.  (which is marching into but.. again the tricky nature of reality) 

Again, all comments being made are ultimately from a position of no value, no better or worse.  It simply is.  And part of the game is for humanity to develop systems and methods for people to engage willingly while being supported through, not because it is right or wrong, or better or worse but because this is the game.  "Awakening or being Actualized" to the degree that mirrors our active point in the game might not even be the hardest part.  What to do with that awakening, how to integrate it, how to weave it into culture and society, how to stimulate true change might be the actual hard part, the bulk of the work. All the hoopla about awakening, all the glitz and glamor, I believe that kinda becomes like "ok, ya, i know.. yup."  Like a new toy or new hobby or a new love, when it hasn't been attained it consumes us but once we move through it its like whats next.  Whats next?  Reshaping narratives, culture and society, to integrate those truths into working systems. That is exciting in my book. Why?  Cause I haven't been there yet. (its happening, its always happening, the change the evolution.  I talking about a radical shift.)

Elements of history that are collectively held out as terrible, Nazi etc, don't hold the same weight with me. My perspective on most things don't align with dominant narrative.  The terrible isn't terrible which also means the flowery beauty isn't flowery beauty either, don't get one without the other.

Again, this was me thinking out loud.  Not speaking at you, not educating you.  My interpretations are not right or wrong, who knows what they are.

Blessings to you, A Fellow Lighter..  

 

[A Fellow Lighter]

@RevoCulture wow man, your mind is amazing. Thank YOU, brother, for such an elaborate post. I actually did enjoy reading it, as you predicted. So a huge THANK YOU for that.

What's most surprising to me is, as you suspected, the level of sync in our perspectives though not necessarily reflected by our language use. I mean you basically did what I've always struggled to do with words - that is managing to formulate good enough statements that express your thoughts. This is no doubt my constant struggle, hence, in my mapping of logic, I've resorted to using phrases that appear, as you have detected, all new age and hippie-ish. 

So, of course, I agree with you when you say that we need a new language, one which doesn't have any preconceptions to it. But, as you've for sure taken note yourself, this cannot happen with a whole rebirth of Culture. I mean English isn't even my native tongue but I can definitely spot all the flaws in trying to teach spirituality with it. In my opinion, It because it lacks in lore and mythological poetry for it to be able to be used. But anyway let's not really get into this part as of yet.

For now I'm just going to show you all the  synchronicity in our perspectives. 

1 hour ago, RevoCulture said:

Within my purview everything is spirit or spiritual, it isn't possible for something to not be spiritual.

This is my perspective as well. Exactly as you've written it.

1 hour ago, RevoCulture said:

I also hold the tenant that there isn't a thing or an act that is more or less spiritual than another.  Perspective is synonymous with spirit in my usage.

Of course, life is spirituality, whether we admit it or not. 

1 hour ago, RevoCulture said:

The average person, however, hears those words and it comes preloaded with lots of connections and content.  Thus, my conflict.

Yes, this is true. Of course, any phrase or any word will mean something to anyone who speaks the language. So when I say “relation” I am only attempting to communicate that experiential reference rather than the preconception. Another way of putting this is saying, no one will understand your experiences if they have not experienced the same, they will not be able to relate. 

Therefore, the phrase Love for Light cannot help will not have a human relation to it.. only those preconceptions. And the reason there won't be this relation is precisely because of this ?

1 hour ago, RevoCulture said:

Combine that grip with the fact that humanity is psychologically designed to crave the familiar and certainty, a place within the tribe, and we have a situation. The majority of humans seek a place within what is present, they want to preserve what is, no peeling just preserving.  They say they want growth and progress, they believe they want growth and progress, and they do want growth and progress but... There is power and status to be had in owning what everyone has agreed to be truth.  There is comfort to be found certainty, to proclaim we have it. 

See? These are the conditions that prevent human beings from knowing the Love for Light. Not to say that the Light exists only in certain experiences and not in other experiences. No.

The Light is absolutely everywhere all the time, it is omnipresent. It is only a matter of the level of frequency that man's love for Light is oscillating at. And in my experience, that very level of light frequency is a mirror of the level of Love for, say, “the Truth” about the nature of oneself, or the Knowledge of Oneself.

The truth is man cannot tune into this God level of Spirit, this level of pure Love for Light, without having first befriended Death. And again, I say this from experience, not a theory, for I myself have done exactly this. This was the first order of business in my initiation into learned spirituality.

1 hour ago, RevoCulture said:

What is the goal, to give people a sense of beauty or to awaken them to beauty?  Do we want language and imagery that points to something or do we want to arrive, become, be?

I took me quite a while to understand that a person cannot learn for another, thus, no real teaching occurs between one person or another. It is only ever between one person and life itself, if you may pardon this misnomer. 

So if I may rephrase this entirely: we are here to learn from the Dream, and having Awakenings is the sure sign of the lesson being learnt. There is no real Awakening without the new found Awareness to back it up in one's overall Life Orientation (Behaviour). 

1 hour ago, RevoCulture said:

The participation we typically see is one of being dragged through not marched into.   Many who are marching, chanting unity and love, are being dragged from behind.  They are marching away, not into.

Haha.. well put, man.

1 hour ago, RevoCulture said:

Elements of history that are collectively held out as terrible, Nazi etc, don't hold the same weight with me. My perspective on most things don't align with dominant narrative.  The terrible isn't terrible which also means the flowery beauty isn't flowery beauty either, don't get one without the other.

You couldn't have said it better. Of course I hope you can understand that choosing these scenarios is for the reinforcement of social belief. I only chose them for the sole purpose of communicating the message of universal awakening progress/work by our collective Mind. As no one journey is a more true or more authentic than the other, for the destination is always the same for everyone.

P.S. I hope I did as much a justice as you in expressing my thoughts. 

