Posts by Michael Gonzalez77

Is anyone actually going to walk away from a $250 weekend retreat with some massive spiritual breakthrough? Honestly, I doubt it. Are they going to leapfrog ahead in their evolution or finally master self-healing? Not a chance. BUT... clearly, this is just designed for people who have the extra cash and a specific reason to blow it on this particular experience in a short window. For some, maybe it’ll just make them feel good. 🙂

Real spirituality should be about something deeper than this. You can't condense growth into a forty-eight-hour sprint, even if you were sitting with actual enlightened Masters instead of these "motivational speakers" you can find anywhere online. Look, I get it—it’s a high-quality product that sells incredibly well. There’s usually a sharp management team behind the scenes that knows exactly how to set those premium price points.

At the end of the day, the only people who can truly say if it was worth it are the ones who opened their wallets. I’m just talking here. It’s their money, and once it’s spent, it’s gone. 🍿

neonhawk19 said:"Don't let any outside forces—whether they're some self-proclaimed gurus, rigid ideologies, or just people's opinions—manipulate your emotions, your mind, or your entire way of life. I mean, seriously, don't ever let them strip away your divine Identity, your free will, or the sovereignty and power that belongs to you alone."

In short: "your delusions versus theirs."

When people start diving into those wild "theories" about spirits and entities (demons and devils), 🤔 it’s really just a matter of whose delusions you're following.

rustymaker3 said:Even if it is something greater than thought, it eventually filters back down into them—into language. Otherwise, we'd never find common ground, acting like walking deities, right?

Look, you just have to strip those negative thoughts and feelings down to almost nothing. If you live fully in the moment, it becomes impossible *not* to slip back into thought and language—because if you didn't, you wouldn't be practicing spirituality, you'd just be doing a mental flip.

rustymaker3 said:Observing oneself through the lens of love.
Watching your own thoughts and mental flow with a sense of genuine satisfaction—perhaps that is God...

That’s the ultimate mission for everyone—and don't get stuck "there."

rustymaker3 said:Observing oneself through the lens of love.
Watching your own thoughts and mental flow with a sense of genuine satisfaction—perhaps that is God...

Kanda isn't.

neonhawk19 said:"Get to know yourself as God, and see God Himself as your true Identity"

I mean, how can you even begin to believe in a God you can't see
if you don't first believe in the divine Nature within yourself—which, let's face it, is a part of who You Are!?
How are you supposed to have faith in God if you haven't realized that you are God,
and that God is actually your own core Identity!?
So, I guess you just have to love the Lord God with every single ounce of your heart, soul, and mind,
loving Yourself, God, and your neighbor—every living thing out there—just as much as you love yourself.
That’s basically the law of love,
that’s our whole faith,
and it's quite literally our life!

👍

"The truth of the divine life isn't some hopeful wish; it is a reality. Everything else is just an illusion."

Jeremy Brooks6 said:👎
Instead of jumping around or preaching about Jesus, anyone can step up because you will know them by their deeds : planting a tree, helping a stranger, being there for someone you love...
Rather than just swinging on a porch swing like Sathya Sai Baba and lecturing everyone about love.
On a global scale, the people who become icons are often just great talkers; there are so few whose actual actions—let alone selfless, unpaid service—leave a lasting legacy behind them.

😁 That logic is basically like claiming there’s no life in the ocean just because you can't see it from the surface.

Betty Ramos said:These are all just theories—if we assume you only truly know what you experience firsthand, then we won't actually know anything until we pass away, whether during Life or afterward (and if we cease to exist entirely, well, then there's no knowing at all)... so personally, I don't claim to know. That said, my own experiences and perspective so far seem to align with the theories regarding the death of the ego. What remains is the "soul"—or whatever term people prefer to use—now enriched by all those experiences gained through the ego during our physical existence. It continues its journey if it hasn't yet achieved "realization," "resurrection," or "liberation or enlightenment."
But again, I’m just saying these are merely theories; as of right now, I only know that I know (almost) nothing.

