CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Matthew Evans › Posts

Posts by Matthew Evans

24 posts shown.

On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Jeremy Brooks6 said:On a side note, it’s worth mentioning he predicted World War III, and since the date he picked passed a few years ago, he’s stuck in a bit of a loop. Aside from spamming every major university in the States with emails—though he probably didn't bother reaching out to any Ivy League schools because, well, he wouldn't want to face that kind of embarrassment—he hasn't gotten a single response (I assume those institutions actually have people working 😁 inside them). Still, he’s sticking to his guns, convinced he's the only enlightened one left because the date was simply "postponed." It reminds me of that Taoist idea about the balance between being and non-being—maybe there's a little more "being" in his head than reality allows—and now he's got to figure out which side carries more weight if he ever wants to move past this stagnant mindset that's just cluttering up the world.
😵

You've got your wires crossed!!! 🙂

Do you even realize who you're talking about when you make these kinds of definitive statements?
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Jesse Price5 said:A being is just a creation.
A BEING IS NOT GOD.
Poor little being doesn't even realize what they're actually made of...

ALL GLORY TO OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, THE ONLY WAY, THE TRUTH, AND THE LIFE!!

God isn't a creature, and a creature isn't God.
Furthermore, God isn't a being, nor is a being some kind of creature.

Being is both God and creature... it is absolute.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Betty Ramos said:Hey there, person with the great username 🙂,
Everything is the same—yet it isn't quite the same until you actually identify with it.
All is One, but it doesn't truly become One until that oneness is realized.
Everything exists and doesn't exist... all at once.
But, but, but...
I just remembered something... the fact that I actually know nothing at all 🙂
(except that everything is constantly shifting and that it's good to plant oneself firmly)
So, all this we're saying? It’s just talk.
It might be better to just quote Narnia, for example 🙂
Because for truth lies in Life, not in mere words.
Sometimes, the only thing that matters is what stays hidden between the words.


'Everything' keeps shifting, except for the one thing that doesn't: the absolute, the Being... the 'I AM', the 'YOU WHO YOU ARE'.

That entity creates the reality of change, for self. That entity (Being) witnesses the existence of that change. Change doesn't touch the Being, its existence, or the witness, even if it alters how that witness perceives what's happening.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Betty Ramos said:I find myself wondering... is there actually a decision involved here? A sort of human "consent" to enter into Knowledge? We all talk about liberation or enlightenment, but (assuming such a thing exists) the question is how many people right now—here in this room—would uncompromisingly agree, no matter the cost, to "surrender" to it all. If they even had the choice, of course. It seems to me that most of us, as long as life is good and we're doing alright, just enjoy our little illusion—we read the books, we daydream... we'd love actual liberation or enlightenment, sure, but maybe tomorrow, or next year, or some fine day down the road. Then, I get the impression, the system collapses, the illusion loses its vibrant colors or completely dissolves to reveal its true illusory face, just so we might finally turn back to the self... and if we don't turn back, the cycle just repeats. Is there any mention of a consent, a surrender, a conscious "Thy will be done"—something truly decisive? Or does it all just happen on its own? Does "Consciousness" shape a decision, deciding to wake up, and then the person wakes up—willingly or not—pouring themselves into trust until they seemingly, voluntarily, "consent"? Or perhaps they never truly consent at all? Or maybe there is neither a decision nor a person 🙂?


Let’s break down these concepts and their actual functions—their "roles": 🙂

Consciousness. It doesn't make any decisions. Consciousness is just the confirmation that EVERYTHING IS. Who is doing the confirming, and to whom? A being—Existence itself—confirms that it IS everything, absolutely everything, that it is the absolute. So, the Being confirms to the self that it IS ALL, which means the words we projected from the spirit (from knowledge-of-self) into the intellect are just saying there is something (knowledge-of-self) through which the Being confirms to the self what, how, and that it IS. Consciousness isn't deciding anything here. It’s simpler: CONSCIOUSNESS = the confirmation (EVERYTHING IS). The one actually doing the acting and making the calls is the Absolute-Being. Being stands above knowledge-of-all-that-is, and because of that knowledge, it can actually use its potential... CONSCIOUSLY.

Man.
It doesn't have any power. A person is just a projection of the soul through the mind-body connection, creating this psycho-physical entity. Its manifestation is experienced through its own reflection—in the spirit of creation where the Absolute-Being experiences self as something shifting, something in constant motion. Think of it like this: a human is just an image projected onto a movie screen. The Being is everything else—the director, the set designer, the screenwriter, and the producer all rolled into one. It dictates every single movement on that screen, whether it’s doing so with full awareness of self or acting unconsciously. The unconscious part kicks in because of how easily we identify with things, centering our will and attention on the wrong spots. If the Being's entire focus is locked onto that specific entity, then the Being starts to believe it *is* that entity. Because of that identification, it loses its divine qualities and settles for whatever traits were drilled into it through experience and conditioning.

So, here’s the reality: we don't actually hold any power. We're just along for the ride while an Absolute-Being recreates us in every single moment, constantly reshaping and directing the flow. In this setup, we're essentially nothing more than the lead actor—the central subject in a play staged by that Being.

So, a person doesn't really get a vote in any of this. No one asks for our input. We just end up becoming exactly what the Being projects us to be for its own sake. In the act of positive affirmation, the human being essentially agrees to drop their own ego and identity. It’s about having total, unwavering trust in the self—to surrender everything to the Self-God, the one who truly is. That's the only way liberation or enlightenment actually happens. It occurs when all those frantic attempts to control the direction of Life are traded in for complete, unconditional surrender.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
.
.


Pain, sickness, treatment, healing, and the METHOD OF HEALING (in short):

Most people—living without any real > or a way to maintain their own health—just look for a quick FIX that comes from the outside. They run to doctors, grab Aspirin, or lean on whatever else modern Big Pharma churns out, which truly DOES NOT HEAL
. Only after they’ve lost all faith in the MDs and those endless pharmaceutical cocktails being pushed by doctors (usually just for profit) do they go looking for "healers" as a final Hail Mary. If all these pills, physicians, and healers could actually "cure" the body, what exactly are they treating when we swallow those substances or surrender ourselves to a doctor or a "healer"?
It is FAITH that heals.

Healing is really nothing more than an attempt to return the energetic system to its normal operating state—a state where the system itself, once sufficiently supported (convinced), takes over the rest of the work by relying on the Self in self. Until then, the system can't see a way to reclaim its own efficient healing power (immunity) because its energy field has already undergone a frequency transformation occurring within the cells. This internal cellular struggle reflects destructively onto the organism, causing the physical condition to deteriorate. The outcome of this battle depends entirely on the balance between the cells tasked with defending the system and those that have succumbed to the influence of sickness. Naturally, everything formed on the inside eventually manifests on the outside. But by the time something becomes visible externally... it means the "sickness" has already taken hold. In that state, the body has manifested DISEASE as a material change within itself, meaning it has already crossed the line of what is "permissible." At that point, most "patients," in their lack of awareness, seek help from the outside... first from doctors, and only then from "healers" (and even then, only as a last resort, a desperate attempt at salvation)...
The > about sickness is that the individual, in their ignorance of self, allowed > to develop within their energy field. Essentially, the body's cells picked up the frequency of those vibrations (fear) that triggered the initial change. Since they neither knew nor heard how to prevent the development of disease (because no one ever taught them and they haven't reached that realization themselves), they bypassed the first messengers (warnings) of the disturbance (the first pains) as if those warnings never existed. From there, every disturbed cell becomes a vibrator of belief (a frequency transmitter) for the vibration it absorbed, spreading the > through the system. Eventually, once the > reaches proportions with enough mass and gravity to exist as isolated entities—with frequencies distinct from the body's frequency—the energy of the > becomes stronger than the surrounding vibrations in the energy field. That is when a simple disturbance easily escalates into full-blown disease. By then, it is too late for a simple >. But of course, that isn't the end of life, provided the balance of the energy field is returned to normal.

