Joseph Bailey41 said:This is the same hurdle that gifted students run into back in grade school. The teacher always asks: "Well, where is your work shown?" 😁
As for inspiration, in its current state, it either comes or it doesn't. You can pray, meditate, take psychedelics, or call upon the muses... but they’ll only show up if they feel like it.
Perhaps, just perhaps, I might develop—or maybe I already have—some kind of methodological approach to actually triggering inspiration. I’m currently trying to mentally deconstruct exactly what I did to trigger this current experience, looking for the specific causes and their subsequent effects; I haven't quite wrapped my head around everything yet, but things are starting to become a bit clearer 🙂
Paul Rogers94 said:I don't think you're crazy, but honestly? What you're looking for doesn't fit into any space, any dimension, or even a mathematical concept.
Put me in a Zen circle and we'll be speaking the same language perfectly... but if you try to throw some basic math formula at me, it's useless. I'm completely hopeless when it comes to numbers.
Everyone on a spiritual path has their own thing—their own specific gift or siddhi. You have yours. If your intuition tells you to follow it, then go for it—whether it's through math or sound frequencies, there's barely a difference. Even Bach composed his music based on mathematical principles.
As for trying to study spirituality using the scientific method, I love quoting that old provocateur Crowley, who once quipped something along these lines:
Attempting to analyze spirituality through a scientific lens would be like a professional geographer trying to provide a technical analysis of Gulliver's travels.
I think you're making one fundamental logical error here. You seem to believe that if you haven't had a personal experience with something, then it isn't real and doesn't exist.
The truth is, you haven't personally experienced the merging of science and spirituality, nor have you explored spirituality through experimental scientific methods. That’s fine, I guess, but that doesn't mean such a thing doesn't exist. 😉
Actually, even someone like Stephen Hawking fell into that same basic logical trap. In his final book, he wrote about his belief that God does not exist. It seems to me that simply because he lacked a personal experience of knowing God, he concluded that God wasn't there. It’s quite fascinating, really, how one of the greatest intellects in physics could make such a foundational error in logical reasoning.
What I find even more compelling is how essentially the entire scientific community decided to just ignore Ramanujan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan)—not in terms of his actual theorems, but in terms of his methodology. Without any formal education, this man simply prayed to God (well, his own version of God, regardless), and hundreds or even thousands of mathematical formulas and theorems were revealed to him. He received completed solutions—these theorems—but without the proofs, which was unacceptable to the scientific establishment (and still is). He passed away a century ago, and over the last hundred years, as much of the scientific community has worked to prove his theorems, it turns out that practically everything God showed him through those formulas was correct.
And I wonder, did no one in that scientific community ever stop to ask themselves—could it be that this is actually a valid way for people to engage with science in a methodological sense? Should we perhaps formalize this in our curricula and subjects—not just memorizing formulas from old textbooks (though I suppose that has its place), but actively seeking inspiration for future formulas? You pray to God and seek inspiration (the arrival of the Holy Spirit) and you receive finished solutions. Okay, after that, you would then need to verify that solution and confirm it experimentally, assuming it falls within the natural sciences. But, if one man who prayed (Ramanujan), through divine inspiration, produced more theorems than practically the entire scientific establishment that didn't pray, isn't that a pretty clear indication?
hiddenpuma75 said:It feels to me like the source of those messages might be stuck in the 19th century 😁 and hasn't quite caught up with the modern work of the legendary mathematician Kurt Gödel, who actually provided a mathematical proof for the existence of God. 😲
So, don't waste your time trying to reinvent the wheel here. 🙂
Here is that proof—once you look at it, everything should become pretty clear. 😁
I suppose we shouldn't look at this as some sort of mathematical "proof" intended to demonstrate that God exists. Rather, I feel it might be more accurate to view it as a physical equation—a formula that actually defines the properties of God. It’s a bit like how Schrödinger's equation describes the specific characteristics of an electron, which, of course, can be verified through experimental testing. In a similar vein, I imagine one could theoretically test this formula experimentally as well, though I suspect the initial step—actually calculating those specific properties from the equation itself—might turn out to be quite a daunting task, if not outright difficult. 😬And then, I suppose, we would eventually have to go through the grueling process of actually proving whether it’s true or not.
I wonder if anyone else has ever sat down to actually write something like this out? 🙂
Joseph Bailey41 said:Catch you all on December 21st, 2021? 😁
I just wanted to check in for a moment.