Let's call it dying, or rather, the part that is illusory falls apart. More specifically, after physical death, the aura and the body disintegrate while a specific portion of energy—the carrier of consciousness (and all its impressions) within the aura—forms into a charge or a field. This field represents the consciousness of the limited ego, and it continues its journey toward cosmic refuges. However, by its very nature, it eventually dissolves after a certain amount of time; it doesn't happen immediately after physical death, but that consciousness lives in that form for quite a while.

Even though this is the theoretical side, what speaks to my actual experience is having a living contact with ghosts—with the consciousness of deceased people. Most fittingly, I had a very strange and fascinating encounter in a "physical" sense with a long-time friend of mine who passed away, where I felt his presence and had some kind of ability to help him in one way or another.

On the other hand, it is clear to me that I have died and been reborn hundreds of times across different continents, just as much as this current experience. The difference is that it wasn't that "consciousness field" (in other words, a little cloud of white bioenergy acting as an energy field), but rather all the impressions contained within my mature glowing body (what some call the "Higher Self"). That isn't just a part of us; in a sense, it *is* us. This mature glowing body is visible in a sub-normal sense; everyone possesses one. It is our closest spiritual energy, actually an energetic structure composed of several types of noble energies—it is super-intelligent.

As a person's aura develops, they also develop a so-called Yellow Core. This is like the noble energy that makes up the mature glowing body, and as the aura matures, that energy matures as well. At a certain point in development, a Second Light Body forms from this Yellow Core. This is the "sharir," the "body," or the energetic form with which our fragile white bioenergy merges during the process of liberation or enlightenment.

Once both of these structures have matured (the first Light Body guided all our previous lives, while the second Light Body is created during our current life through high spiritual development), then the unified human consciousness matures. At that point, after death, there is no more "leaving" or temporary existence as a little cloud in some cosmic refuge; instead, it becomes an eternal structure within the framework of the mature glowing body.

Betty Ramos said:I’d say I’m mostly in agreement here—everything truly happens in its own time. You can't force a moment or skip steps... there really isn't such a thing as "wrong" action when you're simply acting in alignment with the current state of your being. Even if you wish things were different, at any given moment, things just are the way they are—it is what it is, as they say in those movies...

That said, I wouldn't go so far as to say we are all Gods, even though we all carry God and the divine within us—whether that's consciously realized or just lying dormant. But what is dying isn't God. It's us who are dying.

It’s only the physical body—the anchor for the ego-mind—that passes away. That ego-mind just keeps moving, reshaping itself into a new vessel, desperately trying to shake off its old baggage through whatever new experiences come its way.

A person is only as much of a god as God is a person. All our physical forms are just shadows of God; they aren't the reality itself.

wearyowl29 said:

You know, everyone talks about the seven deadly sins, but there’s an eighth one hiding in plain sight—one that doesn't even look like a sin at first glance. It's obedience. Honestly, it's caused enough chaos to earn its spot on the list.
It's funny, really. People often toss aside their own common sense and intelligence just to follow some authority figure. They turn into a total herd mentality from the get-go. It’s much easier to let someone else make the calls than to actually think for yourself, right? So they just trade away their freedom of thought for convenience.
Any society built on rigid authority relies on that exact same mindset, and frankly, so do most ideologies and religions.

Check out this episode of Science Magazine dedicated to this "eighth sin."

Looking at it through a spiritual lens, what do you all think? Is blind obedience a good thing or a bad thing when it comes to a person's spiritual growth and maturity?

How do you guys handle your own obedience—or lack thereof? What kind of impact has it had on your life?

Generally speaking, the concept of "authority" is misunderstood by the masses. People mistake leaders for true authorities. A real authority should act as a facilitator for growth—someone who helps nurture specific aspects of a person's character—rather than just a traditional leader.