When is disease removed most effectively?

When the first traces of sickness appear in your energy field.

How do we recognize them?

Consciousness made an effort here; it gave us the simplest mechanism for recognizing the first signs of a disturbance. I say disturbance, because a disturbance in the energy field is NOT YET DISEASE. PAIN is the true messenger of disturbance. The first, smallest pain is the precursor to disease. It doesn't mean every pain will escalate into illness (that's why we have our energy field's immune system, which balances small disturbances on its own). But regardless of whether our immune system is in good shape or not, every noticed pain should instantly serve as an ALARM—a wake-up call telling us that the state of our projection has warped. Pain is truly a reminder, pointing back to everything I wrote above, and it should lead you, without hesitation, to stop (no matter what you are doing) and employ the method that follows. If you are working, stop what you are doing and balance your energy field immediately, wherever you are. If you are driving a car... pull over, park, and balance your energy field at the first opportunity. Balancing costs nothing. We all possess the power and plenty of time to use this gift of our nature, but few of us even realize we have it.

BALANCING THE ENERGY FIELD

Method:
Close your eyes. Take a deep breath, let it out—do this three or four times until you feel your mind finally settle down. Once you hit that point, look upward toward your third eye (somewhere above and between your eyebrows). While keeping both physical eyes directed upward, shift your focus to that "third eye" spot. Try to hold your focus right in the center of your field of vision, yet simultaneously take in everything within your peripheral view at once. A subtle, steady light-energy should begin to emerge in front of you, forming a circle or sphere that sits faintly against the darkness at the edges of your sight. Within this circle, a concentrated pocket of energy will appear, and this specific part will start rising toward the crown of your head on its own. Let it rise. When it does, use your mind to guide that ball of energy—or ring, however you perceive it—down through your head, neck, shoulders, torso, pelvis, legs, and feet, letting it flow out through your toes and into the ether. (Throughout this whole thing, if it helps, offer some gratitude to your Higher Consciousness, God, the universe, or whatever entity you feel connected to... it really makes a difference)
(To get a better handle on how to move this subtle energy through your field, think of an MRI scanner or a high-tech medical scan; imagine your body is being scanned by a ring positioned around you. As you pass that ring "from head to toe," visualize it as a visible light emanating from the scanner, passing through your body and having the power to record every single cell in the plane it travels through).
As the energy moves through your field, you'll feel waves. Your cells will vibrate as the energy passes through them, creating a sensation of fizzing or even chills. That’s the sign you’re doing it right—that you actually believe in what you're doing, that you are fully present in your body and with that energy, which is why you can feel it. Repeat this process until the energy of the ball (the "ring") and the energy of your own field merge into one, becoming indistinguishable. At that point, the process is complete; the energy field is balanced and the body is healed.


PS
This should be done routinely, every morning when you wake up and every night before you sleep. This routine is how we keep the body in a state of healing.

.
.
.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Benjamin Taylor6 said:I honestly thought Lawrence Novosel was pushing the Bible just like you push that New Age spirituality.😬

Look, I’m not some New Age cheerleader. I’m explaining existence from the perspective of the Self, straight from the source, rather than following someone else's script. I live in this era—that much is obvious. I am HERE and NOW, which is why there's naturally going to be some overlap with what people call the 'New Age' movement. Our connection isn't ideological; it's linguistic. I use a vocabulary that makes sense to the modern American, but we all draw from the same source. That same source is what connects us to Taoists and everyone else talking about the same thing. The only difference is that instead of using the terminology used by Bedouins, Romans, or ancient Chinese thinkers two millennia ago, I’m using the language of my contemporaries—the way people actually talk in everyday life today.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.



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.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.


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.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.


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.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.

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.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.

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.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.

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.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.

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.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.

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

Benjamin Taylor6 said:But this particular school of thought approaches the concept of God quite differently:

The Great Tao

Born before heaven and earth,
there exists something—vague, yet complete,
silent, empty,
always the same amidst all shifts,
eternally changing, yet eternally the same.

It can be viewed as the mother of all things.
I do not know its name,
so I call it the Tao.
In the absence of a better word, I call it "Great."
Great implies infinite.
Infinite means all-encompassing.
All-encompassing means returning to the beginning.

Therefore:
The Tao is great.
Heaven is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
In existence, there are four great things,
and Man is one of them.

Man follows the earth,
the earth follows heaven,
heaven follows the Tao,
and the Tao follows its own nature.

The mind is just a projection. Absolute personalities. His "nature" is absolute.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Jacob Sanchez7 said:Everything that exists = God
Everything is made of God, regardless of whatever labels we slap on it.
Every single cell in your body is God. Every thought is God. Your identity? It doesn't actually exist; it’s just a mental illusion. When you meditate, the mind settles, the thoughts stop, and our true nature reveals itself.
(that famous shift from the head down to the heart)

We are essentially cells that make up God, much like our own cells are units that make up our own "god"—because a balanced, self-actualized person eats well, stays at peace with their surroundings to maintain inner peace, nurtures their cells, and listens to them. Just one way to view the fractal nature of the universe.

Infinite love and infinite patience

Look, we could talk about this for years and never actually reach the truth.
But in the silence, it’s hard to miss. 😁
There's no point searching for truth in books, opinions, or research results; those are all just consequences of circumstances. Truth is right here, right now.

It's better to just sing and dance :P

God isn't everything that exists. If God were simply everything, then God wouldn't be unborn, uncreated, or unchanging. The mere fact that anything undergoes change proves it isn't God. God doesn't pass through change. God is unborn, uncreated, uncreatable, and immutable—absolutely absolute.

When you’re dealing with something absolute, that thing exists uniformly. It means every single "part" of it holds equal weight. Each fragment is just as much a container for all the other parts as the whole is. Look, Man isn't built like that. A human being doesn't carry the entire universe inside them; it's actually the other way around—the universe carries the human. And honestly? Even the universe doesn't hold God within itself.

So, does that mean the universe isn't God?
Not quite.

God is the essence—the absolute Being that possesses Knowledge-of-Self. That specific Knowledge-of-Self-as-absolute (Consciousness) is itself absolute. Because of that, every single individual instance of knowledge-of-self (every "I") acts as a container for all other instances of knowledge-of-self. It’s like a fractal where every part holds the whole. In this sense, the One and Oneness are essentially equal.
So, The absolute (Being) plus consciousness-of-the-Self-absolute equals God.

Think of it this way: there’s a distinction between God, who exists solely within that absolute aspect of the Being, and the Being itself, which is omnipresent. The Being isn't just tucked away in that absolute state; it’s right there in the thick of experience and creation, too. When the Being shows up in the realm of creation, it generates a spirit of creation—essentially a reflection of its own projected state. And just like in the absolute, that reflection always curves back toward the self. It’s a closed loop. So, when the Being projects experience, it creates this consciousness-of-becoming-self, or a creative spirit, through which the Being comes to know itself as a created thing.