For the last three days, I’ve been receiving these internal messages, almost like prompts, about how to express God through mathematical notation. It isn't even that I'm actively seeking this out, or forcing myself to focus on it, or even dwelling on my own ego—though, I suppose, at one point the sheer implication of what this might mean flashed through my mind for a second... it's just that these messages seem to arrive on their own. I've started writing things down, so I guess we'll just have to see where this leads, though I suspect the whole process is going to take a little bit longer than expected. 😁
Yesterday, I had this sudden, spontaneous urge to make an excuse to my family, acting as if I were just stepping out for a quick pack of cigarettes, when really, there was something else weighing on me. 😬
What was that term again? Tatamata? Tathagata? 🤷 😁
So, I decided to spend some time playing my music just to clear my head and find some center... and honestly, it’s been incredible because I’ve started experiencing these intense visual connections and patterns while I play. It is all just so deeply fascinating!
However, I feel as though the Spirit has whispered to me once again, suggesting that I should take a little break from writing and following the discussions here on the forum, so I think I’m going to honor that guidance. I suppose when the Spirit whispers for me to return, that’s when I’ll be back.
Paul Rogers94 said:Pleasure is a hymn to freedom, But it isn't freedom itself. It’s the blossoming of your desires, Yet it isn't their fruit. It is the depth that calls toward the heights, But it is neither depth nor height. It is the prisoner who takes up wings, But it isn't the space that holds him. Yes, truly—pleasure is a hymn to freedom. And I would love for you to sing it with all your heart; just don't lose your heart in the singing.
Kahlil Gibran
Alright, I think I might need a bit of an explanation here.
At one specific moment, I felt this sudden flash of pure insight. I was looking at the formula regarding the velocity dependence of a particle with mass within an electromagnetic field—basically, how it changes based on the particle's charge. It’s really just a straightforward formula (m*dv/dt=q(E+vXB), something pretty standard that most people pick up by the end of high school or early college. But, because it's expressed here in vector form (using bold notation), it offers a much more powerful way to handle mathematical analysis. Anyway, out of nowhere, this intense visualization of the formula just hit me; I saw it right there in Euclidean three-dimensional space (to keep things simple, just our everyday space without any relativistic effects), and I saw it as if it were physically sitting right next to me, almost as if I could reach out and touch it. My goodness!!!
Could someone please explain, is this what people mean when they talk about having a "pure mind"?
I realize I probably sound like I've completely lost my marbles, but I truly, honestly saw it!!!
Paul Rogers94 said:Pleasure actually increases the less blindly you cling to your personality (that myth or story about yourself)—and even regarding the personality itself, once you start giving it special attention, the connection to the person strengthens, and consequently, the whole thing fades out. So, don't get too attached to the pleasure, no matter how striking or fascinating it might be. Again, the pleasure is fine—it's just a symptom of being detached from the story of the self (that limited sense of identity).
Yes! YES! That is absolutely brilliant intuition right there! 🙂
Thank you so much! 😉
An intuition just struck me while reading this: I had previously written that this state is a byproduct of the dissolution of the 'self.' Are you suggesting that it isn't merely a byproduct, but rather the core essence of the whole thing?
Paul Rogers94 said:Don't obsess over whether the bliss will vanish or try to cling to it. You didn't earn it, and you can't hold onto it—or let it go—any more than you can control anything else. Everything happens as grace. Whatever appears must eventually disappear. Clouds come and go, but the sun stays put. Ignore the bliss itself—you can't do anything about it anyway—and instead shift your attention to the subject of the bliss: that space of pure consciousness where the sensation arises. Hold onto that. The bliss itself is fine, but don't get involved with it; don't fight it, and don't force it. Ultimately, that bliss has no inherent meaning or significance—it's just a symptom.
Yes, I think what you're writing is becoming much clearer now. 🙂
This sensation of the 'self' dissolving is growing stronger, and it seems increasingly obvious that the 'ego' or the 'I' has absolutely nothing to do with this pleasure. I guess all the 'I' really did was sincerely call upon the Spirit, and everything else just seemed to arrive independently of my own efforts.
However, for the time being, I have this intuition that it might not be wise to disregard the pleasure quite yet. It feels as though whenever pleasure appears, it carries its own purpose and deserves some level of attention. There is also this inner nudge to choose surrendering to the Spirit, which I believe includes letting go of any anxiety regarding how much time it might take for other transformations to occur.
And then, there is this profound sense of cosmic gratitude. Along with a certain sense of wonder... and peace.
I suppose I should wrap up this thread as far as my own experience is concerned.
In the time since we last spoke, that sensation of pure bliss—which I mentioned briefly at the very beginning back on June 27th—has actually stabilized and grown significantly stronger. I’d say the intensity of this pleasure is roughly comparable to the most powerful sexual orgasms I’ve ever experienced, perhaps even a bit more potent than that, and it feels constant. It’s a sensation that permeates my entire body; I feel it in my arms, my legs, my spine, my internal organs, my lungs, my heart, my brain... it’s everywhere.