To me, a true "authority" would be someone who acts in the interest of the greater good. They wouldn't impose themselves; instead, they'd lead by example, acting as a respected member of the community whose spiritual strength is evident. They aren't demagogues playing on the insecurities of a crowd looking for easy promises; they are more like Socrates, asking nothing and offering nothing except a nudge for others to question everything (much like Buddha or other great thinkers).

So, I see two types of authority here. The first group might find blessings if they can find a legitimate authority figure—someone who isn't "above" them in a hierarchical sense. In this case, comparison doesn't exist on a conventional level. This is the authentic relationship between a student and a Teacher. It’s not about a small "me" versus a massive "I" centered around a limited ego where dust and ignorance gather. Instead, it's about a collective "I" that seeks to expand over time toward a true cosmic feminine principle. This principle unifies individuality into a cohesive whole that everyone feels—not as "we," but as ONE. Even when a person interacts with another being, they recognize a closeness, a union, or a oneness.

The second group are those seduced by ego-driven individuals. These people surround themselves with a core of individual ego and selfish interests, attracting others who are also seeking to satisfy their own selfish needs, usually driven by deep insecurity.

Honestly, if someone lacks even the slightest bit of insight into what it means to be open to another human being—looking past roles like nationality, religion, ideology, or personal baggage—they will struggle to accept true authority. If they are too focused on their own narrow, selfish interests and get lost in differences rather than finding our shared humanity, they won't find help from false authorities who manipulate them, nor will they find it in a conventional educational system.

Matthew Evans said:

Before there was ever heaven or earth, there was Mind. Without Mind, nothing else can exist—there are no manifestations, period. In all honesty, Mind is the very first movement of the absolute. It’s the true beginning.

What’s unclear, silent, and empty—that void—is the constant background for everything that ever emerges within it or through it. Think of the sky, the earth, or anything else that takes shape; they all spring from this same stillness. That is the Mind. The Mind is present in every single shift, yet the Mind itself remains untouched by change. It acts as the medium for all transformation, facilitating every movement while appearing to evolve, though in reality, it stays exactly as it is. What actually changes are just the relationships between things within it—the endless variables, like an infinite set of equations constantly shifting their values.

So, when the Being within a person finally manages to break free from thought—from those fleeting appearances in the void or the manifestation of equations—what's left? You’re looking at an emptied Mind. There is nothing inside it. It’s just a state of total emptiness, facing nothing but the Mind itself, which is perceived only as that very void.

That isn't what God is.

God is experienced in the next stage of liberating your attention. Once you turn that focus back toward the self-observer—when your attention is finally pointed inward at the self—the emptiness begins to fall away. It just vanishes. In its place, the absolute emerges within the spirit. That’s when Being is experienced as God.

God equals absolute plus Consciousness. Knowledge-of-Self-absolute—or perhaps just the spirit of the absolute.

Yeah, like I just said—the Mind is the medium. It’s the mechanism, the matrix, and the cradle for everything that exists.

The "Thing" is just the sum of the I and the Mind.

So, here’s how it works: Every Knowledge-of-Self—that core "I" from the Center of Consciousness—has to project itself through the Mind to actually become an experience. You can't project anything without the Mind; it's the only tool we have for that. When that happens, it creates a "vibration" with its own specific frequency. It’s called a vibration because that direct, individual connection with the Mind is where the first consciousness-of-becoming-self takes place. It's essentially an exchange between two types of Knowledge-of-Self: the knowledge of your individual "I" and the knowledge of the other "I." In this setup, the Mind acts as the medium—the absolute container holding all other forms of Knowledge-of-Self within the self.

So, here’s the thing: Um is absolutely present within projected reality alongside every other projected I. It’s basically the backbone of the rest of the Self, making it possible for things to individualize through it and for its... through the realization of the rest of the Self (the subject-I + MIND + object-I). In this process, every single insight becomes its own thing—a specific, individualized, PERSONAL experience.