Look, when it comes to making sense of the whole mess of existence, most people just can't tell the difference. They struggle to distinguish between what is truly, absolutely present—that Being that permeates everything in existence—and that which is absolute within itself.



Jacob Sanchez7 said:Everything that exists = God
Everything is made of God, regardless of whatever labels we slap on it.
Every single cell in your body is God. Every thought is God. Your identity? It doesn't actually exist; it’s just a mental illusion. When you meditate, the mind settles, the thoughts stop, and our true nature reveals itself.
(that famous shift from the head down to the heart)

We are essentially cells that make up God, much like our own cells are units that make up our own "god"—because a balanced, self-actualized person eats well, stays at peace with their surroundings to maintain inner peace, nurtures their cells, and listens to them. Just one way to view the fractal nature of the universe.

Infinite love and infinite patience

Look, we could talk about this for years and never actually reach the truth.
But in the silence, it’s hard to miss. 😁
There's no point searching for truth in books, opinions, or research results; those are all just consequences of circumstances. Truth is right here, right now.

It's better to just sing and dance :P

Not everything is made of God, but everything that exists—creation itself—is God’s creation. It is built from Knowledge-of-Self, which God projects from Consciousness into individualized experiences. Think of it like this: God projects Ideas (souls) out of Consciousness, but God doesn't project Himself outside of the Self-God. That’s why the absolute, as Being, exists without absolute Knowledge-of-Self (without Consciousness), positioning itself within these individual Knowledges. It does this to create an experience, to actually manifest its own potential through those specific fragments of Knowledge-of-Self. In the process, the absolute (Being) also creates the consciousness-of-becoming-self (creation). Now, within this creation, Being—which is fundamentally the same as what is in GOD—strives toward the Ideal (the Self-God) that it separated from through individualization. But you can only reach that Ideal when your consciousness rises to a level where you can totally surrender to it. You have to let that Ideal strike you, pull you out of the projection, and bring you back to the Self-absolute. I've touched on this in my earlier comments.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Benjamin Taylor6 said:Thanks for providing such a detailed breakdown of your technique for awakening Man. So, this is the path you’ve walked to reach enlightenment.
It reminds me of how there’s a whole mountain of techniques cooked up by that one single local guru we have over here:

As for what he’s actually achieved or whether he’s being authentic—well, only he knows that. Honestly, you don't even need a special experience; you could just study the theory from spiritual literature, which isn't exactly hard to find in America these days.
He seems to feel this burning need to dump all this knowledge he supposedly pulled from transcendental sources onto us.
Whether it's authentic is hard to prove. All I see is that he's trying. Maybe he should have reflected on that Zen story from the link above regarding spiritual technologies:

A MOTHER'S ADVICE
Jiun, a teacher to a shogun, was a well-known expert in Sanskrit during the Tokugawa period. When he was young, he used to give lectures to his fellow students. His mother heard about this and wrote him a letter:
“Son, I don't think you became a follower of Buddha just because you wanted to become a walking dictionary for others. There is no end to teaching, interpreting, shining, and seeking glory.
I would like you to stop these lectures. Retreat to a small temple in a remote part of the mountains. Devote your time to meditation, and through that, attain true knowledge.”


To him, that advice probably holds no weight since he claims he's already enlightened. Though, to be fair, he hasn't exactly shared any concrete details about this supposed enlightenment of his.

And regarding the whole "guruism" thing, it looks like gurus just can't stand each other, leading them to say things like this:

Zika is Senator Palpatine

Just look at what this guy Mihajlo Slavinski—better known as Zika—wrote. You'll see it's the exact same vibe as the ideas from our new guru here:

"The breadth and freedom of the Soul," "Love." Once my mind stops its initial struggle and resistance, I enter a state of bliss that is difficult to return from. At the same time, it feels entirely new, yet infinitely familiar—a sense
of belonging and connection to everything. Everything is so easy and natural... Every descent into Shunyata leads
me to a new level, a different one, showing me at first how easy it is to dissolve—to discretize—all
the problems and the heavy emotions I carry within myself. I feel a profound relief realizing that all these limitations
are not "Me" and that I can let them go completely, if only I decide to do so.
"I" becomes width, light, a feeling of simultaneously floating in the depths of the ocean and
distant cosmic expanses...
A massive sense of Love and Peace!"


So, there you have it—the actual experience of one participant from a Shunyata course!

The only thing that truly tripped me up when I crossed paths with Jesus—you know, that local kid from the neighborhood who spent all his time preaching about the self—was the question of where he actually went. Because after just a few months, it was like he vanished off the face of the earth; nobody had any clue where to find him anymore.

I once encountered a Christ myself:

The guy knows the entire Bible by heart and just spouts stuff left and right!!! Honestly, he’s even more intense than Matthew Evans

As for me, I don't have much to do with the Bible... I'm not preaching its contents. Not everything in the Bible represents the truth... there's a lot in there designed for other purposes (controlling the mind).
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Peter Phillips32 said:Well, if you don't know how to frame your question and you keep getting useless answers, then maybe next time you should figure out how to word it so you don't end up with those same wrong answers you already know aren't helpful.

So, just ask it again in a way that won't trigger those incorrect responses you aren't looking for in the first place.
That's just how you handled it. You reached into your own little stash of knowledge and pulled out something that might sound like an answer, but it isn't. Because I know damn well what continuity is, and I'm fully aware of my own growth. I can look back at myself as a five-year-old kid who knew nothing and had certain emotions, and compare that to who I am today—a woman in her fifties who knows what she knows about the world, politics, people, nations, biology, economics... and so on.

You can only be aware of your own nature evolving in a theoretical sense; having the idea of such change is one thing. But thinking you actually know who you were as a five-year-old? That’s most likely just a manufactured memory mixed with a tiny bit of reality. Those generalizations about how five-year-olds act are just that—tiny bits of reality—and the rest is just making stuff up by stitching those generalizations onto fragments of childhood memories.

If you really want to convince me I wrote something wrong, you're going to have to try a lot harder than that. Nothing short of posing the "right question" and finding the right answer is going to move the needle for me. And honestly, just a heads-up: stop lecturing me on my "wrong beliefs" regarding how much of memory is made up, and just focus on finding the "right question." I mean, hey, it's your call which matters more to you.

Isn't it kind of weird how everyone who disagrees with him is automatically wrong, as if this "guru of humanity" simply must be right? It's almost like—dare I say it—he's just another spiritualist in a long line of guys delivering monologues about their own superior truth. If reverse psychology exists, then this guru of humanity is the first one to actually prove "reverse gurulism."

And please, for the love of God, stop throwing in convenient little stories about your anti-guru hero, K. g. U.

But look, I personally met Jesus, and I was hit with these heavy arguments about his Truth, his Path, and his Life back when I was just a kid. There was just one tiny little catch, though. Jesus turned out to be just some kid from the neighborhood.

I mean, when you finally come face-to-face with the most powerful figure in religious history—someone who's basically a guru that avoids anyone with a different opinion like Satan avoids frankincense—what happens?

Honestly, you've got pretty low standards if you're just one of those people who thinks, "Well, as long as at least one person finds happiness," and then you pat yourself on the back thinking you've accomplished your life's mission.

You're standing at a crossroads here, and you've got a choice: you can keep churning out these massive mountains of nonsense text just to reach one or two people who will become your mindless little cult followers, or you can actually try to explain your ideas concisely and clearly, aiming to foster some actual understanding through real conversation.

Look, that Jesus you ran into might have actually been Jesus, but he probably wasn't the same guy they call Christ.