Another side effect that seems to have emerged in the interim is that my need for sleep has diminished quite a bit. For the last twenty days or so, I’ve been getting somewhere between four and five hours of sleep per night, yet I feel completely refreshed and brimming with energy during my waking hours. Previously, I was sleeping about seven to eight hours a day, and there were plenty of moments where I felt pretty exhausted throughout the rest of the day.
During this period, I’ve also begun to communicate directly with the Holy Spirit on a level of intuitive knowing. It’s been explained to me that this intense bliss is actually a manifestation of the Spirit, and that its fundamental purpose is to facilitate communication. I’ve found that if I listen to the Spirit and subsequently act in alignment with what is being conveyed—if I truly listen, attentively, with focus, and with an open heart and mind... then the bliss remains. If I wander off track or fail to listen carefully, the bliss begins to fade. I imagine that if I were to stray too far, the bliss would vanish entirely (though I haven't tested that, nor do I intend to).
I’ve also been told that if I remain truly attentive, my life from this point forward will essentially consist of 24 hours a day, 365.25 days a year, of pure bliss. Of course, the choice is mine, and I am making that choice every single moment. I’ve decided that I am going to try my absolute best to listen, and I think that’s really all there is to it.
It’s almost hard to believe how simple it can be! 🙂
A sort of byproduct of this decision is that I can feel very clearly that the old "me"—the version of myself that existed before June 27th—has started to fade away rapidly, becoming transparent and almost invisible. There’s still a little bit of him left, I guess, but those are just remnants of the past that will likely disappear completely very soon.
Now, is this bliss what people refer to as Kundalini? To be perfectly honest, I haven't the slightest clue; the concept of Kundalini is foreign to me, and I’ve never fully grasped it. And don't even get me started on all those mentions of Scorpio, Bulls, Lions, Phoenixes, and the rest of that menagerie. 😁
For the time being, I don't feel any particular urge to go digging further into that specific connection.
What I do feel a need to do is share. If anyone out there wants more information, please feel free to post here or just send me a private message.🙂
Kevin Ruiz36 said:When it comes to spiritual matters, everything depends on where you stand. In your case, you're dealing with milder spiritual entities assigned to you by higher authorities at a spiritual level. Given your family and kids, you're nowhere near experiencing Kundalini, let alone the Bull, the Lion, or even the Phoenix...
To be honest, I haven't the slightest clue what a Bull, a Lion, or a Phoenix is supposed to represent... and if I'm being completely candid, I don't even really understand what Kundalini is myself.
All I know for certain is that whatever this experience is, it feels like it's accelerating quite rapidly, though I have absolutely no idea where it's all heading or when it might level off. For the time being, I don't think I'm quite ready to share my full experiences here, mostly because there's still so much that feels unclear to me.
I wanted to say thank you once again to everyone for all your contributions to this thread; you have truly been such a massive help to me. 🙂
Yesterday, I spent some time working through exercises specifically designed to quiet the Holy Spirit, and I suppose my intuition is telling me that I should probably step away from writing and stop browsing the forum for a little while. I’ve decided it might be best to just listen to that feeling.
You guys have completely cluttered up this thread, and honestly, I’m about ready to report this whole mess to the moderator! 😬
All jokes aside, I really want to express my gratitude for all these reflections; honestly, that is exactly why I decided to start this thread in the first place. 🙂
Just a few thoughts from my side of things:
As I’ve mentioned before, I have been playing music for about forty years now. I spent those first ten years immersed in classical music, though I've spent the last thirty focused on jazz. My home collection is actually quite massive—I think I have nearly 1,000 CDs stashed away at this point. Most of them were purchased legally because I feel a genuine sense of respect for the artists, you know? Honestly, where have you been, hiddenpuma75, old friend? 😬 It feels like such a waste of money at this point, honestly. I don't even know who I would sell my collection to anymore; if I did find a buyer, I'd probably only get pennies on the dollar, and even that seems like a long shot. It’s almost funny when you think about it—you can just hop onto Deezer for seven bucks a month and access a library that's easily a hundred times larger than my entire physical stash. And to top it all off, Spotify finally launched here in the States last week, so it's officially available!
After reflecting on everything we've discussed, I’ve come to this conclusion: most of the modern approach to finding your path in jazz is essentially useless. You don't find your voice by mindlessly cycling through thousands of CDs or digital tracks. I suppose the real legends—those old masters who possessed that unmistakable, spine-tingling spark—didn't work that way at all. They found their essence by truly, deeply listening to just a handful of seminal records, extracting every ounce of wisdom they could from them. It wasn't about volume; it was about depth. And honestly, if you aren't playing live, you're missing the entire foundation of the craft.