So, when a 'Man' empties his mind (or more accurately, when a Being does), everything goes quiet. The mental images of objects vanish, space itself disappears because there are no objects left to define it. What remains is a void. You become aware of that primal creation within the 'self,' but you haven't yet reached the true Self, the God-WHO-IS...the absolute.

Call him whatever you want. Manifestation unfolds within him; manifestation unfolds through him. He is the primary manifestation. Most people aren't clear on this, but he is commonly known as the MIND.

Infinity is just a trait of the represented Mind—a characteristic of projected emptiness. You can't put boundaries on it.

Unlike the infinite Mind, the absolute is finite—it is God.

I don't agree with that at all. See, being all-encompassing means you encompass EVERYTHING. That isn't a "beginning"; it’s an attribute of the spirit that exists at the start, the middle, and the end. If we are suggesting that the Mind is a projection of the absolute personality, then yes, the Mind encompasses the rest of the projected Self within itself. I say *projected* Self, because there is also a non-projected, unmanifested Self which is the spirit of the absolute. But the Mind, by its nature, encompasses every phenomenon during manifestation. All those phenomena and manifestations constitute the Universe.

The Mind is a projection of the absolute personality, which means it leaves out other characteristics of the absolute; grandeur and impersonality.
The single Mind is the manifestation of the individual absolute personality, whereas all Minds (of every universe) are the manifestation of the grandeur of the absolute. So, every single "I" within the Self acts as the MIND to the rest of the projected Self.

When the absolute is experienced as grandiose, it isn't experienced as just one Mind containing a single universe; rather, it is experienced as all Minds and all their universes simultaneously—as the various manifestations of all absolute personalities.

When the absolute is experienced as an impersonal manifestation, then it is experienced as the Multiverse—the complete manifestation of all universes combined.

That's just a human perspective. The truth is that every "thing" possesses its own Mind. By that logic, everything would be considered massive, not just those four specific examples mentioned.

Everything that comes to be, everything that evolves and grows, follows the blueprint of that initial creation—the Tao.


The mind is just a projection. Absolute personalities. His "nature" is absolute.

Essential and useful treatises. The fundamentals. 👍

urbanwalker72 said:

Matthew Evans As stated by:
I exist as a solitary Being.Everything else is simply a collection of his expressions, his lived experiences, and his various manifestations.
🙂

It appears that Sigmund has yet to provide an explanation as to why God cannot be considered a Being. ☕

Is it Non-Being, or is it God? 🤔

Elizabeth Sanchez2 said:It’s not quite the same thing—and even if it were, like I said, it isn't really about what’s being said. 😉
Anyway, I’ll try to take your advice and dig up at least one de Mello book as soon as I get home... then I'll let you know my thoughts.

Now you're just philosophizing for the sake of it because you realized your initial conclusion was a bit rushed. 🙂

Both de Mello and Eckhart Tolle clearly know their stuff, but if you ask me, de Mello is an even better teacher than Eckhart.

Elizabeth Sanchez2 said:I used to be all about Oshoa, but then I stumbled upon some stuff regarding his behavior—which is why I made that comment earlier (basically, "looks polished on the outside, total wreck on the inside"). His way of expressing things is incredibly impactful, and honestly, his books really hit home for me. But if we’re talking about who actually embodies an authentic spiritual being, Eckhart Tolle takes the top spot for me—*The Power of Now* is pretty much my manual for how to live. For the intellectual side of things, Ken Wilber is brilliant; his book *Doctors Without Borders* offers such a killer deep dive into consciousness theory. I've read plenty of other stuff too, but I can't recall it all right now... I'm not exactly a spring chicken anymore. 🙂
Fine, I won't even bring up Buddha... he's in a league of his own and paved the way for everything else.

What Eckhart talks about is essentially what de Mello was saying, just a few decades earlier. That’s why I always say you should revisit these books multiple times. A person matures through experience (if they actually mature), and their perspective evolves along with them. An opinion formed years ago doesn't mean much when so much water has flowed under the bridge since then.