Look, I’ll break this down for you since you seem lost: Jesus—even if we assume he was a real historical figure, which isn't out of the question—is nothing more than the personification of universal knowledge. For reasons entirely predictable within the framework of Christendom, they just slapped the label "Christ" on it. Personification simply means taking a concept, like universal knowledge, and giving it a face and a name so people can wrap their heads around it.

So, that version of Jesus you’re talking about couldn't possibly be the same personification of Christ—it clearly isn't the same guy. But sure, he could have been, just like any one of us who manages to elevate their own consciousness to the level of the universe's consciousness. It's all part of the same thing. Christ The whole thing about an entity manifesting within a human body... honestly, save the religious fairy tales about the birth of Jesus for someone else. It’s all noise to me. None of that stuff has anything to do with actually awakening the Self-knowledge within a person.

Peter Phillips32 said:Well, if you don't know how to frame your question and you keep getting useless answers, then maybe next time you should figure out how to word it so you don't end up with those same wrong answers you already know aren't helpful.

So, just ask it again in a way that won't trigger those incorrect responses you aren't looking for in the first place.
That's just how you handled it. You reached into your own little stash of knowledge and pulled out something that might sound like an answer, but it isn't. Because I know damn well what continuity is, and I'm fully aware of my own growth. I can look back at myself as a five-year-old kid who knew nothing and had certain emotions, and compare that to who I am today—a woman in her fifties who knows what she knows about the world, politics, people, nations, biology, economics... and so on.

You can only be aware of your own nature evolving in a theoretical sense; having the idea of such change is one thing. But thinking you actually know who you were as a five-year-old? That’s most likely just a manufactured memory mixed with a tiny bit of reality. Those generalizations about how five-year-olds act are just that—tiny bits of reality—and the rest is just making stuff up by stitching those generalizations onto fragments of childhood memories.

If you really want to convince me I wrote something wrong, you're going to have to try a lot harder than that. Nothing short of posing the "right question" and finding the right answer is going to move the needle for me. And honestly, just a heads-up: stop lecturing me on my "wrong beliefs" regarding how much of memory is made up, and just focus on finding the "right question." I mean, hey, it's your call which matters more to you.

Isn't it kind of weird how everyone who disagrees with him is automatically wrong, as if this "guru of humanity" simply must be right? It's almost like—dare I say it—he's just another spiritualist in a long line of guys delivering monologues about their own superior truth. If reverse psychology exists, then this guru of humanity is the first one to actually prove "reverse gurulism."

And please, for the love of God, stop throwing in convenient little stories about your anti-guru hero, K. g. U.

But look, I personally met Jesus, and I was hit with these heavy arguments about his Truth, his Path, and his Life back when I was just a kid. There was just one tiny little catch, though. Jesus turned out to be just some kid from the neighborhood.

I mean, when you finally come face-to-face with the most powerful figure in religious history—someone who's basically a guru that avoids anyone with a different opinion like Satan avoids frankincense—what happens?

Honestly, you've got pretty low standards if you're just one of those people who thinks, "Well, as long as at least one person finds happiness," and then you pat yourself on the back thinking you've accomplished your life's mission.

You're standing at a crossroads here, and you've got a choice: you can keep churning out these massive mountains of nonsense text just to reach one or two people who will become your mindless little cult followers, or you can actually try to explain your ideas concisely and clearly, aiming to foster some actual understanding through real conversation.


Everything Jesus knew, I know. Anyone who has managed to elevate their consciousness to the level of universal consciousness shares that exact same Knowledge. It’s simple: because Jesus, myself, and others like us have raised our awareness to that same frequency, we all possess the same universal Knowledge. We aren't just followers; he, I, and those of us on this path are simply the physical embodiments of that Knowledge itself. Not the man, but the truth he carried. ChristThat’s exactly why that specific attribute was grafted onto Jesus within Christendom. He ceased to be just some man named Jesus and became Jesus Christ. The living, breathing embodiment of universal knowledge.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
"Quote:"
Benjamin Taylor6 said:Maybe I’m just being thick—honestly, maybe I’m just slow on the uptake or my reasoning is fundamentally flawed—but man, I am having a hell of a time trying to follow you through this labyrinth of ideas. It’s like... well, it's like trying to read a map while someone is constantly shaking the table. I'm struggling to keep pace here. 😲😁😲
And that—right there—is exactly why I stick to the PRACTICE.

Look, you actually wrote this:
Even Sigmund Freud couldn't wrap his head around this one—not even close. Because, let's be honest—there’s just zero actual experience to back that up. To even begin talking about confirming something like that, Sigmund Freud would have to stop being Sigmund Freud. It needs to stop being perceived as just some individual expression of the absolute—it’s gotta go back to the Self (the absolute). Only through that direct, raw relationship between one's own Will, focused attention, and the actual substance of the absolute (the Self)—specifically through the spirit of the absolute (Consciousness)—can one finally uncover the truth about the Being that they so stubbornly claim they are NOT.

So, this brings me back to a question that’s been rattling around my brain lately—how exactly does someone like Sigmund Freud, or honestly, any of us hanging out in this digital corner of the internet, actually undergo an experience so profound that we cease to be just some "individual expression of the absolute"? It's a heavy thought, I know, but I can't help but dwell on it.
And that he finally returns to his Source.
I honestly feel like we’re all just sitting here spinning our wheels—fighting over nothing more than which way the wind blows a flag on a flagpole. It feels completely trivial. I’ve been sitting here thinking about this whole mess—this endless loop we seem to be stuck in—and honestly, it’s exhausting. It feels like we're just circling the drain of our own making. You look at what people are saying, how they interpret things through such a narrow lens, and you realize how little anyone actually understands about the core of the matter. Take what Matthew Evans was getting at earlier—it’s almost comical how much effort goes into misinterpreting the fundamental truth. We spend all this time debating the surface level, the trivialities, while the actual essence remains untouched by our noise. It reminds me of those long, pointless debates I used to get dragged into back in college—those late nights in the dorm where everyone thought they were a philosopher because they’d read a single chapter of a textbook. It’s the same thing here. We’re intellectualizing ourselves into a corner. And then there’s the question of the self. Everyone wants to talk about "finding" themselves, as if the self is some hidden treasure buried in the backyard. They don't realize that the self isn't something you find; it's the very foundation of everything. If you don't grasp the concept of the Self-absolute, you're basically just shouting into a void. You're trying to build a house on sand without even realizing the ground is shifting beneath your feet. It's like what Sigmund Freud used to suggest about the unconsciousness—we are constantly being driven by these deep, hidden currents that we refuse to acknowledge because it's too uncomfortable. It’s easier to argue about semantics than to face the reality of our own being. We'd rather stay in the comfort of our delusions than face the weight of true Self-knowledge. Honestly, most of these discussions feel like they're designed to distract us from the real work. We get caught up in the personalities, the egos, the constant need to be "right." But being right doesn't mean anything if you're disconnected from the absolute. It’s all just noise—empty, hollow noise. We need to stop looking outward for answers and start looking inward, though I know how much people hate hearing that. It's too much work. It's much easier to just keep arguing on a forum.

So, let me just wrap this up and put it back to you: what exactly was it that you went through during your awakening?