To reiterate my point, I truly believe that a genuine master of jazz is someone who manages to strike that rare, delicate balance between flawless technical execution and profound emotional depth—someone who has ultimately discovered their own unique path. It’s as if, after they play just a small Pair of notes, you instantly recognize them; they possess that unmistakable, signature style that makes their identity immediately apparent to anyone listening.
So, I suppose I’m still quite a novice when it comes to the formal side of the spiritual path, but I’ve started to realize that maybe you don't necessarily need to be on some official, structured journey to acquire life's most profound wisdom. It feels like those deeper truths can find you even if you haven't strictly followed a specific curriculum or joined a formal school of thought. 🙂
When it comes to STEM and science in general... I think I actually fell in love with it back in elementary school. Mathematics has always been my absolute favorite subject, right from the very beginning. There’s just something so refreshing about it—you don't have to deal with those vague grades for "artistic impression" or any of those silly, subjective assessments that seem to pop up everywhere else. It’s much more straightforward; you either calculated the answer correctly, or you didn't, and that's really that. I guess you could say I’ve never truly walked away from science, because I don't believe there is anything inherently wrong or flawed about it. In fact, I try to keep up with it as much as I possibly can, making sure I stay current with the latest breakthroughs and discoveries in physics—the fundamental sciences, really.
But... oh, absolutely! Science is still nowhere near being able to provide meaningful answers to those fundamental life questions that truly haunt us. I’ve mentioned this before, I suppose, but if we look at physics as our foundational science, it only holds partial knowledge regarding about 5% of the matter and energy that actually constitutes our universe. As for the remaining 95%, we practically have zero understanding. Even the most brilliant physicists on the planet are essentially flying blind when it comes to defining dark energy, which, according to their own calculations, accounts for roughly 68% of everything in existence. They know incredibly little about dark matter, too; they mostly just manage to identify what it definitely *isn't*—which, of course, isn't the same 5% of ordinary matter we actually have some partial data on.
When you really step back and look at the context of things, it’s a bit staggering to realize that our fundamental scientific framework openly admits it hasn't even a clue about 95% of the matter and energy that actually constitutes the universe. I mean, if we consider that, relying solely on science to provide definitive answers to life's most profound and essential questions feels... well, I suppose I'll just let you all draw your own conclusions from that. 😉
I suppose I officially embarked on my spiritual Quest around the age of forty, though I approached it with a very specific mindset. At the time, I decided to take a strictly analytical, almost engineering-based approach to the whole thing—very much rooted in a scientific curiosity, if you will. My first step was simply to pick up a comprehensive overview of the world's major religions by Houston Smith, just so I could get a clear, bird's-eye view of what the most prominent belief systems actually have to say. I figured that if I could study them all systematically, I might eventually be able to discern which path resonated with me most deeply. It felt like a logical way to start, treating the search for meaning like any other complex problem that needs solving. 😁
Up until my 40th birthday, I’d always viewed my life as being perfectly, almost flawlessly, aligned. Everything just seemed to click into place: I have a wonderful marriage, three beautiful children, and a career that is—honestly—quite remarkable. My work is essentially centered around helping others, which is incredibly rewarding, but it also comes with an excellent salary funded entirely by federal grants, providing me with enough flexibility to truly show up for my family and keep playing music. Plus, everyone close to me is healthy... I suppose you could say I’ve had practically zero problems. And yet, lately, I’ve been gripped by this intense, nagging realization that none of this is permanent. I’ve started thinking seriously about how all of this will eventually fade away—that illness, misfortune, or death will inevitably arrive one day. It led me to the conclusion that I really need to grasp certain truths before that happens, because if I don't, I fear I won't be ready. It feels somewhat similar to why Siddhartha—or whatever his name was—decided to leave his wife and child behind to embark on his Quest. Of course, it's not quite like that for me. I’ve never felt any genuine urge to abandon my loved ones. Even when the thought did cross my mind—like that time I seriously considered moving to New York City to pursue jazz professionally—it was always this strange combination of a deep sense of duty, a bit of common sense, and perhaps a lingering fear of the unknown that kept me right where I belong.
Well, I suppose that’s all I have to share for the moment; if you all feel like flooding my thread with your own thoughts, then I guess I might as well join in too 😬
hiddenpuma75 said:So, why am I even bringing all this up? Honestly, I just felt like sharing a few interesting tidbits about A Course in Miracles, since I know it's one of your favorites.