There is only one truth. Buddha is the avatar; Buddha is God in human form. He is absolutely beyond comparison.

Elizabeth Sanchez2 said:In my book, it’s not really about WHAT someone is saying. You meet people who sound incredibly smart and rational—but honestly? That’s often just an ego mask hiding a consciousness that doesn't actually align with their words. It would be great if I could just read someone's aura to instantly spot if they're being authentic, but hey, that’s just sci-fi.

I honestly don't see how what you're saying connects to our actual topic. If you're suggesting he's just spinning psychological tales instead of sharing the simple Truth, then I think you're mistaken. As for his ability to shine a light through his stories—using anecdotes to pull the essence of spirituality out of others—you don't need to see an aura for that. You just need personal spiritual insight and experience. I say you haven't truly grasped him because you're judging him based on how you felt when you read his book "back in the day." Honestly? Pick it up again today. Since some time has passed, you might find you understand him much better without those old preconceptions hanging over you. You might actually find his depth fascinating; the man isn't just a great spiritual guide, he's a brilliant teacher.

Whether he's enlightened or not isn't the point. What matters is that he communicates his experience and his understanding of it in a way that is genuine, not fake. It’s easy to spot from a mile away when someone is just acting "smart"—using intellectualism to spout knowledge without having any actual spiritual experience behind it. That isn't the case with de Mello. So, my point stands: you don't need to see an aura (which, let's face it, you can't do anyway, regardless of what you've read) to see the truth here.

Elizabeth Sanchez2 said:I've got other authors I prefer...

That’s fair, but just because someone doesn't "get" an author doesn't mean that writer isn't being authentic. 🙂

Elizabeth Sanchez2 said:Found this:

Besides—the 70s and 80s were basically the golden era for the New Age movement. You had all these Eastern teachers, including the well-known Osho, making huge waves in the West. So, I really don't buy the idea that people weren't interested back then. If anything, it was a total craze...

Of course you aren't going to see eye-to-eye with us if you haven't actually grasped what de Mello is getting at. 🙂

Sure, interest levels were lower than they are today. Sri Chinmoy started becoming active in the US around that time, and Meher baba was even visiting the States as far back as the 30s. But that doesn't change the fact that today, way more people are looking for something different—not just Eastern spirituality, but any kind of alternative paradigm or discourse.

And that still doesn't change the point: de Mello explained the essence of how to think correctly in a way that’s attractive, simple, and easy to grasp—even if you seem to have missed his core message. 🤷

The hippies were the big thing back then, but that’s separate from the actual substance de Mello was sharing. He became popular everywhere he traveled, not just here in the US, otherwise people wouldn't have been reading him years ago like you mentioned. My advice? Take those books you own and read them again. Don't just skim them once; go through them once, then come back to them a few months later. Spirituality isn't something you just "get" instantly. His messages can be incredibly practical and inspiring, provided you aren't just looking for "warm water"—because if you're looking for comfort without understanding what's already been said, you're going to struggle to understand anything at all.

Elizabeth Sanchez2 said:Looking back at it now, nothing about it really jumps out at me—nothing special, really. I just don't see any authenticity there... though maybe I'm wrong.

He is incredibly authentic. In fact, he’s so authentic that he managed to pull millions of people onto "thin ice," convincing them to buy a book based on his talks—turning it into a massive bestseller even if 99% of those readers didn't actually grasp what he was saying.

Back in the late '70s and early '80s, he delivered his message in a way that was accessible and clear, which is inherently authentic. It’s just a waste of time if the listener doesn't understand the core of his message.

Truth is Truth. What he discusses are spiritual phenomena that aren't like sci-fi movies; they don't rely on high production values or "fresh" concepts just to stay relevant. You could argue that newer authors teaching the exact same things are actually less authentic than he is. He was unique because he found a way to make deep spiritual concepts relatable to the "average Joe" at a time when spirituality in the West wasn't even on the radar, let alone widely accepted. (And honestly, it's debatable how many people are truly spiritually inclined even today, though thanks to the internet and other shifts, there are definitely more than before.) He reached people who had zero interest in spirituality and those who just viewed it as a trendy version of modern psychology.