If we don't find a way to actually experience that kind of "awakening," then we’re all just going to end up like some clueless Joe Schmoe wandering through this life—completely lost, totally oblivious, and frankly, a bit pathetic. A guy walks into a high-end bar in Manhattan—one of those places where even the ice cubes look expensive—and he sits down next to this incredibly polished, suit-wearing executive. The executive looks him up and down, sees his worn-out jacket and tired eyes, and decides to be patronizingly "charitable." The exec leans over and says, "You know, son, if you worked hard, stayed focused, and climbed the corporate ladder like a real professional, you wouldn't be sitting here looking so lost. You could be sitting right where I am, enjoying the finer things in life." The guy takes a slow sip of his cheap beer, looks the man dead in the eye, and says, "That’s funny... because I actually did all that. I worked my tail off, I played by all the rules, and I stayed laser-focused on the goal. Now, I’m just sitting here waiting for the guy who actually owns this place to come out and tell me why my paycheck hasn't cleared yet."

It’s actually pretty simple: Once you finally return to the Source—once you actually wake up—you realize you are God.
When you finally cycle back from that state and reintegrate into experience—let's say, you’re just an ordinary guy again—you aren't starting from scratch. You emerge as someone with an upgraded awareness of the Self-God. It’s a heightened state of being that you keep sharp, all thanks to that specific process of pulling your attention back toward the Self-absolute.

______________

A bit more context:

First, you need the hunger to know, followed by the groundwork—basically, training the Being’s will and attention to slowly turn toward the Self. But when I say "toward the Self," I’m talking about that thing which can never be perceived through subjective imagery. I mean the true I. Once a Being is sufficiently prepared, the enlightenment of the absolute (the Self) happens exactly when you least expect it. Why? Because that's the only time you're actually free from striving. Every attempt at striving is just an exercise in concentrating attention through the intellect. You can't perceive something that doesn't vibrate using mere logic. As long as you remain conscious of the object you're chasing—as long as you're thinking and focusing on a vibrating thought—enlightenment won't happen. It means you have to be ready to voluntarily surrender everything that makes you a distinct creature, including Consciousness itself. This doesn't imply that, as a Being, you are totally unaware of what you're trying to achieve. Quite the opposite; you've simply placed your intention in the hands of the Self-God. Even before enlightenment, you've already had intuitive flashes of Consciousness (the spirit of the absolute), including glimpses of that "thing" you're searching for. But you could never truly conceptualize it; your intellect just couldn't grasp the absolute. This preparation is essentially an intuitive education in how to surrender unconditionally, placing total trust in that absolute spirit that has been feeding you instructions until now. By developing intuition, you arrive at inevitable Knowledge, which allows you to surrender with confidence. The path to total surrender is the path to total trust—which leads to an absolute freedom from the fear of loss, from death, and from the terror of non-existence. Through this kind of spiritual self-education, you become calm and composed, yet still driven by the desire for total Self-knowledge, ready to accept whatever Consciousness decides to offer you. When you are fully surrendered to Consciousness, that is the moment all barriers dissolve and the spirit of the creature returns to the absolute spirit. Truly, that is when the Being, through a will that is already surrendered to Consciousness, shifts its attention away from the projection of experience—away from the subject's intellect—and onto the absolute itself: onto what remains when the projection is "switched off." Onto the true Self.

It’s pretty simple, really. When a Being directs its entire focus inward toward the self—toward the absolute—that absolute becomes illuminated by an absolute spirit. That reflection of what truly is merges with the thing itself. In that moment, that initial core of what exists (the absolute) and the absolute spirit (Consciousness) become one single, absolute unit of Self-knowledge.

Look, I’m telling you, it all comes down to the Self-absolute. Think about it: if Knowledge itself is absolute, then that Absolute is absolute too. That means every single bit of individual Self-knowledge—which is really just a reflection of the quality of the absolute—acts as a container for every other piece of Self-knowledge out there. In this kind of absolute relationship, the Being becomes God. Once consciousness turns inward and excludes unconsciousness, the human spirit as we know it simply ceases to exist. It has to happen that way for the Source to reveal itself. At that point, the Being isn't some "creature" anymore; it's become the Self-absolute, or God.

If God is the absolute—the one who truly knows the Self—then that Knowledge contains everything necessary for what *is* to actually exist. It’s all there, sitting in that pool of potential. Within that same Consciousness, everything is already known. We're talking total Self-knowledge: every quality of the absolute, the mechanics of projection, the principles of existence, and pretty much anything else you could possibly wrap your head around. But here’s the thing: Knowledge isn't the manifestation itself. Because the Being understands this, it pulls its attention and will back into an individual projection. It carries that Knowledge along, expanding the spirit of creation and trying to fulfill that primal drive—the original intention of the soul to realize itself. That’s why that spiritual Knowledge gets funneled down into the human intellect. It has to be processed and understood so it can actually be put to work, attempting to refine reality until it mirrors the purest expression of the soul.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Peter Phillips32 said:Haha 😂
It's easier for you to make up all this mindless nonsense about me than it is to actually explain your ideas briefly and clearly.

That's enough about your guru complex.
Yeah, yeah. And why does it bother you so much that you felt the need to air your Judgment regarding me and my 'flaws' in public?

I write what I write because I know it, and I'm offering what I know. Right now, I'm giving you the chance to take that Judgment you've formed about me and my writing and actually back it up. Point out those flaws and argue why they exist. If you don't, then every single comment (of this type) where you try to condemn me or my work will be dismissed as irrelevant—just an outburst of envy. Therefore, I'll ignore them... I won't feed your hunger. Peace. 🙂

I made it pretty clear: "explain your ideas briefly and clearly, and the holes, cracks, and pathetic failures will become obvious."

Go ahead, give it another shot. This time, try it without insulting your opponent and shifting the burden of proof for your own claims onto them.


I present my Self-knowledge exactly how I see fit. If the way I deliver it—or what I'm actually saying—doesn't sit right with you (if it doesn't pass through whatever bias-filter you're using to process reality)... then don't read it. (The moment you see my name, just skip it, RUN). What I write isn't specifically targeted at you; obviously, it's meant for whoever needs to read it exactly as it stands. Period.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Peter Phillips32 said:There isn't anything wrong with the fact that you're actually easy to figure out.
You're just another one of those self-proclaimed spiritual gurus who thinks they've sucked all the wisdom straight out of the Source of all spiritual energy, and therefore, clearly, the universe has hand-picked you to be some kind of global leader for humanity.

But honestly, you're just making things unnecessarily complicated by hiding behind these massive walls of text and flowery poetry, because if you actually laid out your ideas in a short, clear way, everyone would see the glaring holes, the cracks, and the sheer stupidity that serves as the shallow foundation of your whole act.


So, responding to your first comment and your reaction to my writing, I gave you an answer—one where you failed to find any actual message or meaning, choosing instead to double down on the same tone. Essentially, you're acting like a judge over everyone else. You sit there passing judgment on what people do and why they do it, judging their motives, but you can only play that role when you identify with the mechanism of judgment itself: the intellect. That isn't a spiritual "achievement." It's just a symptom of falling into deep unconsciousness. Not "you"... I'm not talking about your ego, because sure, you read, you write, you use logic, but I'm not talking about "you," I'm talking about You, the Being-that-is, which has fallen asleep by staring too hard at the intellect—specifically, into one of its polarities: the subject of one's own experience. It’s no wonder you judge; judgment is the very foundation of that relationship. You judge "good" or "evil," which really means you're judging an object based on whether its appearance in your subjective consciousness fits your current mental framework. In other words, does it align with the system of beliefs you use as a filter to process information? Judgment is just that filtering process. Based on your filter, you decide if the info fits or doesn't, nothing more. That kind of filtering... it has zero connection to truth. Of course, it has everything to do with the relative position you've taken, the position where you've centered your own will and attention.