To answer your question directly: I don't actually know a whole lot about how much Advaita and A Course in Miracles overlap. I’m fairly certain there's a deep connection there, though—that they share a massive amount of common ground. If you ask me, nondualism is the single thread that weaves them both together.
So, I did a little digging on Google, and I actually stumbled upon this link about it. I’ve been spending some time with this video lately, and I honestly can't stop thinking about it. It touches on those deep, existential questions that we all grapple with at some point—the kind that make you pause and reconsider everything you thought you knew about reality. The way the speaker navigates the intersection of spirituality and our everyday experience is quite remarkable. There’s a certain weight to the arguments presented, yet they are delivered with a clarity that keeps you engaged rather than overwhelmed. It really makes you lean in. For me, the most striking part was how it bridges the gap between ancient wisdom and our modern psychological struggles. It isn't just abstract philosophy; it feels incredibly relevant to the actual lives we lead here in the States. If you've ever felt like there's a deeper layer to existence waiting to be uncovered, I think you'll find this deeply resonant. It’s definitely worth a watch if you have a quiet moment to sit with it.
To be honest, I’m still finding *A Course in Miracles* a bit fuzzy and hard to wrap my head around. But then again, maybe that's just because I haven't really rolled up my sleeves and dove into the actual exercises yet.
On the flip side, even though Advaita can be quite a heavy lift—both philosophically and in terms of actual practice—it comes with some truly incredible role models. I’m talking about legends like Ramana Maharshi and Nisargadatta Maharaj. When I dive into their teachings, their words, their dialogues, and those spontaneous exchanges, I find them incredibly clear and deeply inspiring. Honestly? They are nothing short of IMPRESSIVE. 🙏 On the other hand, I find *A Course in Miracles* to be quite a challenge; it’s definitely more philosophical and dense than what I usually dive into.
It occurred to me recently that *A Course in Miracles* doesn't really provide us with nearly as many heavy-hitting "realization" role models as you find in the world of Advaita.
I just wanted to take a moment to weigh in on this... and honestly, I think I absolutely agree. It’s something that has left me feeling a bit unsettled myself; I’ve spent quite a bit of time searching online and studying some of the more well-known practitioners of ACIM—people like Marianne Williamson, David Hoffmeister, and a few others—and even reading through books they've authored... yet, I don't find myself particularly impressed by any of them.
I’m aware that doubt can be one of the most significant hurdles one encounters on the spiritual path, and perhaps the fact that ACIM lacks such clearly defined 'realizers' is exactly what fuels my own skepticism...
I don't really have a definitive answer here, I suppose; I'm just sharing my thoughts as they come.
That being said, I intend to keep moving forward on this path for now, since it seems to be yielding some positive results for me so far, so we shall see where it leads.
Anyway, I’m going to head off and do my morning practice now.🙂
Paul Rogers94 said:Saying suffering only ends once everyone awakens is just some silly Bodhisattva nonsense—it reeks of those exotic Theosophical ideas from Madam Blavatsky. In Advaita, that's total gibberish. It’s like saying, "I won't wake up from this dream until everyone else does"—as if you don't have to wake up yourself first before you could ever hope to help anyone else. Being awakened is the greatest gift to the world, even if you have zero intention of helping anyone else wake up, or even if you couldn't care less about the rest of humanity. Not every awakened person becomes an instant guru, nor does every awakened person possess the capacity (siddhi) to awaken others.
And this whole idea that it's impossible to experience Love by yourself is based on a fundamentally flawed interpretation of ecumenism, because it’s clearly referring to impersonal, unconditional, absolute Love...
Everything starts and ends with the grace of the guru. The guru has no intention of making you realize anything. He doesn't actually care whether someone wakes up or not. He’s like the sun, shining equally on everyone, maintaining life on Earth without having any specific intention to do so. What touches him is your true longing. His spontaneous response is Love. That Love is precisely what wakes you from the dream of conditioning. Without that initial spark of Love, there is nothing. Technically, he doesn't "wake" you, because you are already wakefulness itself... but he helps you clear away the obstacles preventing you from seeing it.
I probably expressed myself poorly there.
It isn't the idea that I won't or don't want to wake up until everyone else does; rather, it's the thought that suffering on a cosmic level won't cease until the cosmic Mind awakens. If we are all one, then that seems like the only logical conclusion to me.
Of course, personal (though, of course, illusionary!) awakening is a massive deal and the greatest good you can do for the world (which is really doing it for yourself!), but if you have truly awakened, it means you've realized that we are all one. So, how could you possibly NOT want to awaken the rest of yourself???
I also wrote incorrectly regarding it being impossible to experience Love within oneself, my apologies. A Course in Miracles says that it is possible, though it takes much longer. Right at the beginning, it mentions that performing miracles (which are expressions of Love) can shorten that timeframe.