[RevoCulture]

Well, I'm glad I went ahead and sent what was typed.  I appreciate your appreciation. 

I connected to your reciprocation of thought.  There was one point I would revisit:

38 minutes ago, A Fellow Lighter said:

I took me quite a while to understand that a person cannot learn for another, thus, no real teaching occurs between one person or another. It is only ever between one person and life itself, if you may pardon this misnomer. 

From the perspective of the deepest expression, life is simply teaching itself, there is "no teaching between one person and another."  Or you possibly mean that the other may bring something to the forefront but when we engage with it, the engagement exists between us, the thing, and reality.  The other exists just outside that bubble.  This would be up a couple layers of manifested form.

I will totally buy in that the scenario you are suggesting is the way it truly is if you can undeniably convince me that a steel beam is either predominately empty space or solid.  I mean it can't be both, right?  It must be one way, two opposing polar aspects of reality can't be true, can they? One most be more true or "right" than the other?

For me this encapsulates part of my tension with the "spiritual" community.  I subscribe to the notion that it all exists, it is all valid, it is all real, it all needs to be spoken of with the same reverence and respect.  It is all valid, it is all part of the process.  Illusions are real, lies truthfully misrepresent.

I do learn from people.  That truth might be up the manifestation chain but that doesn't negate its value or truth.  This is where we are, this is where we have been put to function.  I exist in layers, I embrace this truth.  I am unity and division.  There is a reality where that steel beam is solid, I don't want to accelerate a car into it, I don't want to hit it with a ball up fist at max ability.  Choosing to denounce, denigrate, dislocate, deny any aspect of reality because it isn't squarely rooted with the mystical magical unified field is trouble, tragic, and causes tons of complications. But, that desire to do so is a space or a stage through which we all must pass (reference spiral dynamics).

Truth is if a person wants to be honest about anything they must include all the layers.  Anybody who is trying to eliminate pieces, trying to cut out equations, trying to box reality in, distill it to A thing, One thing... Red Flag..  With that said, we must shun and deny in order to seek the One but when we meet the One we realize how and why and we no longer shun and deny.. All of a sudden it all snaps into place, the one is the many and the many is the one and we must learn how to talk about everything at once... but language doesn't allow for that.. so we begin to realize we are best expressing our truths within the silent presence of one another.. we nod and smile.. our eyes glimmer.. and we emanate.. we exchange immense amounts of data between one another without a word..  any attempt to speak will isolate.. 

but... we must speak.. but maybe we need to revise our relationship to language.. maybe we need to revise most things we know about humanity.  what we are.. how we are.. whats next.. how we do whats next..

 

 

[A Fellow Lighter]

12 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

From the perspective of the deepest expression, life is simply teaching itself, there is "no teaching between one person and another."  Or you possibly mean that the other may bring something to the forefront but when we engage with it, the engagement exists between us, the thing, and reality.  The other exists just outside that bubble.  This would be up a couple layers of manifested form.

Yes, the former: Life, Being, is teaching Itself.

12 hours ago, RevoCulture said:

I do learn from people.

This would imply that the source of your learning is “other” people. What I'm suggesting is that the source is your own Willingness to learn. The illusion of “others” only serves as a catalyst. Behind the shell that is the human form is no “other” only You. Hence I say: We are One, for we are One. There is only OneBeing, OneSelf.

Of course, in One's experience of life, S/he will discover a variety of perspectives or minds, a variety of spirits and forms. This is not to say One should ignore these varieties, for these varieties are instrumental in learning what it means to be OneSelf. 

Do you know what it means to be You, to be OneSelf?

[RevoCulture]

@A Fellow Lighter

Interesting, it appears that I initially spoke to the perspective you were after.  You acknowledged that.  Wasn't that perspective the root of what you are referring to as OneSelf?

I could play that angle.  I understand it.  I could jump on the band wagon that says that is all there is, cause there is truth in it.  But I believe that perspective is a stage in awakening, it isn't the final destination.  Paradoxical to people who think "well if One is all there is how can it not be the final conclusion?"  That is for each of us to figure out.  No rush, no right or wrong.  

[A Fellow Lighter]

48 minutes ago, RevoCulture said:

Wasn't that perspective the root of what you are referring to as OneSelf?

I'm not sure. The acknowledgement of Oneself, here, is only to the teaching/learning query. Initially we had not quite gotten into this topic of the stages of awakening.

56 minutes ago, RevoCulture said:

could play that angle.  I understand it.  I could jump on the band wagon that says that is all there is, cause there is truth in it.  But I believe that perspective is a stage in awakening, it isn't the final destination.  Paradoxical to people who think "well if One is all there is how can it not be the final conclusion?"  That is for each of us to figure out.  No rush, no right or wrong.  

Sorry, this isn't quite the matter I intended to get into - that is your and people's perspectives on awakening. Whether it is believed to be conclusive or not is of no importance to me.

The question I'm actually trying to ask isn't a general one. I was actually asking you, @RevoCulture , what you suppose the meaning of existence/life is, as an absolute being, meaning without relation to anything else, since You are OneBeing?

I believe that this is the question that the Absolute asked in the creation of the Light: “I am all that there is. Now what does it mean to be me?” 

People also ask the question, however, on the level of their human existence. People ask: “What is the meaning of Life?” rather than, “What does it mean to be me, the Oneself?” It really is the same question. 

Of course, the answer does not exist in words. It exists as the entire universe. Hence I'm not expecting anyone, including you, to answer it. Rather to contemplate this.

This is what we're here to learn.

[RevoCulture]

@A Fellow Lighter   I enjoyed our conversation and feel it is a nice place to conclude.  I wish you the best in your journey. 

[A Fellow Lighter]

@RevoCulture and all the best in your journey, brother.