So, there's nothing wrong with understanding, but the question is: "what is it that you have understood?" The very act of judgment you take before everything else said reveals what you consider to be "understanding." You've confused grasping facts with true comprehension, elevating your own judgment to the level of absolute Self-knowledge, which can only be perceived by the spirit.

Peter Phillips32 said:There isn't anything wrong with the fact that you're actually easy to figure out.
You're just another one of those self-proclaimed spiritual gurus who thinks they've sucked all the wisdom straight out of the Source of all spiritual energy, and therefore, clearly, the universe has hand-picked you to be some kind of global leader for humanity.

But honestly, you're just making things unnecessarily complicated by hiding behind these massive walls of text and flowery poetry, because if you actually laid out your ideas in a short, clear way, everyone would see the glaring holes, the cracks, and the sheer stupidity that serves as the shallow foundation of your whole act.

Yeah, sure. And why does it bother you so much that you felt the need to broadcast your judgment regarding me and my "emptiness" to the public?

I write what I write because I know it, and I offer what I know. Since you've already reached a verdict on me and my work, go ahead—back it up. Point out those "gaps" and argue why they exist. If you won't, then every comment of yours intended to condemn me or my words will be dismissed as irrelevant—just another outburst of envy. I won't feed your hunger. Take care. 🙂
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
"Quote:"
Andrew Hayes8 said:Matthew Evans
You haven't actually explained what harmony and balance mean to you.
Are you really that indifferent?

Harmony isn't some vague, fuzzy feeling. It’s actually about existing in total openness to everything around you. It means everything exists while knowing its purpose—acting in a way that hits its absolute peak potential without stepping on anyone else's toes or messing with the rest of the system. That's why we talk about living in harmony with our environment; it just means making sure every move you make aligns with the fundamental laws of nature.

If a person could actually exist in total harmony with everyone else, it would mean that none of their actions would ever threaten the existence or the potential of another individual—and by extension, humanity itself. Every single thing they did would be driven by the pursuit of their own maximum potential, and in that scenario, reaching that peak would naturally become the ultimate expression of our highest collective values.

For a group to actually function in harmony, you need individuals who understand how to foster collective well-being. It’s pretty simple: true well-being comes from fulfilling those initial potentials we carry—those deep-seated intentions meant for our own soul's self-realization. If we actually knew how to let our souls manifest, we’d inadvertently create harmony in our reality too. The logic behind it is straightforward. When you're in the middle of an action, you can see its direction—you can see exactly where you're headed. If that goal, and the action itself, doesn't step on anyone else's toes, then you know you're on the right track toward realizing your soul. Another dead giveaway that the soul is being realized is the experience itself... The simple joys of living.

.

Balance is essentially just a leveling mechanism—an effort to smooth out frequency discrepancies and pull every single cell back into equilibrium. Think of the human body like a complex electrical grid. We’re constantly trying to balance that energetic field, syncing up the frequencies of every individual cell with the frequency of the soul that drives them—the central point everything else orbits around. When those two frequencies finally align, healing actually happens. It's simple math: when the cells and the soul vibrate at the exact same rate, you achieve total systemic harmony. The problem is fear. Fear disrupts that harmony, creating blocks, and those blocks inevitably lead to sickness. To put it bluntly, if the cells become so diseased that they start vibrating in total chaos, the Being simply pulls the soul out of that vessel, and the body dies. But if you engage in the routine work of balancing that energetic field, those isolated, terrified cells can find their way back to their original frequency. They sync back up with the soul, and the body returns to a state of being healthy. Real health isn't just an absence of symptoms; it's a return to rhythm.

Balancing our body's energy field is essentially just mimicking how the universe balances its own field. On a cosmic scale, the process is identical. The universe maintains equilibrium by routinely sending a Proton Ring from its core out toward the periphery. Anything caught within that ring undergoes a sort of healing process. Our Earth follows this exact same cycle every 26,000 years, where the conscious levels of beings here return to their intended frequency—the frequency of their soul. During these times, humanity reaches a collective peak, and civilizations hit their absolute zenith. Of course, it doesn't stay there. Periodically, the cells of the human collective isolate themselves again, acting through a veil of fear. This drives consciousness downward, sometimes even toward total self-destruction. That’s exactly where we find ourselves right now: our technology has outpaced our actual capacity for understanding and our level of awareness. Because of this gap, we're seeing an influx of souls entering "life" with the specific intention of waking up to Self-knowledge. They come to use that knowledge to balance the vibrations of those whose consciousness has dropped to catastrophic levels. But a catastrophe isn't inevitable. We have spiritual access from higher dimensions down into the lower ones. From a state of Higher Consciousness, we get a bird's-eye view of Lower Consciousnesses. We step in as volunteers from above to balance this dimension from the inside, staying in constant contact with our older, more conscious brothers and sisters.

When people like this show up, their vibrations, their thoughts, and their actions act like a catalyst. They cause the collective understanding of existence to shift rapidly from the inside out. There isn't a better remedy than one that works internally. That’s how you actually make a change—without anyone hurting anyone else, without anyone threatening someone else's perspective. After all, the perspective itself is what's evolving. Once an individual's consciousness shifts, they become their own supervisor, naturally striving for internal harmony through that new lens.
(I'll be breaking down the method soon—how to balance our energy fields and what tools to use.)
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Sam Martinez9 said:I think you missed my point.

It’s really about the methodology by which we acquire knowledge and understand the world. Broadly speaking, there are two ways we learn: we either learn independently, or we learn through the mediation of others.

Learning via others can be subdivided even further—learning from authority figures or teachers, learning alongside friends and peers, or even learning *from* someone, where they serve as the subject of your study...

Now, regarding what I was getting at earlier—we can categorize learning through others into two distinct modes: using conflict as a tool, or using cooperation as a tool.

Conflict as a tool is far more prevalent. I mentioned the example of a televised political debate, where two sides clash and essentially *fight* one another using nothing but arguments.

Cooperation, on the other hand, is what you see in scientific research teams or collaborative professional environments.

In my view, cooperative learning is of a much higher quality than learning through conflict, yet conflict remains the dominant method. This forum is living proof of that; ninety-nine percent of what is written here can be reduced to conflict (using arguments, words, quotes, etc.), while perhaps only one percent truly represents cooperation.

The reason for this is quite simple: humanity is still at an evolutionary stage where conflict tends to outpace cooperation. So many global issues are still *settled* through warfare rather than through diplomacy and agreement.

I am a firm believer that this is shifting—that we will see a gradual decrease in friction across all fields and a rise in collaboration.

Warfare will eventually vanish, both in terms of physical combat and verbal aggression. Our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will look back on our era as a barbaric age, much like we look back on the state of the world two thousand years ago.

That outcome depends entirely on the consciousness level of the individual. And you can't reach that level in pairs; it’s something you have to navigate through the self. Sure, you gain "world" experience through various insights, and those insights happen through the interaction between the subject and the object. That's basic mechanics. But no matter how many insights you collect or how wide your awareness stretches, nothing changes in how individuals treat one another until the personal level of Consciousness shifts upward toward the Higher.

Wars will vanish only when consciousness rises to a point where every single being within the collective knows, instinctively, that harmony can only be achieved through cooperation and empathy with the rest of the whole.

Sam Martinez9 said:I think you missed my point.