You haven't answered my question about how one actually practices Advaita, and I would really love to read your thoughts on that. 🙂
What kind of exercises are involved? Roughly what does the practice look like and how is it done? As I mentioned in my introduction, I've been playing music for 40 years, so the importance of consistent practice for making progress in anything (including the spiritual path) is practically hardwired into my subconscious. I am genuinely curious about how one practices Advaita in a practical sense. 🙂
And how important is a teacher? I think hiddenpuma75 mentioned somewhere that he has a teacher (if I remember correctly, his teacher is 78 years old). I don't have a teacher (at least not a living human being; A Course in Miracles says the true teacher is the Holy Spirit...), and I've spent a lot of time wondering whether I should be out looking for someone... for now, I still don't have an answer to that question.
Paul Rogers94 said:There is no "me" and no "others"... when you identify with a persona (the ego, the self-myth), you perceive everyone else as separate individuals. But once you recognize your True impersonal nature—the Truth of your own Being—everything is ONE. This doesn't mean everyone is physically "one," it means there is no "me" vs. "them"—there is no duality at all. Duality is just a mental construct; ONENESS is what is experienced through the lens of the mind,,,
By the way, I ran into A Course in Miracles years ago—much like hiddenpuma75 did—and I noticed immediately that, fundamentally, it’s indistinguishable from Advaita. It’s just different terminology... basically Advaita for the dummies... even Christ's teachings are non-dual at their core.
Advaita is the only true teaching, regardless of the form it takes. All other teachings aren't necessarily wrong, they're just tailored to various temperaments and states of being. Truly, Advaita isn't for everyone—but if the teachings are correct, they must inevitably lead to Jnana (realization or direct insight).
THE CORE OF ADVAITA FOR THE UNINITIATED
1 There is no such thing as bondage, and therefore, there is no such thing as liberation. 2 If you don't get that after being told, then meditate on it. 3 If it still hasn't clicked, spend time with saints and listen to what they say. 4 If it still hasn't clicked, read the sacred texts. 5 If it still hasn't clicked, chant the name of God (mantra). 6 If it still hasn't clicked, pray for true insight. 7 If it still hasn't clicked, don't worry—it will click eventually.
Thanks again, 🙂
As I mentioned in my introduction, I am still very much a beginner on this spiritual journey, and I am quite aware of that. Since I happen to be a naturally curious person, I find myself asking just about everything and anything.🙂
You mention that, in essence, A Course in Miracles isn't different from Advaita, and that is exactly the impression I get after re-reading what you wrote and looking up some things about Advaita online. To me, the terminology used in A Course in Miracles feels clear (or rather, it's becoming clear 😉 ), so I think I'll just stick with that for now. Since I'm still a bit of a dummy, that approach seems to suit me just fine for the time being 😁 😁
On my first pass through this, it all seems remarkably similar to me.
But... I can't help but feel there's a fundamental distinction here, specifically regarding how ACIM places such heavy emphasis on the idea that experiencing Love in isolation isn't really possible; rather, it has to be realized through our connection with others—that whole concept of us all being the Son of God. There’s also this profound insistence that suffering won't truly dissipate until everyone, and I mean absolutely everyone, reaches enlightenment. It’s not enough to just wake up for yourself, I suppose.
I wonder, what would the perspective from Advaita be on a point like that?
Furthermore, I'm curious about how one actually goes about practicing Advaita. With ACIM, you're provided with these incredibly specific exercises and very detailed instructions, which makes it feel like you don't necessarily need a teacher or a guru to guide you. In the context of Advaita, how much weight does the presence of a guru actually carry?
I suppose this serves as my current attempt at summarizing the theology of A Course in Miracles, based on how I’m perceiving it right now.
Do you think you could offer some kind of comparison between this and Advaita?
Does any of this actually make sense to you? When I try to process everything using my rational mind—you know, the ego—it honestly feels completely nonsensical. But then again... on a much deeper, more intuitive level, things seem to be slowly clicking into place. I can't help but wonder, am I losing my mind?
As for a way to gauge my progress, I guess I look at the fruits of my life (since a tree is known by its fruit, right?). So far, the fruits appearing in my world—my family, my career, my relationships with others—all seem to be good. And even this experience with the Holy Spirit and Kundalini... well, it feels like a positive fruit as well, for the time being.
What kind of metrics do you personally use to judge your own path?