Elizabeth Sanchez2 said:Heh, he was my first "spiritual mentor"... I was maybe 13 or 14 at the time. Looking back now, it all seems pretty naive.

You probably still haven't quite grasped what he's getting at. He uses simple, almost childlike language just to make things easier to digest, but he isn't talking nonsense—he's sharing incredibly practical, profound, and essential truths.

electrictinker26 said:Someone who actually went through it described being in the depths of hell—a place far beyond anything our human imagination could conjure. He was an atheist, plain and simple, and basically told God that if He truly existed, He needed to pull him out of that nightmare. In that exact instant, he was met with the Divine, radiating absolute light. Personally, I believe we hold the reins; we choose whether we want love or something else entirely. There is so much more to this than meets the eye, and I truly believe someone could find their way to heaven even without a traditional belief in God. At the end of the day, it’s the intention that counts.

So many people have been down in the "hells" of their own making. Some were strong, creative souls who just strayed off course—some through a life wasted on drugs, others through experimenting with things like mescaline or peyote, some due to severe chronic mental illness (like myself), and others for reasons we can't even fathom. It isn't a matter of debate; I'm just saying that these experiences are also products of the imagination. They are fiction, yet we cling to them. I've "spoken" with Satan himself, but he isn't some external entity. He is simply the direct archetype of the darkest phenomena within the human imagination; he doesn't exist outside of that. I've had contact with ghosts too—most recently a year ago with a deceased friend—because I'm sensitive to those things, and it feels perfectly natural to me. Ghosts are real entities to me, whereas Satan and hell don't exist except within the imagination, within a person's wild mind, within illness, or as a kind of mass hypnosis. Many people are so convinced of a literal Satan existing outside their own minds that they lose themselves in it, projecting their deepest, unlit fears and phobias onto this concept.

There is no Satan. There is only the capacity for evil within the human heart, or as an archetypal opposite of the mind that emerges during psychosis or similar conditions—in short, during illness. Similarly, there is no greater hell than being in the throes of severe mental illness; those internal impressions act like a cancer spreading through the psyche, turning life into a grim, distorted wasteland. That's it. No matter what a person believes—whether they believe malevolent aliens are stalking us or that we were created by them—human fiction knows no bounds, and there's no cure for experiencing it.

Paradise exists as a state of consciousness and form. When we talk about physical paradise, spiritual paradise is enlightenment and liberation. If someone doubts this, they should look into the spiritual heritage of those who actually achieved it. It’s that essence of Jesus' command to "Leave everything and follow me." The result is liberation, or "death while living." The one true death is Liberation; everything else is just returning to form. In the Bible, there were once entire sections regarding reincarnation, but today people cling to the idea that it's something different from Eastern philosophies. It isn't. Anyone who reads the text more precisely will see that reincarnation is as much a natural phenomenon as evolution is, or as the spiritual involution of consciousness.

Thanks @al_đezira..

Unlike the abstract concept of an "eternal hell," you can actually visualize Heaven right here among us. It’s about achieving a level of harmony that can only exist when everyone reaches a certain state of being—though whether that's even possible is a whole different debate. Heaven isn't just some opposite flip side of hell, either. And it certainly doesn't just kick in after the "Final Judgment" for a handful of incredibly blessed souls who live lives like Mother Teresa. Honestly, besides her, maybe two or three other people on this entire planet meet those heavenly standards. Let's be real: most people are just well-organized pawns in a much larger game, easily led astray because the bar for sainthood is set so impossibly high, regardless of how many times they sit in a pew or pray to Christ.

- So, this could exclusively apply to Catholics (not Protestants, not Orthodox, not anyone else—just Catholics). That means we're really left looking at someone like Mother Teresa, assuming there's even enough of a quorum to support her case at this tiny table.

🤷