It’s really about the methodology by which we acquire knowledge and understand the world. Broadly speaking, there are two ways we learn: we either learn independently, or we learn through the mediation of others.

Learning via others can be subdivided even further—learning from authority figures or teachers, learning alongside friends and peers, or even learning *from* someone, where they serve as the subject of your study...

Now, regarding what I was getting at earlier—we can categorize learning through others into two distinct modes: using conflict as a tool, or using cooperation as a tool.

Conflict as a tool is far more prevalent. I mentioned the example of a televised political debate, where two sides clash and essentially *fight* one another using nothing but arguments.

Cooperation, on the other hand, is what you see in scientific research teams or collaborative professional environments.

In my view, cooperative learning is of a much higher quality than learning through conflict, yet conflict remains the dominant method. This forum is living proof of that; ninety-nine percent of what is written here can be reduced to conflict (using arguments, words, quotes, etc.), while perhaps only one percent truly represents cooperation.

The reason for this is quite simple: humanity is still at an evolutionary stage where conflict tends to outpace cooperation. So many global issues are still *settled* through warfare rather than through diplomacy and agreement.

I am a firm believer that this is shifting—that we will see a gradual decrease in friction across all fields and a rise in collaboration.

Warfare will eventually vanish, both in terms of physical combat and verbal aggression. Our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will look back on our era as a barbaric age, much like we look back on the state of the world two thousand years ago.

It wasn't like everyone was a barbarian two thousand years ago. Humanity goes through cycles of rising and falling based on its level of consciousness. The only real difference between then and now is the technology; our level of consciousness is essentially the same as it was two millennia ago—if anything, it might actually be lower right now. Even today, just like back then, there are a few individuals operating at a higher consciousness while everyone else is still fumbling around in the dark looking for "harmony." The weapons have certainly become more lethal, but the reasons we use them haven't changed one bit.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Benjamin Taylor6 said:
And just what kind of mental prep work goes into that? I mean, how exactly do you prepare yourself so those little portions of knowledge can actually sink into your spirit without just bouncing right off?
?? 🤔

If that was simply its own inherent essence, then we’re looking at a gift from Nature. Or, if you prefer the language of the faithful—as they often do when trying to make sense of the inexplicable—you could call it a gift from God, or perhaps Divine Providence.

The preparation was simple, but it was intentional.

Back during that phase, I had this driving, almost obsessive need to figure out "who I am." I started cultivating that curiosity through things I did while taking breaks from my painting—I’m a painter by trade. Every day, I’d head out for a coffee, but eventually, I decided that instead of just sitting there, I’d listen to the same old repetitive chatter with the usual crowd and just... observe. I’d peek inward into the self. That’s what I was doing at the coffee shop. I’d find a spot, usually somewhere quiet where the sun could warm my back without blinding me or burning. I’d sit there, nearly every single day, lay out a pen and paper, close my eyes, relax, and just soak up the sun until I was completely loose. It was a kind of meditation right there in the middle of a Starbucks or a local diner—a specific way of meditating that felt right to the self, something I’d also do in my studio during breaks. Once I hit that state of no-thought, that total stillness, I’d stay there as long as necessary. Then, the second a thought surfaced in my mind, I’d start writing. I did my writing exclusively in coffee shops.

I’d jot down that first word, and I wouldn't even think about the second; I’d just recognize it as it emerged in my mind and instinctively line it up after the first, and so on, until it became clear that some kind of story was flowing out of me. While writing, I’d naturally grasp the meaning of what was already intuitively known within my spirit, and I’d just keep letting it flow into order. Usually, by the time I took the last sip of coffee and that brief little story wrapped up, I’d put a period on it.

Every story, every poem, carried its own message—something that spoke unerringly of Consciousness. Not my individual consciousness, which most people call "human consciousness," but Consciousness as the Source of all Knowledge, as the Truth.

So, the preparation was conscious and deliberate, though I had no clue what answers or insights would be left behind. The preparation itself was really just a gradual opening of the spirit toward the spirit of the absolute, so that at the moment I was sufficiently ready, my spirit could merge with the spirit of the absolute. At that point, the self vanished from the attention of the being, and the absolute became "visible" to the self. I didn't experience the enlightenment of the absolute in a coffee shop; it caught me off guard in bed, at home. Still, it happened as the direct result of all that disciplined preparation I had been doing.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Sam Martinez9 said:It should have been different. We should have sat down together, hashed it out through debate, weighing the arguments from both sides until we landed on the actual truth. But honestly? We aren't mature enough for that kind of communication yet.

What you’re suggesting just doesn't work—and honestly, you've already admitted that yourself by saying we weren't born together. Since we didn't share a birth (and even if we had), our paths haven't been identical. Our experiences aren't the same. Some people spent their lives stacking up wealth, others are still grinding to get there, and some have spent their years accumulating knowledge through trial and error. Then there are people like me, who did all that, only to add one specific experience to the tally—something that fundamentally rewrites the meaning of everything else. That experience—if you can even call it that—is the total redirection of attention back to the Absolute-Self.

Leading up to my return, I felt this intuitive preparation taking hold. It was like portions of Knowledge were just pouring directly into my spirit. The more I realized exactly *how* it was happening, the more frequently it occurred—until eventually, it just became my baseline. It stayed that way, a steady routine, right up until the moment I finally let go. I dropped the logic, shut off the intellect, and merged my spirit with the Absolute-Self. To put it plainly, I experienced what most people spend their whole lives trying to describe as being "Self-God."

No, it isn’t some kind of delusion. Before that moment, even though my spirit was flooded with intuitive insights, I couldn't even wrap my head around what it actually meant. Then, the intellect just... evaporated. I was left alone with my Self. But in that solitude, strangely enough, you aren't actually alone. In fact, it’s more than that—you aren't just a lonely individual; you are the entire container and everything contained within the One. It doesn't feel like isolation. It feels like absolute self-fulfillment. As long as the rational mind stays out of the way—as long as the Being's attention remains fixed on the content of the Absolute-Self—everything that exists becomes crystal clear to itself. It couldn't be any sharper. The essence of everything has finally revealed itself to the Self.

Look, this Being—the One, the only one—is what religion and the masses call God, which is why I framed it that way above. Personally, I call it Will, the Absolute, the Being, or the being-that-is. It could be "the one who is," or some qualitative plurality, or whatever else you want to throw at it. At the end of the day, I know deep down that none of those labels actually change anything about its essence. It remains itself, regardless of the name. 🙂

.

By turning my attention back inward to the human self, I’ve embraced the spirit of creation and the Absolute Knowledge held within it. But here’s the thing: my intellect just can't wrap itself around what that actually looks like. It's impossible to grasp the whole thing in one single moment—not for me, and honestly, not for anyone else either. Yet, despite that mental wall, the Absolute Knowledge remains accessible to me, and I can shape it into words whenever I choose.