Thank you so much in advance for any thoughts or guidance you might share.🙂
Thank you so much for getting back to me with that response. 🙂
I was wondering, what language did you actually use when you first started reading A Course in Miracles? I’d imagine it was English. For me, English feels almost like my native tongue, yet even so, I have to say that ACIM remains the most demanding book I’ve ever attempted to get through. It honestly requires so much more time and intense concentration than anything else; sometimes it feels less like reading a spiritual text and more like trying to work through incredibly complex mathematical equations. When I’m deep into those pages, I find myself thinking entirely in English. I did eventually track down an American translation, but I can't help feeling it just doesn't quite hit the same way as the original. I mean, please don't get me wrong—I have nothing but the utmost respect for Peter Vasiljevic's translation work, though I haven't had the privilege of meeting him personally.
I’ve already made my way through the first theoretical section of A Course in Miracles once, but I’m currently diving into it for a second time—and honestly, I suspect I’ll need to circle back through these pages several more times before everything truly begins to click. It’s quite fascinating, actually, because this second pass feels like an entirely different experience compared to the first; it's almost as if I'm seeing the concepts through a completely new lens. I must admit, though, that I haven't been particularly disciplined with the workbook exercises. I suppose I’ve realized that without actually sitting down to do the work, all this theory doesn't offer much practical value, and it can become rather exhausting to read just for the sake of reading, which makes it all too easy to lose momentum and give up entirely.
Well, let me try to lay out the basic framework of the theology—if you can even call it that—as I personally understand A Course in Miracles, because honestly, it feels quite different from anything else I’ve ever come across in my reading. Now, I know everyone says the exercises are the most vital part of ACIM, but I truly believe that attempting those exercises without grasping the underlying theory is just as difficult as trying to digest all that theory without actually doing the work. In my view, one really must go hand in hand with the other.
So, here is the thing:
I’ve been reflecting quite a bit on this lately, and I truly believe that anything which possesses actual, fundamental reality simply cannot be threatened or undermined by any force whatsoever. On the other hand, everything that we perceive as unreal—all those fleeting shadows and illusions—doesn't truly exist in any meaningful sense. It is precisely within that realization, I suppose, where we find the true peace of God.
I guess it’s worth noting that *A Course in Miracles* actually opens by stating that its very first principles serve as a concise summary of the entire curriculum. I feel like we should probably keep that core idea at the front of our minds whenever we sit down to read; if we hold onto that central premise throughout the process, it might just make everything feel a whole lot more intuitive and easier to grasp.
I’ve been reflecting quite a bit on this lately, and I truly believe that God is the only absolute reality. In my view, everything that God brings into existence carries that same fundamental reality; it's part of that divine fabric. Everything else—all those illusions we get caught up in—simply isn't real at all.
I’ve been reflecting quite a bit on this lately, and I truly believe that the fundamental essence of God is Love, which finds its ultimate expression through the act of creation itself. It seems to me that everything God brings into being—what we might call the Son of God—possesses qualities that are essentially identical to God's own nature; therefore, everything created is inherently an act of Love and carries that very same quality within it. In my view, God and the Son of God are completely inseparable, existing in a state of direct, seamless communication within the timelessness of eternity.
God and Love, of course, can't really be pinned down by mere words, nor can they ever be fully grasped through the intellect alone, though I suppose some expressions manage to capture the essence of reality much more effectively than others. In that regard, I’ve always felt that Saint Paul’s description of what Love truly is provides a remarkably beautiful and accurate way to frame that reality.
I’ve been reflecting quite a bit on this lately, and I truly believe that God and everything He brings into existence exists entirely outside the constraints of space and time; it’s a realm without a beginning or an end, possessing a nature that is fundamentally unchanging.
The universe we find ourselves inhabiting exists within the framework of space and time—that much seems obvious, doesn't it? Within this realm, everything is in a constant state of flux; things are perpetually shifting, emerging from nothingness, only to fade away, being born and eventually dying. It feels as though the dominant characteristic of this entire cosmos is a pervasive sense of separation and intense individuality. We tend to perceive ourselves as fundamentally isolated beings, where every single person is just a solitary, disconnected entity drifting through the void.
In that light, I suppose one could logically argue that this entire universe—and everything contained within its vastness—wasn't actually brought into being by God. It seems to me that if you look closely, the very nature of the cosmos stands in direct opposition to the essence of God and the things He truly creates. Consequently, it feels as though this universe, along with everything we perceive within it, might not possess any true reality at all.
It seems to me that *A Course in Miracles* constantly challenges the reader with these heavy, unsettling questions—you know, the kind that really make you stop and think. It asks something like, "Do you honestly believe that God would create His Son only to be mortal, to suffer through endless pain, or to witness killing and being killed?" I suppose if one assumes that God is the architect of this entire universe, then the logic follows a pretty dark path: it would imply that such a God is inherently cruel and lacks any true love for His Son. It’s a profound dilemma, isn't it?