That’s why I say what you’re suggesting just isn't doable—not that you don't see it, but it's an impossibility. We weren't born at the exact same moment, nor were we born as the same spirit. Because of that, our perceptions and our grasp of self-existence and being aren't going to match up. You can't exactly walk up to some guy and explain that he has the capacity to know everything any other person has ever known. He’s an individual. He’s got a spirit that belongs only to him. He lacks the lived experience required to actually verify your claims, even if you were standing right there. So, I’m left doing what I feel called to do within that Absolute-Self connection. It’s something I only really grasped after returning to the Self: I give what I know. Period. I don't care who judges how I give, when they judge, or if they even wrap their heads around what I’m talking about. But, since I’m still "alive"—meaning Being is active and present within me—I can engage with everyone I meet here, in this moment. I can listen to their questions and try to offer explanations that feel familiar to them. Still, after doing this every single day for seven or eight years, I’ve realized something: it is impossible to explain something that feels obvious to me to someone whose level of consciousness simply isn't high enough to catch it. Now, that isn't a dig at people with a "lower level of consciousness." It has nothing to do with comparing my value to theirs. It’s just a fact. Some individuals are quite "young" in terms of their cycles of incarnation. Their spirit hasn't accumulated enough Absolute Knowledge to create a foundation where they can easily build upon or integrate new truths into their Self-Being. Another individual might be more seasoned; they've been through the necessary school of life and already possess a massive degree of that Knowledge within them.

Look, this has absolutely nothing to do with IQ. You can have a genius-level IQ, but if you lack the "life experience"—the incarnations—needed to accumulate the right amount of realized Absolute-Self Knowledge, it doesn't matter. Think of it this way: the width of your "consciousness circle," or a specific level of awareness, doesn't dictate its "height." It doesn't change where that consciousness sits within the grand hierarchy of the Being-universe. That’s why we see such a massive spectrum of consciousness among Americans; we aren't all operating at the same stage of experience or incarnation. We haven't all gone through the same cycles required to grasp and truly understand what we think we know.

Understanding alone isn't going to land you at the highest state of existence, but it certainly makes whatever you *do* understand much more useful.

At the end of the day, we all just act according to what our current level of consciousness allows us to do. It follows, then, that those sitting at higher levels have to possess a deeper understanding of those at lower ones. This is exactly why rising in consciousness strips away prejudice; it forces you to become more compassionate.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
Peter Phillips32 said:Honestly, shouldn't these kinds of autistic monologues belong on some niche PDF file or a personal blog instead of here?

You could swap out "Sigmund" for any other random guy on this forum, and change "he's just obsessed with the history of philosophy" to whatever that guy's specific argument happens to be, because apparently, this user's word is basically the Word of God.

So, I could go ahead and say, "Wow, look how brilliant this guy is." But I won't. Instead, I’ll just say this: take your opinions and shove them back into whatever mental boxes you’ve built for yourself. You can try to force my writing into those same little molds if you want, but let me save you the trouble—it’s never going to fit.
Don't waste your breath. You’re better off just looking out for yourself. Honestly—and I'm still pretty new to this place—if you're the one running the show here, deciding who gets to speak and which sub-forum they belong in, then I might as well pack my bags and head for the exit right now.
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
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. ☕


Sigmund can't explain it because he lacks the lived experience to back it up. For him to actually prove it, 'Sigmund' would have to stop being 'Sigmund.' He’d have to quit identifying as an individual expression of the absolute, return to Self (the absolute), and only through that direct relationship—where his own will and attention meet the content of the absolute (Self), the spirit of the absolute (Consciousness)—could he finally uncover the truth within the Being he claims doesn't exist.

Every negation is just a byproduct of logical deduction. Why? Because any subject always perceives what the object-subject is NOT; they perceive the objects of their own mental representations.

So, claiming that Non-Being exists is nothing more than a hollow negation of whatever your mind projects onto itself. And your mind projects a representation of what you THINK you are. Therefore, that thing you think you are—which you, as the one experiencing the thought through reason, represent as reality, as existing, as being... well, that's Being.

Claiming Non-Being exists is just a consequence of identifying with the subject of your own representation and observing what that subject presents to you. The subject can only claim that something like Non-Being exists as a negation of being because, in trying to logically explain to itself what the object-subject IS, it reaches the only logically valid conclusion possible: the Subject is the observer of 'being,' and therefore, as the observer—as absolute existence—must be the negation of whatever the object of its perception is (being). By denying that illusion of being, the subject essentially confirms to itself that it, as absolute existence, must be its negation: Non-Being. It's a total negation of an objectified, subjective representation.

Of course, this has zero to do with truth. It has everything to do with logic, which is notoriously bad at handling absolute truths. 🙂
On Being and its components in Spirituality ·
steelridge58 said:If we’re going by that logic—why don't we try looking at it this way instead:
A tyrant can't truly become a tyrant until there is a part of their own personality that craves the experience of being a victim just as intensely as the desire to dominate.
Why not just consolidate everything into one single person—the personality of the potential tyrant?

I mean, we see it all the time in real life where a tyrant or a criminal portrays themselves as the victim, and honestly, let's just assume they actually feel that way.

I’m definitely not trying to 'amnesty' a criminal for their actions by suggesting that there has to be some "Other" out there who is Unconscious Corp enough to want to be a victim just to make the dynamic work. That doesn't hold water for me, except maybe in those weird, specific contexts where the whole tyrant-victim connection is just down to how you choose to interpret it.


No, that doesn't track. My mistake. That specific persona seeking out the experience of tyranny can't simultaneously be the same persona seeking the experience of being the victim—unless we're talking about someone with a death wish or a masochist. In relation to that "other side" of the personality, they can only desire to experience "tyranny over themselves" through that other part, which is really just the experience of being the "victim," not the "tyrant."

steelridge58 said:If we’re going by that logic—why don't we try looking at it this way instead:
A tyrant can't truly become a tyrant until there is a part of their own personality that craves the experience of being a victim just as intensely as the desire to dominate.
Why not just consolidate everything into one single person—the personality of the potential tyrant?

I mean, we see it all the time in real life where a tyrant or a criminal portrays themselves as the victim, and honestly, let's just assume they actually feel that way.

I’m definitely not trying to 'amnesty' a criminal for their actions by suggesting that there has to be some "Other" out there who is Unconscious Corp enough to want to be a victim just to make the dynamic work. That doesn't hold water for me, except maybe in those weird, specific contexts where the whole tyrant-victim connection is just down to how you choose to interpret it.

It's impossible.
A single individual within the universe can't be exercising tyranny over someone else while simultaneously experiencing their own victimization in that same exchange of intent. If they did, they wouldn't be able to function as the tyrant because they wouldn't feel like the victim. You're either one or the other in that specific interaction.

Essentially, a tyrant can't step into that role until the universe responds to their intent by presenting an equivalent intent in another person—someone who wants to play the "victim." They enable each other's manifestation, allowing them to realize their own intentions and experiences. The tyrant's intent is clear, but the actual experience of tyranny requires the presence of a "victim" in their reality. That victim serves as the object through which this reality manifests, acting as the vehicle for the tyrant's intention and realization. By recognizing the "victim," the tyrant only ever realizes what he, as the tyrant, is NOT. That persona, acting as the tyrant, IS NOT the victim.

steelridge58 said:If we’re going by that logic—why don't we try looking at it this way instead:
A tyrant can't truly become a tyrant until there is a part of their own personality that craves the experience of being a victim just as intensely as the desire to dominate.
Why not just consolidate everything into one single person—the personality of the potential tyrant?

I mean, we see it all the time in real life where a tyrant or a criminal portrays themselves as the victim, and honestly, let's just assume they actually feel that way.

I’m definitely not trying to 'amnesty' a criminal for their actions by suggesting that there has to be some "Other" out there who is Unconscious Corp enough to want to be a victim just to make the dynamic work. That doesn't hold water for me, except maybe in those weird, specific contexts where the whole tyrant-victim connection is just down to how you choose to interpret it.

The image someone projects to the public and the truth behind that projection aren't the same thing. 🙂