So, this leads us to the big question—who or what actually brought this entire universe and everything within it into being? If we look toward *A Course in Miracles* for an answer, it suggests that what God created (the Son of God) somehow, for reasons that remain somewhat mysterious, "thought" itself into a state of separation and individuality. I guess you could say it was an emergence of perceived isolation. To put it in more symbolic terms, it’s much like the story of Adam and Eve; they existed in a state of total, seamless union with God until they conceptualized the idea of being separate—which is often represented by that moment they bit into the apple. *A Course in Miracles* doesn't really dwell on the "why" behind this shift, suggesting perhaps that such an explanation belongs to a different realm entirely.
It seems to me that this whole concept of separation—this nagging question of "what would it actually look like if I possessed a personality and an identity entirely independent of God"—is essentially the spark that ignited the entire universe. It’s as if that single inquiry acted as the catalyst for everything we see around us. At the very same time, I suppose this cosmic ego emerged, which is really just nothing more than that fundamental thought of separation and individuality, which, if we are being honest, is also just another illusion.
I suppose it could be said that the moment that thought of separation—that fundamental error—ever surfaced, God provided an answer that was instantaneous in a truly timeless sense. It’s as if the correction was issued at the exact same moment as the mistake itself. In truth, that error doesn't actually exist anymore; if you really look at it, it likely never truly existed to begin with. The response God offered is the Holy Spirit, which I view as the Word of God. The Son of God can never truly be separated from God, nor will he ever be, simply because that is the essence of God's will.
In that sense, if you look at things from God's perspective, this entire universe doesn't really exist anymore. I mean, no matter how many billions of years this cosmos might seem to endure, within the context of timelessness, it all effectively amounts to zero—it’s almost like trying to divide any massive number by infinity. Perhaps, if we follow that logic to its conclusion, it’s as if it never truly existed in the first place.
Consequently, if we look at things from the perspective of God, I suppose neither we nor any other conscious beings in the entire universe actually exist. What we perceive as the passage of time is, in essence, just an illusion.
9) The Holy Spirit, who—from the viewpoint of God—instantly (and timelessly) corrected the error, continues to exist within this universe, and it is possible to hear Him and establish a connection with Him.
A Course in Miracles places a heavy emphasis on the idea that there are two fundamental systems of thought that are entirely contradictory and fundamentally incompatible. One is the system of the ego (the Cosmic ego), which is rooted in the concept of separation; from this foundation, things like sin, guilt, fear, anger, and death inevitably arise. The other is the system of the Holy Spirit, which is based on our indivisible oneness with God. From that state, immortality, Love, and forgiveness flow.
10) This sense of individuality and separation that seems so real in this universe is, I think, merely an illusion. We are all—not just humans, but every self-aware being—manifestations of a single Mind (the Son of God) that conceived of separation and was subsequently 'seduced' by the Cosmic ego. But perhaps that seduction exists only within this perceived universe; in truth, it has already been rectified and, in a sense, never truly happened! The Cosmic ego also manifests within each of us, constantly reinforcing this illusion of being separate.
11) Jesus was a man who fully realized God, someone who saw through and dissolved the illusion of separation. I believe about two-thirds of the exercises found in A Course in Miracles are centered on shifting our perception, which is ultimately intended to lead us to a direct vision or realization of the illusion itself. In other words, the goal of A Course in Miracles is—as it says—to remove every obstacle standing in the way of a direct experience of Love. And once someone directly experiences Love, they become one with Jesus, essentially becoming Christ (the mind of the Son of God).
12) A Course in Miracles emphasizes that the only way to truly know Love is to see all our brothers and sisters as ourselves; that by forgiving others, we are actually forgiving ourselves, and that by loving others, we love ourselves, whereas hating others is really just hating ourselves...
13) The third part of A Course in Miracles (since the first part is the text/theory and the second consists of the exercises) is titled the Manual for Teachers.
Why is it so vital to help others 'awaken' and see clearly? Well, I guess it's because others are simply us, since we are all manifestations of the very same Mind.
14) A Course in Miracles suggests that once all individual consciousnesses 'awaken' and recognize the ego's illusion, the universe will vanish. In reality, the universe has already vanished (from the perspective of God, from which it never truly originated).
15) The only thing we can actually change is time from our own subjective perspective—that is, how long it takes for everyone to awaken. How long we continue to suffer, to die, to kill one another... that ultimately comes down to our free will.
So, why does helping others awaken matter so much? It’s because by doing so, we shorten the amount of time we all spend suffering together (and since we are all one anyway, it is a collective experience within this universe's perspective).
